Great Ideas?

Yes sir, Mr. Bubblehead, you are absolutely right, for such an egregious and stupid offense I certainly deserve to be punished. Having been suitably chastised, I will force myself to stand in the corner for 15 minutes (not meant to be a factual statement). And while (not) doing so I will reflect on the kinds of people who would:

Make it illegal for people on Public Assistance to have more than $20 in their pockets at any time (Minnesota). Apparently the original suggestion was for them to have no money at all in their pockets, but someone pointed out this would make it difficult for them even to pay bus fares. I guess they would stop individuals known to be on assistance and search them. Maybe they would just do random searches of anyone who looked poor?

Making it a rule of some kind that Foster children use their state funding clothing allowance only in thrift stores (Michigan). Presumably they would be given gift cards in lieu of cash that could only be used at the Salvation Army or other thrift stores. As the legislator who suggested this said, “My father told me that when you walk down the street no one knows where you bought your clothes.” I guess you would have to have receipts to prove where your clothes originated?

Then there are those who would do away with Roe vs. Wade. It seems there have been 916 measures of various kinds in 49 states that would place severe restrictions on a woman’s right to have an abortion (the law of the land). Some of these also have to do even with the practice of contraception. It is interesting, I think, that all of the above suggestions or attempts have been made by member s of a party that claims to not want the government interfering in their rights.

Of course these people are also members of a party that now features an “Alliance for the Separation of School and State.” That is, they are opposed to public education and want to see it replaced by privatized schools with no state funding (all the better to indoctrinate you, my dears). Free public elementary school education has been a feature of our democracy for a very long time. There are similar ideas about higher education that many think should use a more business-like approach to education (I believe this is actually happening in some Universities and Colleges), so much for academic freedom, the arts and humanities.

There is also a movement in which some religious groups are joining with corporations to fight environmental regulations. I guess they are referred to as “Slayers of the Green Dragon,” the Green Dragon being environmental regulations. I have always found it virtually impossible to believe that anyone could possibly be anti-environmental, but those interested only in short-term profits seem oblivious to the dangers of slowly despoiling our fragile earth.

Some places are apparently serious about doing away with child labor laws under the claim they are unconstitutional and should be a matter of “States Rights.” This would of course return child labor regulations back to where they were in the 1920’s, when child labor was shamelessly exploited for being cheap. Who needs healthy, happy children anyway?

Of course these are the same people who are opposed to collective bargaining, unemployment benefits, minimum wages, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, food stamps, aid to the handicapped, taxes, and anything else that could conceivably benefit the working class and the poor. I reflect on all this and I try to convince myself these people are merely misguided, rather than selfish, greedy, uncaring, hard-hearted, short-sighted, ignorant, and at war with the middle-class, but I always fail.

Him or Me

Weekly goldfish races in Tacoma
replaced with beer pong after
complaints by animal rightists.

Bubblehead: I am so grateful for your eternal vigilance, always keeping the world safe from the terrible excesses of Morialekafa. How about “paying less in taxes than in the history of paying taxes?” Somehow it would seem obvious that you cannot pay less in taxes during a time when there were no taxes. I had forgotten about the brief period of time when there was a 7% rate. No doubt all of my readers were aware of this and had no idea what I was referring to about the relatively low tax rates of, I should have more carefully explained, recent history. In any case, keep up the good work.

Well, it now comes down to either me or Donald Trump. For the last couple of days every time I hear his name mentioned I turn off the TV. This means that either the media drop their ridiculous obsession with this phony baloney or my TV watching news is over. Trump claims to be a genius, among other modest attributes. He has certainly proven his genius when it comes to getting fee publicity, and has also proven the absolute idiocy of the media. I hope he actually gets the nomination, I just don’t want to hear any more about it.

Sarah Palin seems to be slowly slipping away into oblivion where she rightly belongs. I am quite certain that if I had to listen to that shrill fishwife’s voice for more than a day I would quickly go mad. Michelle Bachmann, however loony she may be, at least has a much better voice and seems to be stealing whatever thunder Palin might have had. There is little doubt that so far the Republican candidates that seem to be at least thinking about running are a bunch of losers. If Mitt Romney is the best they can do I don’t think President Obama has much to fear. It seems that the ex-Governor of New Mexico is now thinking of throwing his hat in the ring. How far do you think he’ll get with Republicans with his desire to legalize marijuana? How long do you think it will be before lots of Republicans will start distancing themselves from Ryan’s death wish of a budget?

It is entirely possible, of course, that the media knows exactly what they are doing with the Donald Trump nonsense, and the ongoing rather entertaining situation of the Republicans. It does certainly keep our minds off more important things, like our failure in Iraq, our failure in Afghanistan, our failure in Libya, our failure in the Middle East in general, our failure to actually govern our country, and so on. While we are thrashing about like a nation of incompetent nitwits other countries are forging ahead, already leading us in math and science, life expectancy, health care, technology, and so on. Of course they are not all without their own problems. China, for example, has made a terrible mistake with their one child program which has resulted in a huge surplus of males with virtually no possibility of marriage. I suppose it won’t be long before they will be advertising for “Lovely American Girls,” just as we now see such ads for Philippino, Russian, and other foreign women looking for romance and husbands. As the U.S. (now also known as the land of Obesity, Viagra, and “Low T”) continues to decline, while South America, China, India, Russia, and others continue to do well, things do not bode well for a nation of incompetents. Just wait until one or more of the crazier Tea Party crowd refuses to lift the debt ceiling, then we’ll see some real fun. Such a possibility has never before been taken seriously, but with this current bunch of bumbling know-nothings anything might happen.

I can’t imagine the Founding Fathers ever conceived of a situation in which one of the two political parties would simply refuse to participate in the governing of our nation, in favor of merely doing the bidding of giant international corporations whose only interest was short-term profits. Indeed, I doubt they even contemplated such giant international corporations in the first place. Communism, Socialism, Fascism, were not problems in those simpler times. None of them could have imagined the incredible mess we have made of the nation they created. A nation “Of the people, by the people, for the people,” is now barely a faint echo from the past soon to be heard no more outside of classes in Ancient History.

LKBIQ:
To predict the behavior of ordinary people in advance, you only have to assume that they will always try to escape a disagreeable situation with the smallest possible expenditure of intelligence.
Friedrich Nietzsche

TILT:
There are at least two people I know here who are so fed up with things they no longer watch TV at all.

Chasing Our Tails

After argument with girlfriend
South African man walks into
river of crocodiles, suicides.

Things have become so absolutely ridiculous in the United States it makes one wonder if we are experiencing a period of mass insanity. Can you believe, for example, we are actually having a debate (of sorts) over whether or not people in the upper 2% of the population, with far more money than they need, currently paying less in taxes than ever before in history, in the midst of a period of economic misfortune, should pay less or more in taxes, even the relatively modest amount they paid during the Clinton administration when we had a budget surplus? This is a question so obvious of a solution it is not worthy of even being discussed.

And can you believe we are still issuing permits for deep-water oil drilling only months after the worst oil spill disaster in history, the effects of which are still being felt by those unfortunate enough to live and try to make their living in the Gulf of Mexico. These permits are being issued to the very people who caused the disaster in the first place, and in spite of the fact that no legislation improving the safety has been passed, none at all. The drillers have even admitted that in the event of another disaster they would be no better prepared than they were for the last one. This is, in my opinion, madness, pure and simple. So ridiculous a procedure it is, again, not even worthy of further discussion.

Then there is the matter of nuclear energy. In spite of the recent nuclear disaster in Japan, the outcome of which is still not known but could be worse even than Chernobyl, is far worse than Three Mile Island, and threatens people virtually all over the globe, and in spite of the known fact that many of our existing nuclear energy plants are potentially extremely unsafe, President Obama, and his supporters in the nuclear energy business, still plan to build and operate more of these potentially life-ending plants. This is truly insanity writ large and should never be permitted. Germany has recently announced they will allow no more nuclear energy plants, all other nations should immediately do the same and proceed to close those plants that still exist. This is not worthy of further discussion, it is plain and simply absurd.

Don’t forget the so-called “birther” question. Can you believe we still have to put up with endless hours of television discussing a claim that is known to be totally absurd? Virtually no one but a small number of apparently exceptionally stupid people (including apparently some 42% of Iowans) believe there is any question whatsoever about President Obama’s citizenship and right to be President. And yet Donald Trump, an obvious charlatan, liar, braggart, and opportunist, with no serious intention of running for President, obviously in it merely for the millions of dollars of free publicity he is getting, goes on getting it day after day. Lawrence O’Donnell says he is doing much harm when it is obvious that MSNBC is doing even more harm by carrying this nonsense day after day, hour after hour. Donald Trump does not deserve even one minute of airtime and for the MSM to continue giving him attention is simply ridiculous.

Perhaps most ridiculous of all is the continuing belief on the part of many of our citizens that evolution is “only a theory” and enjoys no greater status than the word of the bible. That contemporary people can believe the earth was created only 6000 years ago, in 7 days, and that people lived alongside dinosaurs, is so far-fetched, so ridiculous, so totally ignorant and mindless, it makes one wonder if these people, like the birthers, are even sane. The age of the earth was settled by geographers in about 1865, evolution is the basic foundation of modern biological science and has been for many years. These are not facts that require any further controversy, like the question of Obama’s birth, they are settled, over, finished, known. To take this as something to be further questioned is simply ridiculous.

Congressman Ryan has put forth a budget proposal that is so outrageously absurd that even most Republicans can’t stomach it. It is clear that at least some 80% of the American public is opposed to his proposal to end Medicare, including some 70% of Tea Party people. This is a proposal that should be simply laughed into a quick oblivion, but there is talk of compromise, if you can believe it. How atrociously bad does something have to be before it is simply not taken seriously? The Ryan plan would also cut taxes even further for the wealthiest individuals in the country, would destroy Medicare, and administer the last rites to the New Deal, something the Republicans have desired ever since it was proposed. Even Social Security, one of the greatest and most successful programs ever conceived, is on the chopping block, even though it has nothing to do with the national debt. Congressional thieves have broken into it, used it illegally, and now don’t want to have to pay it back. This is not only ridiculous, it is criminal.

Finally, for the moment at least, is the conspiracy driven by the Koch brothers and other corporate interests to break the remaining unions, thus removing the last bastions of resistance to their fascist takeover of our nation. This is being attempted under the excuse in several states of budget cutting, even though it has little or nothing to do with their budget shortfalls. Happily there is reason to believe that at least this ridiculous maneuver will not only fail but will reinvigorate the surviving unions and ultimately replace the Republican corporate toadies with more thoughtful and patriotic types with the interests of the nation at heart.

Personally, I do not believe that any of the abovementioned proposals (or whatever you might call them) are worthy of further consideration. All of them appear to have no interest in the public welfare and offer nothing in the way of improving the lot of our citizens. I suspect that in many other nations they would not even be considered serious beliefs or possibilities. To consider them as real possibilities worthy of discussion is simply a waste of time. Further tax cuts for the wealthy, no; further deep-water drilling, no; further nuclear energy, no; Obama’s non-citizenship, no; creationism, no; killing Medicare, a thousand times no; union busting, no. We have degenerated into a nation of valueless individuals with no sense of community, no sense of purpose, no idea of where we should be going, and no serious attention as to how to get there, ridiculous creatures endlessly now merely chasing our tails and baying at the moon.

LKBIQ:
All human beings should try to learn before they die what they are running from, and to, and why.
James Thurber

TILT:
Captain James Cook was killed by Hawaiians on his second voyage to their islands, speared, and some say, eaten.

Democratic Anthropomorphism

Teenager sings his song,
“Sorry for the Mess,” in Oregon
coffeehouse, stabs himself to death.

When Howard Dean addressed the crowd in Worley, Idaho, last Saturday, I believe he made essentially the same mistake President Obama did when he said, or at least implied, that Republicans share the same concern for the nation as he does. I pointed out that I could see no evidence whatsoever that indicated any serious concern for our nation on the part of Republicans.

Governor Dean, during the course of his otherwise excellent presentation, said that “all Americans share a belief in fairness.” Unless Governor Dean believes Republicans are not Americans I think that statement is false. I fail to see where there is any indication of fairness on the part of Republicans. They insist on tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% of the population (those with far more money they could possibly need) while not at all adverse to increasing taxes for the remaining 98%. Is that fair? Similarly, they are opposed to collective bargaining, the right of workers to negotiate fairly on their own working conditions and remuneration. Is that fair? They believe huge oil and other corporations should be given huge subsidies, and not have to pay taxes. Surely that is not fair. They are also opposed to unemployment benefits to those who no fault of their own find themselves without a job. Is that fair? Of course they are opposed to universal health care, especially a single-payer system, and believe if someone can’t pay they don’t deserve health care. I don’t believe that is fair. Most Republicans are opposed to abortion, and some even to contraception, thus forcing women (especially poor women) to bear children they are unable to care for. That’s not fair. And if a woman does have a child and cannot work because she needs child care, they oppose that also, not fair. They are basically opposed to welfare in any form, food stamps, Social Security (not really welfare), and such. That, too, is not fair. In short, searching for fairness among Republicans seems to me to be a lost cause. I do not believe Howard Dean is right when he makes the generalization that all Americans value fairness.

I think when Obama or Dean say Republicans are interested, just as they are, in the nation and in fairness, they are simply projecting their own beliefs onto Republicans, kind of a wishful thinking approach. Because they are interested in the welfare of the nation, as well as in fairness, they simply assume Republicans must be also. This is, I believe, a (probably) fatal mistake. The most basic idea of projection has to do with attributing one’s own ideas, feelings, or attitudes to other people (or even objects). In Freudian terms this has to do with the externalization of things like blame, guilt, or responsibility, and is regarded as a defense against anxiety. I do not believe Obama or Dean are using projection in this Freudian way.

Playing with words, is sometimes fun, and also sometimes useful. I might suggest that Obama and
Dean are more guilty of anthropomorphism than merely projection: “an interpretation of what is not human or personal in terms of human or personal characteristics.” I realize this term is usually reserved for attributing human characteristics to animals or even inanimate objects, but it could potentially be used for some humans as well. If, for example, it is true that Republicans are not interested in fairness, that would imply they lack empathy. Empathy is generally believed to be a vital and basic human characteristic. There is good reason to believe that Republicans do, in fact, lack empathy, for the poor, the sick, the handicapped, etc. Thus it would be the case that Dean, at least, is attributing human characteristics to those who do not otherwise have them. I am not saying Republicans are animals, what I am saying is, if they lack both the concepts of fairness and community, that behavior is much more animal-like than not.

Democrats, being “liberals” (nowadays a Republican hate word), and therefore what I would characterize as “decent people,” interested in the welfare of others and in the welfare of the community rather than merely themselves, seem to be incapable of realizing that others are not necessarily like themselves. Thus they project their own values onto others who do not in fact share them, and they expect from those others the same fairness and good fellowship they themselves display. In the case of contemporary Republicans, doing the bidding of their corporate masters, this is a recipe for disaster. Obama and the Democrats must give up their idealistic beliefs in the goodness and perfectability of mankind (especially Republicans) and face the grim reality of the politics of greed and the unremitting lust for power.

LKBIQ:
The problem of power is how to achieve its responsible use rather than its irresponsible and indulgent use - of how to get men of power to live for the public rather than off the public.
Robert F. Kennedy

TILT:
The flightless kiwi bird of New Zealand lays the largest egg, relative to its size, of any other bird on earth.

Death of the Liberal Class - book

Death of the Liberal Class, Chris Hedges (Nation Books, N.Y., 2010)

I have been reading another book. Usually I only read one book at a time, but as this book promised to confirm most everything I believe, how could I resist from reading it immediately? Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who spent almost twenty years as a foreign correspondent and fifteen years at the New York Times. A fellow of the Nation Institute, he is currently a columnist for Truthdig and also writes for a number of other publications.

By the liberal class Hedges has in mind such disparate groups as labor unions, universities, (what used to be) the Democratic Party, churches, socialists, communists, feminists, and all those who fought stubbornly and successfully for social reforms that had to do with working conditions in factories, the organization of labor unions, civil and women’s rights, universal education, public health, housing for the poor, and socialism. They were successful in that they did bring about the 40 hour work week, the eight hour work day, collective bargaining, at least token holidays, and they also made inroads on civil and women’s rights. They were vocal and active and had a significant presence in our affairs.

The liberal era flourished during the later years of the nineteenth century and the early years of the twentieth. The four basic tenets of classical liberalism, as written by John Gray (a philosopher):

“…it is individualistic, in that it asserts the moral primacy of the person against any collectivity; egalitarian, in that it confers on all human beings the same basic moral status; universalist, affirming the moral unity of the species; and meliorist, in that it asserts the open-ended improvability, by use of critical reason, of human life.”

It is Hedges argument that liberalism of this sort began its demise following WW I, which shattered the optimism of the liberals about the inevitability of human progress, but more importantly, consolidated state and corporate control over political, economic, social and cultural affairs. According to Hedges it also “…created mass culture, fostered through the consumer society the cult of the self, led the nation into an era of permanent war, and used fear and mass propaganda to cow citizens and silence independent and radical voices within the liberal class.”

Thus was brought about over time the death of the liberal class. Organizations like the Communist Party were quickly forced out of the political scene entirely, the Socialists soon followed. Indeed, socialism has been demonized to the point that many would sooner die than see socialism in America (even though America is importantly socialist already). All other remnants of liberalism were slowly seduced or forced into the new corporate controlled culture or were simply ignored. While unions were still permitted their character changed dramatically as they began to become involved in working with management rather than against it. Liberal churches also succumbed to the demands of the new corporate culture and began to conform. Universities that had once been bastions of academic freedom and sometimes held radical or even semi-radical beliefs were slowly changed into something more akin to business schools, as budgets for the humanities and arts fell more and more by the wayside in favor of professional schools like Business, Medicine, and Nursing. The idea of a university as a place for the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake has by now disappeared entirely as the primary reason for attending a university or college is believed to be to get a job. The university itself has become a kind of trade school. The Democratic Party itself became much more conservative to resemble the Republican Party more and more, so we now often hear complaints that we really have only a one party system. This has been accomplished through propaganda and the creation of a mass culture that places importance on the self and material possessions rather than community.

In this new culture we now have there is little tolerance for radicals of any kind, or for that matter even anyone who offers a serious challenge to the status quo. If you don’t conform you soon find yourself ignored, isolated, mocked, and sometimes vilified. The media, now controlled by a very small number of corporations, can make or break candidates at will. Consider what happened to Al Gore, John Kerry, or Howard Dean, all of whom had their campaigns destroyed mainly by the media. Look at what they do to people like Dennis Kucinich by mostly ignoring him and not taking his candidacy seriously. People like Chomsky continue their criticisms but are painted as merely disgruntled radicals. Bernie Sanders, God bless him, is virtually a one man campaign against corruption, but (horrors) he’s a socialist! Ralph Nader, for example, has received this treatment to the point where he has trouble even getting a hearing anymore.

This business of bringing about conformity through the media began during WWI when President Wilson formed The Committee for Public Information (CPI). This was headed by a man named George Creel and “Its goal was not, as Creel confessed simply to impart pro-war messages but to discredit those who attempted to challenge the nation’s involvement in the conflict.” He was very successful at this so that news that had once reflected local discourses and public discussions came to be dictated from above (sound familiar). And never forget the great communist scare of the 1950’s when dozens of perfectly respectable citizens were blacklisted and lost their jobs, university professors that never recovered, actors and writers, a few of whom did survive.

I cannot tell you as forcefully and completely as Hedges has in this book the forces now aligned against a liberal society. He has made a case for the former liberal class selling out to the powers that be and the obstacles that now stand in the way of a just, sensible, and compassionate society. I would urge all serious people to read this fine book. Of course if you are as cynical as I am at times, you might argue that by suggesting merely rebellion rather than revolution Hedges has himself sold out to the system.

Governor Howard Dean in Idaho

Can you believe it, Howard Dean in Idaho, North Idaho, Worly? Well, it’s true, he was. There was a fund raising luncheon today, along with training for Democratic activists, at the Kootenai Tribal Casino in Worly, Idaho. It was well attended, all the tables were full, and I would say it was a great success.

I found Governor Dean to be a bit smaller than I imagined him to be, but a real down-to-earth person and a remarkable speaker. He spoke for a time and then fielded questions from the audience. I thought he was great, I suppose because he said all the things about the current Republican con job that I believe. He proved himself to be extremely well-informed about what was going on in Washington, answered all questions without hesitation and honestly, and was, I thought, inspiring. He renewed his call for grass-roots action, change from the bottom up, and above all, patience, pointing out that the goal might well be not just the next election but the one after that, and after that. He exposed the Republican nonsense for the nonsense it really is, and offered an optimistic assessment of what will probably happen. When asked why the White House appeared to be somewhat confused and disorganized at times during the first two years he politely and rather subtly suggested it was due to the staff Obama had around him during that time, a staff that has now been changed, he believes, for the better. He did not mention anyone by name but obviously had in mind Rahm Emanuel, who everyone believes stood in the way of his getting a position in the Obama administration. He spoke very highly of the new Chief of Staff, William Daley, and also of Ben Bernanke, even though they are not Democrats, saying they are both honest and competent people who can be trusted to keep their word. All in all it was a most worthwhile event.

As we were there an hour early I had an opportunity to look over the casino. I will sound like a genuine hick, I know, but I was absolutely astounded by this huge and, I thought, surreal experience. I have not been in either Reno or Las Vegas for sixty years so I had little idea of the scale of this casino movement. It’s true we have a casino right here in Bonners Ferry, The Kootenai Casino, but it is truly small potatoes compared with this Coeur d’Alene casino. It was amazing, there must be two or three acres covered with all kinds of machines designed to remove a certain portion of your money over time if you continue to play. These machines are now designed to spare you even having to pull a handle, you just sit there gently pushing buttons while being slowly and systematically divested of your money. Each machine has some kind of name, and flashes lights and spins around hypnotically (I guess) while people sit there sometimes by the hour in a vain attempt to get rich. I had been told there was poker and blackjack in addition to the machines but it turns out these games are played on machines as well (although they do offer a large screen with pictures of sexy dealers you can ogle). What impressed me the most was the fact that there are virtually no young people engaging in this foolhardy enterprise. The players are almost universally older people, I could only guess that the average age must be somewhere around sixty, perhaps even older. They come there sometimes from long distances to be fleeced and, indeed, are sometimes delivered there by the bus load, the drivers of which must be enacting the role of a Judas goat. I guess older people in our culture are bored and devoid of other ways to spend their time.

Most of the players I witnessed stopped momentarily for some kind of (expensive) fast food and then returned quickly to their ultimately futile play. There is a restaurant and a bar that I heard serve pretty pedestrian fare (this may be unfair as I did not eat or drink there). One might think that in a place that makes so much money they could afford ultra-gourmet dining, but, alas, that seems not to be the case (it certainly is not the case in our small version of a casino where the food is so pedestrian we refuse even to eat there). Of course there are enormous facilities for meetings and conventions as well as a truly outstanding golf course. The casino offers entertainment, bringing in well-known performers from time to time, and although I’m not certain I think they may also feature boxing matches. There is also a large hotel, and while the complex is already huge it is being expanded even further. I think that as such places go this is probably one of the biggest and best. I found it terribly depressing, smoke-filled, dark, crowded, and in general quite unpleasant. My feelings are obviously not shared by the hundreds of thousands of my peers who seem to enjoy this (to me) complete waste of time and money.

It completely mystifies me how it is that so many of my fellow Americans go out of their way to visit these places and sit for hours mindlessly in front of garish machines designed for no other purpose than to separate them from their money. Many of them actually claim to win, which occasionally they do, but if they keep playing which they all do, they inevitably lose. Personally I think it would be more interesting and entertaining to color the water in your toilet and flush your money down the drain. Don’t misunderstand, I am not opposed to gambling, not at all, but what goes on in these casinos is a far cry from gambling. Thank you Governor Dean, I learned a great deal today.

On American Exceptionalism

Arizona man sues police, claims
Police dog violated his civil rights
and used excessive force.

The basic concept of American Exceptionalism can be traced back to Alexis de Tocqueville in 1835. There were essentially five characteristics of America that seemed to define us: liberty, egalitarianism, individualism, populism, and laissez-faire. I believe one could challenge these as truly characteristic of America at that time, and one could certainly question them as viable characteristics at the present time. The phrase American Exceptionalism was first used by the Communist Party in the 1920’s, as they believed because of these characteristics, especially the lack of distinct classes, America might be the first nation to avoid class warfare and the inevitable destruction that it would theoretically bring about. However interesting this may be, it is not what concerns me here.

There is another interpretation of American Exceptionalism, one that believes there is a qualitative difference between America and all other societies, a difference that results from the fact that we were exempted from the historical forces that affected all others. While the phrase American Exceptionalism does not necessarily imply superiority, those who believe in this qualitative difference seem to believe that it does. I do not understand how one could explain the behavior of the United States if one did not believe in this superiority.

Certainly we are exceptional in that we are regarded as the only remaining superpower, possessing the finest army in the world and a huge nuclear arsenal. Of course the nuclear arsenal is useless as it can never be used, and our army has proven itself unable to defeat even rag-tag civilian patriots in Asia and the Middle East. This does not seem to keep us from the belief in our “superpowerness.” We are also exceptional in that our nation is surrounded on east and west by vast oceans, and north and south by friendly nations. Why the rest of the world allowed a single superpower to emerge at all it not clear to me and was probably a grave mistake.

What this seems to create is an exceptional arrogance that allows us to believe we can dominate the entire world and impose our version of “democracy” on others wherever found. This seems also to include our belief that our basic religion, Christianity, is superior to all others and should be disseminated around the world. And we are quite exceptional in being the only highly industrialized society that still clings to religion, especially fundamentalism, and believe that it still competes with science as an explanation for natural and other events. This is related to the exceptionalism exposed in the suicidal belief that the education of our children is unimportant.

We are also very exceptional in our greed. Although comprising only some 4% of the earth’s population we use up 25% of her resources. This has been accomplished both by military and economic dominance over the past three centuries. We are certainly exceptional as a consumer society where the main focus of life is on the acquisition of material goods, with slogans like “shop til’ you drop,” and “He who has the most toys wins,” and so on. We are also pretty exceptional in our acceptance of built-in obsolescence, accepting merchandise with a relative short life expectancy that can be just discarded rather than repaired, and poorly constructed housing that can be torn down and rebuilt every few years. We are also exceptional in clinging to our belief in our “rugged individualism” even though it is largely just a myth. We are even more exceptional in being the only nation on earth with a morbid fear of socialism even though we practice it on a rather grand scale. We are undoubtedly exceptional in that we seem to be developing into a nation of hoarders, building storage facilities for our used junk much faster than ordinary housing, or so it seems.

While we may not be uniquely exceptional in short-sightedness and stupidity (after all we are members of the human species), we are probably at the top of the list. We have recklessly exploited the finite resources of the planet with little or no regard for the future, overfishing the oceans, destroying forests, fouling the air and the water as we go, destroying one species after another, even changing the climate of the earth. But being blessed with a relative abundance of resources, and safe from the rest of the world, we have developed more and more into a truly militaristic society, engaging in more wars in the past couple of centuries than most anyone else. This has been American Exceptionalism at its best (or worst). We now believe we do not have to even follow the rules of international law, thumbing our nose at whoever we choose, and hypocritically protecting our war criminals while demanding all others be brought to justice. This is imperial hubris at its worst.

Finally (for the moment, at least), we have now become dangerously exceptional in allowing our government and politics to become so dysfunctional as to be virtually useless for the vast majority of our citizens, being controlled by a few giant corporations and their obscenely wealthy cronies. Our much vaunted liberty is disappearing, egalitarianism is losing out to a two class system, individualism is not really permitted, populism, in that it exists, is managed by the powers that be. Laissezfaire has been promoted to such an extreme level it now threatens the collapse of our nation and the establishment of a permanent underclass. American Exceptionalism is not what it’s believed to be, if ever it truly was.

LKBIQ:
Everyone has a right to a university degree in America, even if it's in Hamburger Technology.
Clive James

TILT:
Mali has the lowest literacy rate in the world at 26.2%.

Obama's Multibillion Dollar Mistake

I listened carefully to President Obama’s fine speech today, and apparently like most “liberals” or “progressives” I was very pleased by it. He certainly “talked the talk,” and now we will have to wait and see if he truly “walks the walk.” I sincerely hope he does. I fear if he does not he will undoubtedly find himself in big trouble with his “base.” His vow to refuse to renew the ridiculous Bush tax cuts, by itself, was enough to make me jump for joy. His vow to save Medicare and Medicaid virtually made me swoon with delight. His attack on the Ryan budget proposal was right on. All in all I thought it was a great performance. Maddow and others on the left all seem to be pleased. There seems to be very little criticism from Democrats, but of course volumes of it from the Republicans.

I do not say this because I was disappointed in the speech he gave. I must say, however, I was disappointed with the speech he did not give. That is, I thought he was remarkably silent about his three (or more) “wars,” or quasi-wars, or whatever they are. Surely they have something to do with the deficit. Similarly, he was remarkably silent on the billions of dollars given to various corporations every year. I would have thought that, too, might be related to the deficit. Nor did he mention anything about banks or Wall Street, even though they have been robbing us blind for years (remember, Obama received lots of money from Wall Street). And interestingly enough he didn’t really talk much about jobs. Perhaps you could say these are merely the “details” of his program that are left to be discussed.

What really bothered me greatly was when he said he believed Republicans were sincere in their desires for our country, just as he was. He was speaking of the country “he knows,” the America he knows, a vision he has of America, and he seems to believe that Republicans are sincere in their desire to maintain that same vision of America even though we might differ on some things. This was, first of all, a bit inconsistent with his earlier remarks that the Republicans had one vision for our country and he had another. But part of Obama’s image of the America he knows is the belief that everyone can come together and work to solve our common problems, that is, he believes strongly in bipartisanship and seems unable or unwilling to accept the reality that in contemporary America that no longer exists.

It may be true that Republicans are sincere in their beliefs. But their sincerity has nothing to do with the welfare of our nation. They are doubtless sincere in their desire to rid us of Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, Planned Parenthood, the EPA, taxes, unemployment insurance, Roe vs Wade, and so forth, but they are not interested in the welfare of our nation and our citizens. For the past thirty years they have demonstrated this clearly and repeatedly both in word and deed. When they mounted an unprecedented and unprincipled personal attack on Clinton, thereby interrupting and complicating the affairs of our government, they were not acting in the best interest of the nation, but only of themselves (this is true regardless of how you might feel about Clinton and his Presidency). When they sent their “Brown Shirts” to Florida to interrupt the counting of ballots they were not acting in the best interest of our nation. When they announced they would vote “no” on everything the Obama administration wanted, they were not acting in the best interest of our nation. When John McCain picked the Housewife from Hell, a completely unqualified person to be his running mate, he was not acting in the best interest of our nation. When they are opposed to anything and everything that might benefit the working class of our country they are not acting in the best interest of our nation. When they announced their number one priority was to insure President Obama would be a one-term President they were not acting in the best interest of the nation. Certainly from the Clinton Presidency (if not before) Republicans have, in my opinion, been operating very near the treasonous level. When their concept of “roviating” anyone who opposed them, like John Kerry and others, by attempting to slime them by any means possible, they abandoned any pretense of being a legitimate political party and became little more than a criminal conspiracy dedicated to the take-over of our government to continue to transfer wealth from the poor to the wealthy. When they allowed Bush to mount an unprecedented military attack against a nation that was no threat to us, a so-called “preventative war,” a war crime of the first order, they were not acting in the best interest of the nation. I can see no reason, none at all, why Obama clings to his belief that Republicans somehow share the same visions for our nation or even its well-being. Their interest is in serving the Corporations that have been busily taking over the world. These corporations are no longer merely national, they are international, and they have annual budgets that far exceed that of most of the nations of the world. Republicans (and unfortunately some others as well) are well bribed do their bidding, if the nation itself has to be sacrificed for their profits, so be it, nations are no longer very important. Obama’s multibillion dollar mistake lies in his failure to understand that Republicans are not going to cooperate with him no matter what he does, and the more he gives in to them the more they will demand. His continued stubborn attempt at bipartisanship with these criminals, to compromise with them, has already cost us billions. As he is himself supported in large part by Wall Street, I wonder if he will really say “no” to the outrageous demands they are currently making. I believe he has to do so as otherwise I fear it is going to be too late. Obama even now has a unique opportunity to become a truly great President, if he says no to corporatism as did both Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt. If he now takes a stand against these giant corporations and the creeping fascism that is underway in our country I have no doubt the majority of the American people will not only support him but will think him a hero. He must say no to further tax cuts for the obscenely wealthy, subsidies for corporations that don’t need them, and to those who would undermine what have always been the best features of our nation, liberalism and support for the middle class and for those less fortunate. If he fails our future will be bleak indeed.

Irresponsible?

Iceland Phallological Museum
finally gets first human penis,
to join 275 other specimens.

Why are the MSM endlessly showing us Donald Trump’s absurd attack on President Obama’s citizenship and birthplace? Now Sarah Palin has joined in the chorus, as have others. Apparently anyone who is willing to say anything about this (completely false and nonsensical) birth certificate farce seems to have no trouble getting on TV, which is, of course their intention. I do not believe any of the people who are promoting this nonsense actually believe Obama is not a legitimate citizen. The evidence is quite clear. Those who continue to espouse this ridiculous claim are obviously just using it for the publicity and I am quite sure that neither Trump nor Palin have any intention of running for President. So I guess one might not like it, but at least it is understandable why they are doing what they are doing. I suppose there really are a few of their “base” that might actually believe their BS, but if so, they are too stupid to worry about.

The problem I have with this is not basically with what Trump and Palin are doing, it’s with what the MSM are doing. The issue of Obama’s birth and citizenship is a closed issue in the sense that there is no doubt about the facts. If the MSM were in the least bit responsible they would simply quit mentioning it at all and let the matter die. But they don’t, they are worse than the (supposed) candidates and allow this lying claim to occupy a great deal of air time. This is, from my point of view, completely irresponsible. Of course I know they are irresponsible, having long since abandoned any serious news, and basically just parrot back what they are told to say, but it seems to me they are carrying this particular issue far too far. Part of this has to do with their having to fill in 24 hours with something, being too cheap to afford real reporters and settling for infotainment instead. Whatever happened to Charlie Sheen, Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, and all the other bimbos that constitute real news? We haven’t even had a good LA car chase for ages. That’s probably it, there have just been a few slow news days lately. I’m sure nothing much is happening in Libya, Syria, Egypt, Pakistan, Gaza, Afghanistan, or Iran in the past two or three days. And the fact that Fukushima is now as bad (perhaps even worse) than Chernobyl isn’t newsworthy as it has been going on for too long to be news any longer. Global warming, too, seems no longer newsworthy. It doesn’t matter much if we hear anything or not as you can’t really learn anything from sound bites (and who has time to read anymore?).

I can hardly wait until tomorrow to hear President Obama’s speech on the economy. I’m sure the usual protocol will be followed. Leading up to the speech we will be told what he is going to say, then we will listen to him, and then we will be told what he said. I love this format, especially as sometimes there is little relationship to what they said he would say, what he did say, and what they then tell us he said. The beauty of this procedure for the MSM is that it takes up three times as much air space as necessary and cuts down on their overhead. If you really want to try to understand anything, get a newspaper. Oh, I forgot, there aren’t any real newspapers anymore. Well, you might be able to find a magazine that might try to tell you the truth (but might not). Better yet, watch the BBC, the CBC, or al Jazeera.

Whatever happened to jobs, jobs, jobs? Concern with them seems to have almost entirely disappeared. All we hear about now is abortion, tax cuts, cutting spending, cutting spending, and cutting spending. I dread the next few days, or weeks, and I live in fear that Obama is going to cave once again and go along with what Republicans seem to think are the only priorities. I find it impossible to believe that anyone, Republicans included, will fail to raise the debt ceiling, but with so many crazies in Congress now it is hard to predict anything. As some of the Republican demands are so outrageous I don’t understand why Obama and the Democrats don’t just say “no,” even no, no, a thousand times no, and then see what happens. They seem to be constitutionally unable to say no to much of anything so our nation just drifts closer and closer to complete corporate control.

LKBIQ:
It is only the ignorant who despise education.
Publilius Syrus

TILT:
Small magnets are often inserted into dairy cows to protect them from bits of metal that can cause “hardware disease.”

Lesson From Bolivia

“The growth of religious ideas is environed with such intrinsic difficulties that it may never receive a perfectly satisfactory exposition. Religion deals so largely with the imaginative and emotional nature, and consequently with such uncertain elements of knowledge, that all primitive religions are grotesque and to some extent unintelligible.” (Lewis Henry Morgan, 1877)

Bolivia is about to pass a bill, “The Law of Mother Earth,” that will establish new rights for nature: “the right to life and to exist; the right to continue vital cycles and processes free from human alteration; the right to pure water and clean air; the right to balance; the right not to be polluted; and the right to not have cellular structure modified or genetically altered.” If you read either the Guardian or Truthdig today you may have seen this reported. Ecuador is said to have recently passed somewhat similar legislation. It is not completely clear just how rigorously such rights will be protected, but it surely is a major step in the right direction (if, that is, you have any respect for or interest in the environment, global warming, and survival).

I submit that a “Law of Mother Earth” could never have even been conceived in the United States, let alone passed. Bolivians can do it because they still have vestiges of their “primitive” religious beliefs. Bolivians believe in the Pachamama, which in their view is a living being: “She is sacred, fertile and the source of life that feeds and cares for all living beings in her womb. She is in permanent balance, harmony and communication with the cosmos. She is comprised of all ecosystems and living beings, and their self-organisation.” It is fair to say, I think, that the Pachamama (a kind of earth deity) is some form of a supernatural being in the Bolivian belief system, and as supernatural beings are the essence of religious beliefs, she is a religious figure. Certainly in Morgan’s view (that is still held by many today I am sure), she would be regarded as, if not grotesque, at least unintelligible. What this legislation does is make Mother Earth’s rights equal to what we think of as other rights, including human ones. As Bolivia has suffered from environmental degradation for many years, mostly from mining and the extraction of other raw materials, and as Bolivians are eminently sensible and seriously interested in the environment (Mother Earth), and now that Evo Morales is President, with his clearly stated “Movement Towards Socialism,” and they have for the first time the power to do something about the years of naked exploitation, they are doing so. I think this is a truly important development in the current concern with Global Warming and environmental degradation. I think it would be great if it would be taken as a model by other countries. Morgan’s statement about primitive religions was made at the time Europeans believed themselves and their institutions (including religion) were at the very apex of “civilization” with all others far below that (arbitrary) standard. His view was, of course, narrowly ethnocentric as well as completely simplistic and naïve, as very little was known about non-Western/European religions. In my view (being an atheist) all religions are pretty grotesque and unintelligible, and equally “primitive.”

A Law of Mother Earth could not have occurred in the United States because most of our religious views derive from the Christian Bible rather than beliefs about earth deities or what have you. Such a law would be in direct opposition to the basic Christian belief that mankind should have dominion over the earth, and thus, by implication at least, ought to be able to do anything they wish (which, alas, we have shamelessly done). Genesis 1 is clear on this point:

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

There are slight variations on this translation but this one is from the standard English Bible. It certainly cannot be said that Western-Europeans have been good stewards of the earth or any of the creatures that exist on it. This is so obvious I need not mention things like the Endangered Species Act, the Passenger Pigeon, or the hundreds of other species that have disappeared while under our dominion. Not being a religious person I don’t believe in any religion I have any knowledge of, but I would be sorely tempted to believe more in an earth deity that looked after nature than in an old, bearded man, living in the sky surrounded by angels. As far as grotesque and unintelligible goes, what about the belief that a man was swallowed by a whale, lived in its belly for three days and then emerged, or that the sea parted to allow people to pass, or someone built an ark large enough to contain two or more of every creature on earth. How grotesque and unintelligibly medieval (to me at least) is it that old men, almost all White until fairly recently, dress up in expensive gowns with funny hats and parade around holding elaborate staffs and keep women from being able to do the same, or even manage their own bodies. How about still others that handle serpents or speak in tongues, or believe the earth was created in seven days, six thousand years ago. How unintelligible to believe that God(?) created a species too stupid to even manage their own affairs, let alone nature? And how ironic to think we may have the best chance for survival by following the tenets of some surviving “primitive” religion.

Do not disrespect that which
gives you sustenance.
Move gently across the land
and the blue oceans,
like dancing with a lover.

Morialekafa

Still One More Milestone

Someone might remember my blog of 4-21-07, “Milestones in Growing Old” (but probably not). In any case, in that particular blog I didn’t consider the whole range of a person’s career. You know, first as infant, then child, adolescent, and adult. I was concerned with how it goes after the first time you were called “mister,” then” sir,” then “Grandpa,” and expressed my dismay of unexpectedly (and I thought rudely) being referred to by some young man as “Pops.” I have until now naively believed that would be the end of it, surely there couldn’t be anything after Pops. I was wrong. I have recently learned from my vast network of spies and informants that I am now sometimes commonly referred to by some as “Old Mr. Langness.” This is, I believe, worse than Pops, and also indicates someone even older than a Pops. I am not aware of just when I crossed this rubicon, but apparently I have. Now I am wondering what will come next, if anything.

There is a phrase in Melanesian Pidgin that fortunately (maybe unfortunately) does not occur here (as far as I know), “Lapun Pinis.” This refers to an old person who has become so feeble and useless he or she cannot garden, fight, raise pigs, contribute to bride prices, funerals, or anything else. In other words you are, for all purposes, even though still alive, “finished.” Often there is a special ceremony for such a person, a kind of pre-funeral feast, put on by the entire community, ostensibly to honor the person and show him/her how much they are respected and admired. Pigs are killed and cooked, gifts of pork are given to relatives and others, some of whom have come from fairly long distances, a special meal is prepared for the “oldster,” and everyone says an early goodbye to the “Lapun tru” (the truly old). These can be quite emotional events as the person being so honored usually breaks down in tears, becomes unable to speak, sometimes collapses, and so on.

There is, however, another motive for such a ceremony as well. It is not a secret, but no one suggests it is the primary reason for the event, even though it probably is. The people believe in and fear ghosts. They think the ghosts of the recently dead can hang around the village and cause trouble for the living. A special piece of pork is carried around and rubbed on the ankles of everyone in attendance (including the anthropologist) and is then the subject of a speech by one of the community leaders, directed at the old person being honored, but everyone else also. This assures everyone that the person’s ghost is now placated and is not going to bother the living (they hope). We have no special term for such a person in our culture. But sometimes such a person might be described as “the living dead,” or “at death’s door,” “completely out of it,” “hanging on by a thread,” “a step away from the grave,” or some other such description. Of course no one aspires to this status but it is not uncommon. Usually when someone reaches this point they are conveniently placed in some special facility that exists precisely to deal with the problem. I have heard this described as “The Penultimate Arms.” Of course as bad as this may be, sometimes people say (only half jokingly I think), “Well, it’s better than the alternative.” I rather doubt it and I hope to move more easily into the final status of all, “The late Mr. Langness.” I wouldn’t worry a great deal about my ghost bothering you.

When I wrote “Milestones…” I recall I was commenting also on the idiocy surrounding our politics and in particular reading something claiming, “The Democrats will cave…” Sigh! Things change but just seem to stay the same year after year. I know that some think the Democrats “cave” too easily and don’t put up the fight they should. I suspect this is because most people don’t want to consider the fact that the two parties are now not that far apart on most things. They are both controlled by the same masters who buy Congresspersons without much regard for what their politics are said to be. And with respect to the current budgetary “battle,” it would be hard indeed, even impossible, to deny that budgetary reform is vitally needed. The negotiators are not so far apart about the budget as they are about what specific things should be cut. Republicans profess to be concerned about the national debt and the size of government, but they aren’t really. Democrats profess to stand up for the working class, education, infrastructure, health care, and such things, but don’t do much of anything about it. Both parties claim to be against “wars” but both continue to support them almost overwhelmingly. Some things are virtually sacred to both sides, Israel and the Pentagon are perhaps the best examples. There are a few on both sides, a very few I believe, that probably truly do support the traditions of their parties when it comes to management versus labor, government versus little government, quasi-socialism versus free-market capitalism, and other important differences, but over the past thirty or so years their numbers have shrunk and the voices of the survivors are mostly ignored. We do have, unfortunately, a basic one party system that will quite likely morph into a full-blown Fascist state, controlled by all-powerful corporate masters through political figureheads, that when asked to jump will simply ask only “how high?”

Where are They?

Where are they? Where are all the Republican women on the issue of Planned Parenthood? You know, all those well-groomed, well coiffed, mostly blond women in their 20’s, 30’s, and 40’s who appear often on TV as Republican spokespersons, analysts, or other Republican activists? As far as I know we have heard nothing from them about women’s health or Planned Parenthood. There was apparently some kind of gathering of some of them today but they ducked questions on the subject and stuck to the party line about it just being about spending. And where are they with respect to the negotiations? I have not seen a single Republican woman involved (there could be some, of course, but I certainly haven’t seen any evidence of it). Nor have I seen any of the Republican women who control talk shows speak out about this travesty. Where, for example, is Coulter or that blond talk show host in Nevada who is always speaking out on behalf of Republican nonsense? And even more importantly, where were Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachmann, I didn’t see either of them speaking out on the issue. Do they believe women should not have adequate health care? What do they think about contraception, breast exams, pap smears, and other procedures dealing with women’s health? Are they prepared to throw their sisters “under the bus” for some minor spending cuts? Or should we, perhaps, just go along with Mencken when he defined a Misogynist as , “A man who hates women as much as women hate one another.” I naively believed that the time when a bunch of middle-aged or older White men decided health care for women was long gone.

One obvious factor comes easily to mind, these women are relatively if not absolutely wealthy, and would not have to visit Planned Parenthood under any circumstances. But wouldn’t you think that as women they might have some empathy or understanding about the problems of women who are not wealthy, and who must depend on Planned Parenthood? You might think that, but you would apparently be wrong. They, like their male Republican counterparts, seem to be incapable of empathy or understanding. This seems to be a Republican character trait that is shared by both genders. I do not understand it but it seems to me to be unfortunately true. How else can one explain that Republicans are opposed to virtually everything and anything that might make the lives of the middle class and the poor easier or more comfortable. They are, as you know, opposed to unions and collective bargaining, unemployment insurance, universal health care, minimum wages, any control over giant corporations, insurance companies, and banks that are basically robbing us blind. They do not want Public Radio or Television, and even wish to deny the masses the enjoyment of the arts and humanities, and also favor ravishing public lands. They insist on tax breaks for the obscenely wealthy and huge corporations making unprecedented profits, but do not hesitate to suggest more taxes on the middle class. They favor permanent wars because they are good for business and do not touch them in any way, the “volunteer” military consisting mostly of the poor who enlist because they have few other options, and nowadays of paid mercenaries, many of whom are not even citizens. They would like to see everything privatized with no controls of business whatsoever. They are, in short, sworn enemies of the majority of American citizens and are devoted to the single-minded pursuit of profit. I do not believe this description is either inaccurate or exaggerated. I am at a loss to explain it in terms other than just plain selfishness and greed. Although I hesitate to say it, as I have no way to demonstrate it, I sometimes suspect there may be an element of sadism involved, a kind of sadism that may accompany the possession of power, especially unlimited power, over others.

The bottom line on all this I guess is that I simply do not understand Republicans. Try as I may I always get hung up on believing they must be either incredibly stupid, incredibly ignorant, incredibly selfish, incredibly short-sighted, incredibly greedy, remarkably insensitive, or perhaps all of those things. But then I come up against the fact that large numbers of people actually vote for them. This I truly do not understand. They do not have the Black vote, the Hispanic vote, most of the urban vote, the union vote, and now they have deliberately mounted an attack on women and the elderly. To me this seems unbelievably stupid if they want to win elections, but we still hear talk of the next election being a 50-50 toss-up. How can this be? Further along these lines, how can anyone take seriously a political party that offers potential candidates like Donald Trump, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, or Newt Gingrich? It’s not that any of these people might actually become President, but one would think (at least I would think) the Party itself would be more serious about this (after all, it is for the most powerful position on earth). Donald Trump for President? Sarah Palin for President? This is little more than insulting and we should not even have to hear about it. Similarly, when they suggest things like doing away with Planned Parenthood, the EPA, or Medicare, and so on, they should be indulged, patted on the head, and sent directly to play in the sand box where they so obviously belong.

If you want to see what children can do, you must stop giving them things.
Norman Douglas

Two Separate Worlds

Grandma sentenced for inaction while
daughter pours rum over daughters head,
sets her on fire to “cast out demons.”

We live in two completely separate words, conservatives and I. This became obvious to me (although I have actually realized it for a very long time) when I went this morning for a haircut. There aren’t many barbers here where I live. As far as I can determine they are all basically “right-wingers.” In fact, as far as I can remember, all barbers tend to be rather extreme conservatives (this might not be fair to some barbers who are liberal but I personally have never encountered one). In any case, when I went for my occasionally haircut there were two others in front of me. I had to wait. While waiting I had to endure listening to none other than Rush Limbaugh himself (he has two hours every day on our local radio station). I do not ordinarily listen to talk radio. But here where I now live it is virtually impossible not to hear this loudmouth know-nothing bloviating druggy wherever you are, the barber shop, the county courthouse, even the health food store. As he went on with one outrageous lie after another, blubbering and pontificating, it became obvious to me that I live in a completely different world from conservatives.

I have to give Rush credit for one thing, he did try to explain to one woman who called in that President Obama probably really was an American, born in Hawaii. She obviously did not believe this and was determined to claim that no one, not even Rush himself, was paying enough attention to this outrageous falsehood. Of course while Rush was defending Obama’s birth, at the very same time he was repeating over and over again that he wished someone would prove something or other about Obama that would destroy him, and boasting about having been the first to publicly hope he would fail. It was really quite amazing as the others waiting for haircuts were obviously enjoying this unbelievably ridiculous tirade. I began to wonder if Limbaugh actually had a functioning brain.

Having successfully achieved my goal of a haircut I returned home to learn that Donald Trump was now considered the favorite candidate for President for the Tea Party crowd. Donald Trump for President of the U.S., can you believe it? I can’t, I can’t even believe that the MSM pays any attention to this obvious miserable braggart with no intention of running for President. Sarah Palin is still also in the running, according to the poll numbers I saw reported, as is Newt Gingrich. Huckabee seems to be slowly losing ground as a prospective candidate, while Bachmann is still considered a possible candidate. I find this so unbelievably strange I can only assume the Republican Party has gone completely bonkers. That anyone in their right mind would vote for any of the above is an idea so bizarre to me I can only assume they do not inhabit the same world I do. But so far there has emerged no candidate I can believe is even credible. I don’t understand what Republicans are thinking, and I wonder if, indeed, they think.

I also heard that the Tea Party, that now apparently controls the Republican Party, will not vote for a budget unless they get riders that will abolish the EPA and funding for Planned Parenthood. Why they think anyone would agree to this, or even consider it at all, indicates to me they are quite likely insane. Of course, as they have already managed to get Democrats to agree to other cuts equally damaging to national affairs, why not try? Not content to demand impossibly damaging cuts to this year’s budget, they are now touting Ryan’s ten year plan that is so far-fetched, so absurd, so patently designed to transfer even more money from the pockets of the middle class to the obscenely wealthy, I, again, wonder about their sanity. I cannot take seriously anything Republicans now propose. Their behavior over the past twenty years (at least) has been so obviously designed for no other purpose than to destroy democracy as we (think) we have known it, as to indicate to me they (1) are deliberately trying to establish a Fascist state, or (2) have no idea what the hell they are doing. I cannot understand it. They do not have the Black vote. They do not have the Hispanic vote. They are now mounting an all-out attack on women and the elderly, as well as unions and collective bargaining. They seem also to be determined to continue endless “wars” to no obvious purpose. Just who do they think is going to vote for them in the next election? Will a minority of White, racist, ignorant fundamentalist “Christians” be enough to bring them the Presidency? I can’t see it, but that is where I begin to doubt I inhabit the same world they do, because it appears that Obama may have trouble getting re-elected. Polls (however strange) seem to indicate that Obama has no more than a 50-50 chance of being re-elected. However much one might not be enthusiastic about Obama, how could it possibly be the case that some Republican candidate (any Republican candidate) could possibly be considered more desirable? Where in the world does any support at all, other than a small minority of Tea Party fools, exist for a Republican candidate, and if it does exist, why? I find it impossible to believe that virtually anyone at all could now possibly vote Republican, especially after their current attacks on virtually everything that would benefit ordinary voters. But if there is somehow still enough support for Republicans as to make the coming elections a contest I clearly inhabit another world entirely.

LKBIQ:
Elections are won by men and women chiefly because most people vote against somebody rather than for somebody.
Franklin P. Adams

TILT:
One Asian species of earthworm is known to climb trees.

Fascists and Philistines

Definition of FASCISM
1
often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2
: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

The above definition was obviously taken from an online dictionary. While it exposes the basic meaning of the term it does not include Mussolini’s famous definition that needs to also be considered. For Mussolini, perhaps in some sense the father of fascism, that form of government was the result of a marriage between corporations and government. Is this not precisely what is being attempted by the current Republican Party, having been bought by the Koch brothers and other corporations that have managed to control our MSM, most of our “think tanks,” and also the majority of our Congressmen (and quite likely at least a portion of our Supreme Court)? What else can one conclude when you learn that at least 62 of the recent freshmen in Congress received money from the Koch brothers, or that Governor Walker and other Tea Party Governors also owe their elections to corporate money? I try to be careful with terms and avoid wild claims of Hitlerism, socialism, communism, and so on, but I do not believe using fascism to describe what is currently being attempted by corporations and Republicans is either inaccurate or sensational. It seems to me perfectly clear that Republicans, particularly those identified with the Tea Party (funded by the Koch brothers), are, acting on behalf of their corporate sponsors, trying to do away with Labor and the Middle Class and thus make it possible for corporations and the wealthy to rule over the rest of us, the ordinary citizens and laborers that work for a living rather than just clip coupons. If they have their way there will soon be a two class society, the obscenely wealthy and the peasants, serfs, or wage slaves (subject to” severe economic and social regimentation”). I do not believe this is an inaccurate description of what is being attempted. An actual dictator is not important in this attempt at complete control because whoever is elected will have no recourse but to do as he/she is instructed. The Fascists are about to succeed unless something drastically occurs to stop them. I understand why the MSM does not use the term fascism, they are part of the program. You can call a spade a shovel if you wish, but it’s still a spade.

Definition of PHILISTINE
1: a native or inhabitant of ancient Philistia
2 often not capitalized a : a person who is guided by materialism and is usually disdainful of intellectual or artistic values b : one uninformed in a special area of knowledge

In addition to being fascists theose trying to take over also tend to be philistines, although this is not as simple as it might appear. That is, they want “us” to be philistines in that common laborers, serfs, peasants, slaves or whatever, should not and would not enjoy the “fine” arts as they do. While they wish to do away with all public funding of the arts, they themselves, I am pretty sure have no intention of giving up their multi-million dollar art collections, their Van Goghs, Rembrandts, Picassos, or even their outrageously expensive pieces of junk labeled “modern art.” Besides, once they have reduced the minimum wage and created enough unemployed who will have to beg for jobs, we “hoi poloi” won’t have enough money to enjoy anything but potatoes now and then.

This is not exactly true in the case of the United States where it is somewhat more complicated. This is because often those who have the obscene wealth also are “guided by materialism and…disdainful of intellectual or artistic values.” But once they have enough money they can at least pretend, and they do. I do not know why the inhabitants of Philistia came to give their name to what we now consider philistines. I do know that it has taken corporations and the wealthy powers that be a fairly long time to systematically dumb us all down far enough to accept the blatant anti-intellectualism that infects our culture, along with the absolute garbage that now passes for infotainment on the wasteland of television. We are, I fear, already a nation of philistines. The humanities and arts in general have already been starved in our Universities and Colleges, having to give up their more and more of their budgets to Business Schools and other professional schools (that probably shouldn’t even be part of Universities). If Republicans succeed in their current attempt to no longer fund the arts at all we will have literally given up any pretense of true “civilization.”

The world is too much with us; late and soon,
Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers:
Little we see in Nature that is ours;
We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!
William Wordsworth

Coping with Bureaucracy

Throughout my lifetime I have had many encounters with bureaucracy, this seems inescapable if you have to deal with banks, insurance companies, telephone companies, energy companies, and so on. I have to admit that contrary to what many believe, I have rarely encountered much in the way of problems with governmental agencies (this must sound like heresy to some). The Post Office, Social Security, Veterans Affairs, Medicare, Passport offices, and even the IRS have always treated me courteously and fairly. I cannot say the same for large private businesses that have given me loads of trouble over the years. I have stories of encounters that would “make your blood run cold,” so to speak. Insurance companies, telephone companies, and banks have been clearly the worst offenders. Here, however, I wish only to deal with a University bureaucracy and how I and my fellow graduate students learned to cope with it. Three of us in particular seemed to have particular difficulties with the University bureaucracy. This was typically over rules and regulations that were not intrinsically very important but seemed to be of enormous importance to the bureaucrats that were in charge. They usually involved things like one person refusing to sign something until someone else signed in first, and that person would tell you the exact opposite. Or it might have to do with a late change of class or registration, a library fine, stuff like that. Interestingly enough, the three of us developed our techniques independently of each other but we did eventually come to discuss them with an appropriate measure of hilarity.

The three of us were of approximately the same age and were also at approximately the same stage of our graduate education in the field of anthropology. One was Black, one was Foreign (Sinhalese), and one (myself) was just an ordinary White student. LeRoy (not his real name), the Black student, had learned from experiences growing up, and being married to a White woman, that for him the best defense was a good offense. When he encountered opposition to his request to circumvent a rule, or break one entirely, he would immediately demand to see “your boss,” someone with authority, someone who will understand the problem (implying that the person he was speaking with did not understand it). He was very emphatic in demanding to see a supervisor or someone who had the authority to conceivably waive the rule in question. This usually worked, as remember these rules and regulations were basically pretty “Mickey Mouse” to begin with, but also because the person being confronted would not want to admit they could not handle the situation, and certainly did not want to see their supervisor involved if it was at all possible to avoid it. I can’t say that LeRoy always won, but he often did, and his strategy served him well. He did not receive his PhD, it is true, but this was not because of the bureaucracy, but, rather, because he decided to do something else (music).

Our Foreign student from Sri Lanka developed a quite different approach. He was handsome, well-mannered, and spoke English fluently with a slight British accent. And he was smooth, a charmer, and very intelligent. When he had a problem and was told it couldn’t be waived or solved or changed, he refused to take that for an answer. He would say, with the utmost dignity, “Yes, of course, I understand the necessity for such a rule as some of the (implied American) students might abuse it. And it is a fine rule, a necessary rule, a rule that one should of course respect (by this point the woman he was addressing would be trying not to swoon), but of course,” he continued, “such a rule should not apply to me, a poor Foreign student who is so unfamiliar with your culture, and who so wishes to succeed here in your country.” Like our friend LeRoy, Chandra (not his real name) did not always succeed, but he usually did. I think he could probably have charmed the birds down out of the trees.

My own approach, which had been honed by many previous bureaucratic encounters, was much more American, aggressive, direct, louder, embarrassingly boorish, and much more demanding. I would simply raise my voice (louder the longer I spoke) and announce to the world at large (whatever that world consisted of at the moment, usually a room full of other people) what a stupid, ridiculous, and useless rule it was. I would claim that it was preventing me from graduating (or some other nonsense) and that it simply had to be waived. I would ignore their attempts to quiet me and simply refuse to listen to them. By this point they were usually so intimidated, and also embarrassed, they would give in. Some even said to me, “Okay, okay, we’ll let you do it, but don’t tell anyone else,” and then usher me out as quickly as possible. As I knew which rules really were ridiculous, and avoided such confrontations when I was pretty sure to lose, I did pretty well. After a couple of such outbursts the secretaries and other staff recognized me on sight and were sometimes prepared to capitulate even without much of a fight.

The University did not, of course, offer instructions in how to deal with the bureaucracy it had become, these were necessary survival skills we developed on our own, without them I doubt we could have successfully navigated the tangle of obstacles that we believed had been designed to thwart us in our ambitions. But you had to know the “enemy” as otherwise they did not work. It seemed that the more absurd the rule or regulation the more successful you were able to circumvent it. None of these techniques would work if it was truly a matter of “life or death.”

I was truly impressed once when I witnessed a performance of my own technique so masterful, so talented, you might say even “professional,” it was a thing of beauty. It occurred in a very large branch of a very large bank. There must have been at least eight or ten tellers and the usual array of lending officers and other officials sitting at desks interviewing suckers (sorry, I mean customers). A young woman, I’m sure she could not have been more than 25 years of age, nor could she have been more than about five feet tall, pleasingly plump, (zaftig, if you know what I mean), and also cursed (or perhaps blessed) with having a genuine “little girl” voice, brought the entire bank to a complete stop for a few moments. Her outrage was so intense, her complaints so loud, her anger so great, her demeanor so aggressively demanding, but at the same time childishly plaintive, the place fell completely silent. It was a virtuoso performance so gifted, so powerful, so awesome, so mesmerizing, I don’t have the slightest idea what it was about. But she was quickly ushered into the manager’s office and emerged in a very short time with a smile of success that could not be mistaken. Not only that! The customers that had witnessed her performance applauded as she departed the scene of her victory!

On Vegetarianism

Census corrects mistake,

Lost Springs, Wyoming has
four residents, not one

The subject of vegetarianism has interested me for some time although I have been resistant to comment about it. A paper today, “A ‘Sin Tax’ on Meat Would Improve Our Health and Environment,” by Bruce Friedrich on Huffpost Politics, has finally motivated me to do so. I scarcely know where to begin. First, I guess one should be aware that Friedrich has some position in PETA, an organization that may have merit but also, I believe, can be a bit extreme at times. Second, I do not personally believe that eating meat can reasonably be considered a “sin.”

I may not have this entirely right, but in my memory the first vegetarian who received much attention was Bernard McFaddon. His argument, as I recall, had to do with the fact that as we were evolved from primates, and primates did not eat meat, we should probably abstain from eating it. Of course we know now this belief has no foundation in fact as apes (and I believe some monkeys as well) do eat meat, at least when they can get it. The contemporary argument against eating meat has to do with the belief (probably fact) that raising meat for food is environmentally undesirable and also, according to PETA, unethical, because animals have to be killed in the process.

I have a bit of trouble with these arguments for the simple reason that anatomically and dentally we have obviously evolved to eat meat. Our dentition and digestion allows us to be at the least omnivores, and in important ways, carnivores. It has always been so. Even if you reject the theory of evolution, you still must confront this basic fact. God, too, must have created us to eat meat as our dentition obviously points to that. You must accept this or assume that God somehow made a mistake and really intended us to be vegetarians. But God does not make such mistakes. Even if you ignore both evolution and Godly creation, and believe that somehow we just naturally exist, you are still confronted with the same facts of dentition and digestion. While it is true that humans can exist without eating meat, it is also true that some humans exist by eating meat almost exclusively. By and large, however, most humans have existed by eating both vegetation and meat (and seafood of various kinds), although the relative proportions of these foodstuffs can vary widely depending upon environments and availability.

I find the idea that we should tax meat-eating, in particular, truly strange, as that is something that the majority of mankind has eaten naturally for centuries. Are we now to suddenly reverse centuries of diet? Of course when humans still existed as hunter-gatherers there were no serious problems associated with eating meat, it was not environmentally destructive, nor was it regarded as unethical. It was merely the way humans lived, a perfectly natural way of life that depended upon what foods were available and how successful people were in exploiting them. I’m sure if you tried to explain to a Bushman that hunting gazelles was unethical you would be met by at best a blank stare and at worst with hilarity. Similarly, try to explain to an Eskimo why killing and eating seals, walrus, and whales is unethical. All life seems to depend upon the death of some other life form. Animals eat plants, thereby killing them, or they eat other animals in order to live. Humans are no different from other creatures, they have always depended upon the killing of plants and animals. It would seem that is what plants and animals are for, to provide nourishment for other plants and animals. In nature there is nothing unethical about this.

I suppose one could argue that some parasites manage to live without necessarily killing their hosts, but if so that is unusual and hardly makes a case for vegetarianism. Mongols, for example, could go for times on a diet of mare’s milk and blood without killing their animals, but not forever on such a diet. Vegans and vegetarians in general do not appear to be interested in parasitic diets. If American Indians lived on buffalo, depended on them for meat, hides, sinew, bone, and so on, how can it be said it was unethical to kill them. Similarly, if an Indian killed a deer for meat, hide, and so on, how was that unethical? More often than not there were ceremonies apologizing for the kill and hoping that species would continue to flourish. I simply do not believe the killing or eating of animals, per se, is unethical or even undesirable. But it depends upon the circumstances.

There is little doubt in my mind that our current treatment of animals is in important ways unethical. Locating thousands of animals in feed lots, standing for days in their own excrement, pumped full of chemicals and artificial feed, and being slaughtered by the most efficient but inhumane methods possible is certainly not desirable. Similarly, locking chickens in small cages and collecting eggs via conveyer belts is not desirable. Exploiting dairy cows so their average productive years are reduced to three rather than twenty is not desirable. Raising pigs on concrete and feeding them mostly corn is not desirable. This is not what nature, or God, or evolution intended, but I see nothing to indicate that animals do not exist to feed each other in the natural course of their lives or the lives of others who depend upon them.

It is corporate agriculture that is unethical (and unhealthy) and should be heavily taxed, taxed sufficiently to force them to change their ways and allow us to return to former methods of vegetable and animal production, smaller farms and the more ethical treatment of animals. In the New Guinea Highlands, where pork is the major source of meat protein, they say, “Pigs are our friends,” and sometimes women even nurse them along with their infants. But it is undoubtedly true that as things stand now we should eat less meat and pay more attention to our animal friends and the environmental consequences of what we do, as what we do nowadays is certainly not what we have done in the past.

LKBIQ:
Grub first, then ethics.
Bertolt Brecht

TILT:
There actually is a recipe for jellied moose nose.

Chutzpah

Okeechobee woman found
naked with marijuana in car
after fight with boyfriend.

Benjamin Netanyahu has now given even new meaning to the Yiddish word “chutzpah.” Can you believe that after all these years of violating one U.N. resolution after another, far more violations than probably all other countries combined, he is now asking the U.N. for help? I guess there is another flotilla on the way to Gaza containing what Bibi thinks are elements wanting to provoke a confrontation. Imagine that, a confrontation with people who want to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinians. This might interfere with the Israeli plan, short of mass murder or gas chambers, to eliminate Palestinians entirely. Obviously we can’t have that. Not only that, he is also warning the U.N. about other nations recognizing a Palestinian State and threatening some kind of “unilateral actions” if the U.N. recognizes them. I’m not sure what he has in mind but I suspect he means trying to legitimize the illegal settlements Israel has already established on the West Bank. It is well past time for Israel colonialism and genocide to be permanently curbed and the Palestinians given a fair shake for once.

I confess to being unable to understand anything about President Obama’s “Libyan Adventure” or whatever you want to call it. Perhaps it really was merely a humanitarian adventure designed to prevent the mass slaughter of civilians, with no intention of taking out Gadaffi. Somehow I doubt it. The goal, however unstated, simply has to have something to do with getting rid of the dictator, otherwise it makes no sense. And we do apparently have our CIA in Libya contacting individuals who may be successors if Gadaffi goes. I can understand why Obama and NATO don’t want to be accused of regime change, but it clearly is just a pretense. The supposed no-fly zone was far more than just that as Gadaffi’s forces on the ground were attacked as well, leading the Arabs to complain that the no-fly zone went far too far. Now there is talk of a stalemate with the rebels in charge of the East and Gadaffi remaining in charge in the West. That may indicate that it was merely a humanitarian gesture but that doesn’t make much sense as there will be nothing to prevent Gadaffi from doing whatever he wants in at least some portions of the country. The whole thing strikes me as an incredible farce unless the motive is actually something more than humanitarian, which I suspect it was/is. Somewhere it was said that it is really an attempt by NATO to take control of the Mediterranean. As the U.S. is the dominant force in NATO that means the U.S. is intimately involved in such a venture. This does make sense to me. By why, then, are U.S. planes apparently quitting the scene? Is this merely to keep up appearances? It is known that both Britain and France have more at stake in this enterprise than the U.S. Does that imply that we have merely acted as a “hired gun” to do their dirty work for them? That doesn’t seem likely. Now it seems to be the plan that Gadaffi will eventually be squeezed out by his own people, the sanctions will prevent him from doing much of anything and he will eventually have to go. Maybe that’s the strategy, but I’m sure I don’t know. Furthermore, I don’t know how anyone can know much of anything out of this apparent misadventure, obfuscated by nonsensical claims and goals to the point of absurdity. I keep resisting the notion that Obama is either stupid, dishonest, subject to terrible advice, or all three of those things, but I confess his behavior vis-à-vis both Afghanistan and Libya seem to me pretty unpalatable. The claim of humanitarianism rings hollow when you realize that similar civilian slaughters are taking place elsewhere, as on the Ivory Coast, Bahrain, Syria, Yemen, and so on, without the same concern expressed for Libya. By now I regard Obama’s Foreign Policy as akin to what Churchill said of Russia: "Russia is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma."

Somewhere I read that t we allowed Saudi Arabia to send troops to suppress uprisings in Bahrain in return for their vote for a no-fly zone over Libya. What exactly does it mean that we “allowed” them to do this? Are we now in charge of Saudi Arabia? And what does all this have to do with Iran? Everyone seems desperate to keep Iran from having any influence in the Middle East, do they expect Iran to only have influence in South America? Why should Iran not have more influence in the Middle East than the U.S., after all it is their part of the world and they do have national interests of their own. Why should we not have relations with Iran as we do with other countries like Turkey, India, Russia, etc.? It can’t be because we truly fear they will develop a (basically useless) nuclear bomb. Perhaps it is just me, not having sufficient information to understand what is going on, what secret deals are really involved in all this, what the genuine motives are, and so on. It used to be pretty simple, we supported all kinds of nasty dictators as long as they kept the oil flowing and cooperated. We depended on Israel to be our major “partner” in the Middle East in spite of their myriad war crimes and colonialism, but now it seems the Middle East is in a shambles, no one knows who the players are without a guide, our hypocritical Foreign Policy is falling apart, as are we.

There are two fine articles I would recommend to you today. One by Chris Hedges on Truthdig, “This Time We’re Taking the Whole Planet With Us,” and “Buy Cable TV, Get a Free Gun: Welcome to the New America,” by Don Monkerud on Smirking Chimp.

LKBIQ:
If history repeats itself, and the unexpected always happens, how incapable must Man be of learning from experience.
George Bernard Shaw

TILT:
Atlantic bluefin tuna are a critically endangered species.

Still Wallowing

Montana State Congressman
opposes DUI laws for
“changing their way of life.”

Well, I’m back from my brief escape to sanity. I vowed not to either watch TV or go on the internet. I cannot claim 100% success, but I think I easily did 95%. I avoided the internet entirely but could not completely escape television as my wife briefly watched a cooking program. It has only taken me a few minutes today on the telly and the net to learn that as I would have predicted, we’re still wallowing around in a sea of insanity. The situation in Libya remains confused but is almost certainly not merely a humanitarian gesture. It probably has to do with NATO gaining control of the Mediterranean Sea and oil routes and such, but we will never be told that. And, of course, if it is NATO that means it is really the U.S. (I think). As of now it appears that Gaddafi may be winning, or at least is far from defeated. Our supposed non-goal of replacing him seems to be a goal of replacing him. Our CIA agents are actively meeting with the rebels looking for possible successors and etc. (same ol,” same ol”).

Mostly out of curiosity, I watched three news broadcasts today and also spent some time looking at news on the internet. I was struck by the absence of news about Japan and the nuclear disaster there. I neither heard nor saw any mention of the situation other than a mention by Rachel Maddow that we were sending a couple of gigantic machines to shoot water at the plants from a long distance. I doubt the relative absence of news means the threat is over, in fact I suspect it is so bad they do not want to tell us the truth about it. In this case no news is definitely not good news. This neglect will play into the hands of those idiots who will continue to promote nuclear energy as the human memory seems to be of little help in such matters. Some are speaking of tighter standards, more inspections, blah, blah, but hardly anyone is saying what is obvious, NO NUCLEAR ENERGY ever again!

The MSM is still eagerly reporting the latest nonsense from Donald Trump, the number one non-candidate for the Presidency. Trump has discovered a bonanza of publicity by talking about Obama’s birth certificate. There are apparently still a considerable number of utter fools who believe in this crap and the more Trump brays about it the more they like him. What he is doing is terribly irresponsible, but for the media to continue to report on this is far more irresponsible. Sarah Palin, the other important non-candidate candidate, has now endorsed some Republican Judge in Wisconsin who is running against a more liberal candidate for a judgeship in that troubled state. Why the Housewife from Hell thinks she needs to do this, or that it is any business of hers whatsoever, or that it will make any real difference, is a mystery to me. I guess anything to keep your name in the news while conning a gullible public out of as many bucks as possible.

It appears the Tea Party Governors who have mounted an all out attack on the middle class and labor unions are going to regret their Fascist tendencies. They have united their citizens against them in ways they did not anticipate. There are strong movements afoot to recall them where possible and to otherwise oppose them at every turn. This corporate funded plan to destroy collective bargaining and give complete control to corporations and the wealthy is experiencing an extremely strong backlash. Perhaps even more important is that this attempt has brought about a more intensive focus specifically on them and their unconscionable greed. They will ultimately lose “big time,” but unfortunately it will take a bit of time.

Republicans who claim constantly to behave constitutionally obviously have little or no understanding of that marvelous document. Several Republican Governors, for example, have attempted to pass state laws claiming they do not have to enact various Federal statues and laws if they violate state sovereignty. This is complete nonsense, of course, and a terrible waste of time. But now Eric Cantor has pushed a bill that claims the House, all by itself, with two separate votes, can pass a law, bypassing both the Senate and the President. This is so unutterably stupid many people thought it was an April Fool’s joke. Someone said they did this only to prove they could “do something.” If that is true it is even more stupid, and pathetic besides.

I did not get in as much reading as I would have liked. I enjoyed watching the fire and the pounding surf so much I neglected to read as I had intended. It was enormously refreshing to get away and escape the insanity that seems to grow by the day. Watching the heavy surf made me wonder about energy from the ocean. There must easily be enough energy there for all our needs if it can just be adequately developed. It has not been as yet, I guess it has been underfunded and is not a high enough priority. No doubt it is being opposed by those who make their money on oil and coal and such. I have concluded after my 81 years of life, that no decent society can exist for long if all of its major institutions operate strictly for profit. Capitalism carries within it the germ of its own ultimate destruction.

LKBIQ:
To build may have to be the slow and laborious task of years. To destroy can be the thoughtless act of a single day.
Sir Winston Churchill

TILT:
It is estimated there may be as many as 30,000 invasive Burmese pythons in the Florida Keys.