End of the world?

April 5, 2015

“The Last Word” in this week’s “Inlander” was actually one of their most useful articles to date, and so it should be treated with a high level of sympathy. Did you know that Washington state, was host to numerous Atlas Missile Sites? That’s the cold war for you, and all that went with it. But even before “The Inlander”, actually got into showing their readership this back page commentary; they did an on the street commentary about the “end of the world.” What would you do, if you knew what day the world would end. The various responses to that question, were quite delightful of course.

Now I am going to reiterate somewhat the night of, the early morning hours of, and finally the day break of 21 December 2012. The fact that my cats were freaking out. The fact that it got so murky black, you felt you were swimming in a pool of it. So dark that your table top plant lights with sunlight bulbs, had literally dimmed to a nocturnal yellow. And the cats well; they were crying and racing around for a good long time; until cautiously they came to huddle up next to me as I lay trying to get some sleep on the love seat. Dawn breaks at well after seven in the morning. I do what I must, to include going to the bathroom and getting a drink of water. By now, the cats have settled down. It is as though the worst of their fears have ended. At approximately eight o’clock in the morning or a little afterwards, an extraordinary silvery light bursts forth through the heavily clouded sky. It is coming directly out of the east. It is not the sun, the clouds are too heavy on this winter day to ever see the sun. It is just this strange silver light, I don’t know how long it lasted because I fell back to sleep, that appeared out of nowhere. I shall also add here, that there was a precipice that humanity had stood on. Very likely one of many. The dangers of a large meteorite striking a truly vulnerable part of Earth. In its aftermath, what we as a civilization had taken for granted: homes, jobs, communities, etc.; it would all be irreparably shattered. I recall it as a vision to this day. What I also say, is that it will never happen. Because it happened on an Earth, in a parallel dimension to this on. Literally this Earth broke away, from what would have been its original course of action. When it did so, it carried all of humanity into a new arc, a new era,that no one could have conceived of. Certainly, the Mayans did not conceive of it. Their calendar stopped, you know, on 21 December 2012.

So am I exercising a flight of fantasy? I suffer from a set of loose screws because I saw a brilliant silver light suffuse a cloudy sky? How about this? Pope Benedict suddenly steps down, and is replaced by Francis. Someone photographs an “angel” form in that region of the world, a new pope will have come from. Consider what else has since happened: politics— The Republicans are crazy. ISIS terrorism and the horrible things it is doing in the Middle East— are you flipping crazy, for wanting to join them? Benjamin Netanyahu who thoroughly involves himself in American politics— and the GOP who want to invite Netanyahu into matters, that in an earlier time, would have been considered off-limits on the basis of U.S. Sovereignty. Apparently anything goes, when you have a President you utterly want to hate. Whether that Democrats like the thought of it or not they are the ones who sound more rational, and yes more conservative. “Western Journalism” is an online tabloid manufactured for the strident Obama and Democrat haters— and what will they do when President Obama leaves office in 2017? Salon.com comes out and actually touts childless women and couples. It should no longer be considered a stigma of shame, if you don’t have a family, period. The GOP are suddenly finding out— that no, the voters don’t necessarily care for the big government, that eradicates the rights of their neighbors. On the other hand, the owners of Pizza Memories can rake in over $800,000 sawbucks. Especially after claiming they were “threatened,” by saying they would never cater to a gay wedding. As other people noted, the bigger priority of instant charity, was to crowd fund what were likely some pathetic bigots. On the other hand, don’t crowd fund anything that would guarantee food, employment, or housing for the suffering people in your midst. I don’t know on “who’s behalf” the pizza shop owners claimed to be for. Since their standing up for “God’s sake” seems to have netted them a lot of money. Right, just how many people do recognize how off-kilter the world has become, since 21 December 2012?

And finally I reference the “Horsemen of the Apocalypse.” One would wear a crown — The horseman of brutal, oppressive, even totalitarian reigns. It is a valid fact in history, as well as our present age, that such a horseman did race out and produced these kinds of governments. The second horseman bore a sword — The horseman of invasions and conquests, unending wars under any pretext or excuse that can be given. This is also true, this world also had its history of violent conflicts. The third horseman being a businessman — If he is carrying the tools of the marketplace and discussing the products that can be bought and sold, then he is a business man. But only in this age have men (billionaires really) believed that they could control the world, by the purse strings. What of the last horseman, who bears the mask of death? — Think what you will of him, even if terrorism was never considered in the Book of Revelations. Wars and rumors of wars, the strident declaration that we must “bomb Iran” (But would it make ISIS go away? That would be anyone’s guess) instead of working out a diplomatic solution. Apparently we have politicians now, and their strident apologia choir, who want to become wholeheartedly the fourth horseman. Problem is, the fourth horseman led the charge as the herald of plague, outcries of war, that would bring about needless suffering and death. The political fourth horseman of GOP extremism, do not see themselves as ever leading such a charge, not if they can get someone else to do it. So I had this to ask on Facebook quite recently, Salon.com and elsewhere: of the people who claimed that they would be with Jesus, while the rest of the world would be begging for ice. “Are you so certain of that?” Precisely, with all of this hatred, a desire for material things, even of outright political power; are you so certain that Jesus would want you around?

Call it the birth pangs of this new and unknown era. Rational people will come out of this period of time, just fine. The stridency in politics and a radicalization of what was once “mainstream religion.” The blatant corruption in politics. The shocking nature of materialism, that has since replaced religion’s once hallowed spiritualism. The bible is banged away, at without its believers coming to grips with, an understanding of the book. Perversion that encompasses far more than, condemning “the other” for engaging in activities different from your own. But look here in Leviticus: any sexual act condemned by the bible, heterosexual, homosexual, or bestial in nature, is still abnormal. To mean that even rape and incest, is a perverted act. You are not a “better person” to that [clam digger] if you commit incest with your first cousin. You are not a better person to the guy [who plugs a gas nozzle into a muffler] if you are a rapist. Nor will you see the face of God, for having sex with your wife or girlfriend, during her menstrual cycle. Thus the bible isn’t homophobic, because there are multitudes of acts which it condemns. But people are, who look precisely only for those scriptures, to justify why they are bigots. In Romans 2 to put it bluntly, the Apostle Paul discussed with fellow church members, what made them no better than their pagan neighbors. Incidentally, Romans 2, doesn’t get read and expounded upon. I don’t foresee an end to this world. But I do see a total burn out, of what men once called “faith.”

Insanity politics

March 27, 2015

Ted S. McGregor came out this week, to opine in a short column about the Idaho state Legislature. I have a bone to pick with them; that is, they will set aside some tens of thousands of dollars to kill wolves in the state of Idaho. But they don’t seem too overly concerned about the state of our schools, emergency preparedness, infrastructure maintenance,or making certain our public employees get a decent paycheck.

McGregor’s column discussed how else the Idaho state legislature likes to waste money. Precisely by passing resolutions to demand that Congress, impeach those judges the political crybabies here, so totally disagree with. I’ll agree with McGregor’s sarcasm about how the House of Representatives in Idaho, could have absolute power—to do what ever they wish—if all other “competing” levels of government were completely eliminated. That’s both houses of Congress, the federal judiciary, the presidency, the Governor’s office (?), and the Idaho Senate. Or according to McGregor’s correctly sniping column, our elected members of the Idaho state legislature could learn to live within Constitutional standards.

What I do know is that our members of the Idaho state legislature has a large set of misplaced priorities. Do they want to attract jobs to Idaho, where the majority of the citizens are barely scraping by? Or do they want to extend “open carry,” to include certain kinds of knives being carried around in a lot more places? Should Idaho’s students be an educated and well-skilled workforce? Or does the Idaho state legislature, prefer to give a literal “bully pulpit,” to gun lobbyists such as the NRA?

Elsewhere in this week’s “Inlander,” and according to one of their columns, the Idaho state legislature finally got around to funding a mental health center for Kootenai County. It was reported that Kathy Simms, did not care to spend any of that money on her constituents; so she voted against it. It was approved regardless, which suggests that sometimes, the Idaho state legislature can do something right.

Which brings me to the main point of the blog post: “Insanity Politics.” Ever since 21 December 2012; I have seen the GOP in particular, going off the deep end in just about everything political that you can imagine. Florida’s Guvnah doesn’t want “climate change” or “global warming” mentioned by anyone on a taxpaid for salary. Especially working at a state level bureaucracy. Yesterday, Jon Stewart pointed out just how much one member of Florida’s state legislature cracked up, when the fellow testifying about “climate change” tied himself up in knots, by trying not to mention it. My opinion about Florida’s Guvnah is this: Miami is a little too close to the ocean. There is reason to believe, that rising sea levels could inundate an entire city. That is in millions of souls who currently populate Miami a lot of people to have to evacuate, when such a huge city would no longer be livable, if such an eventuality were to happen. Telling people they can’t discuss “climate change” in what amounts to totalitarian politics, doesn’t make the problem go away. The voters should on the other hand, make Florida’s Governor go away. It would be nice if they did.

Phil Robertson (if I have his name correct) of “Duck Dynasty” infamy showed exactly who he is as a pervert, by what he said about an “atheist family” at a local prayer breakfast. Incidentally the rest of the perverts listening to him, were laughing and applauding at every appalling thing he said. I saw the cut and past item in the comment threads of Facebook, it was broadcast on video, so I have no need to repeat it. Instead, I’ll hand out the definition of pervert: To turn away from the right course of action. To lead astray morally. To lead into error or false judgment. To turn into improper use; misapply. To misconstrue or misinterpret, especially to deliberately distort. To bring to a less than excellent state—debase. And finally, a person who practices sexual perversion. Well, Mr. “Duck Dynasty” was all about seeing atheist mom and atheist daughters getting raped and decapitated. Rape is a sexual perversion according to the bible. Whacking off atheist dad’s penis and showing it to him, is yet another expression of sexual perversion. Sure my dictionary is better than 40 years old, but Mr. “Duck Dynasty” Robertson demonstrated very well, what a pervert still means. As did his audience.

Also found on Facebook was of some heavily pregnant woman in Colorado. Seems she got lured by a particularly vicious and twisted woman. Mom to be was looking to get some baby clothes. The nasty criminal suspect in this case, was a woman who attacks the pregnant lady, cuts the fetus out of her guest’s body, then rushes it to the hospital claiming to have miscarried the child. Mom survived this appalling tragedy, I am happy to so far report. But in the aftermath of this horrible incident, there was some mention by a member of her state legislature, that concerned God’s punishment… Excuse me, but I don’t believe that justifies, this attack on mom to be. A woman who certainly lost her child in this tragic assault, and who could have most certainly lost her life. Don’t we have enough crazy people out there in the world, that we don’t need to elect them into office?

Shallow thinking

March 19, 2015

A couple of weeks back, “The Inlander” published an article on a fellow, and quite frankly I do not care to recall his name, who made use of fascist/proto-fascist almost like a four letter word. Precisely, once or more than once in a single sentence. Which suggests to me, that the fellow was yet another one of those guys, who doesn’t put a lot of thought behind what he says. Bearing in mind that Italy became one of the Axis powers at the on-set of the 2nd World War, then Fascism as Mussolini saw it, would have a slightly different interpretation than many would give it today. Now what about before the rise of Hitler, Mussolini, the Axis Powers; and 19th century reactionary governments, that held sway over an often oppressed subject populace? Well, it did happen, especially as Europe began to industrialize at the on-set of the early part of that century. Kings, Princes, the ruling class of nobility, weren’t necessarily opposed to private capitalistic enterprises. Especially when they saw a substantial improvement in their own treasuries, by taxes to be gleaned from privately owned businesses. And I am also sure that when the royal houses of Europe desired it, they guaranteed that some business interests would flourish in an atmosphere free of competition. What ever you may say of Fascism today, Mussolini basically invented the word. But the arc of history before then, made what Mussolini did possible.

From another side of the perspective, of so-called left wing views; comes “People against the Libertarian Party.” A Facebook group that is quasi-newsletter and filled with what the grp creators ascribe to “libertarian” style thinking. I can think and quite frankly it is something to bust a gut over, that a little too much is ascribed to “libertarian” ways of thinking. It does remind me overly much of demonizing something, without fully understanding what you are saying. Regardless, the people who started this Facebook grp. did manage to put some thought behind their commentary. One item in particular sticks in my mind: I am not against capitalism. But I am against… What becomes a whole list of criminal malfeasance, using money to wield influence over a government elected by the people (oligarchy), and opposing outright a free market. For in an actual free market, it does come with the caveat of an actual competition. Think about that. Some people seemed to get confused about being for “capitalism” and yet opposed to “all the elements” thereof. At least what has since become the rotten core of “capitalism,” in this society today. But greed, engaging in criminal misbehavior, it actually doesn’t support the foundations of capitalism. Instead with the banking and housing collapse circa 2007-2008, the capitalistic “house of cards” collapsed very readily, with the taxpayers holding the tab. You can’t exactly be for capitalism, if you are supportive of all the things that destroy private enterprise and even further, basically make it dependent on both government and the taxpayers. —A parasitic special interest since the days of yeah, the 19th century. I hesitate to call it fascist; and I certainly wouldn’t call it “libertarian,” either.

Robert Reich is normally a deep thinker, and most of the time I like what he says. But he did come out with some truly alarmist views: The 19th century comparison comes to mind, a very few people within their respective European countries, that control the majority of the resources. But the resources in this case, was land and anything that could be extracted from the surrounding real estate, manufactured on the property, versus those who could through the force of law, be denied any use of it. Which would definitely lead to massive hunger, disease, and deaths from the severe cold. It would also lead to massive uprisings, because of the above-described adversarial relationship, between the ruling class and their subjects. But money isn’t real estate, it isn’t a resource, it doesn’t produce one ounce of manufactured material. What money does do, it is a legal tender for engaging in commercial business transactions. More corruptly, it buys and sells governments. More shadily still, it can finance off the wall political flavors of the day; without the so-called adherents once thinking through, what kind of goofball statements they are making. And how their factual actions, actually contradict their many most “pious” claims. You’ve heard all about “the unborn child” who is an “economic growth factor” for the state. In that same state, education is gutted, possible health care for that “unborn child” is being threatened by constant appeals to SCOTUS, and have them take an ax to the ACA. At the federal level, GOP members of Congress, are opposed to parents having the wages needed to better take care of that “unborn” child. And apparently, so does one Mr. Jeb Bush. The fetus as an “economic growth factor?” Not if you don’t want to invest in it. So back to Mr. Reich, in an alarming future, the American workforce could be laboring for next to nothing. Actually, prior to and certainly during the Great Depression, that was a fact. It was also the reason for the rise of labor unions. I look at it far more practically: who do you sell your merchandise to (from the 19th century premise of buy low sell high)? There won’t be a mass market, because people can’t buy what they can’t afford. Remember, they labor for next to nothing. And what of the value of currency? Doesn’t that value constantly fluctuate? Let 20 January 2009 serve as a reminder of what stock prices looked like by the time President Obama took office. Or the currency of the Wiemar Republic of Germany, post the first World War. Once you run out of customers, that much vaunted $ bill can become as worthless as hell. What billionaires? Yeah, that is what greed can do to you, it tends to short out the capacity for critical thinking

The Rudy Giuliani issue

March 9, 2015

In the last couple of weeks, former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani went public about how President Obama “doesn’t love this country” like Mr. Giuliani does. And further, how Mr. Giuliani “couldn’t be racist” just because he said that, for after all, Obama’s mom happened to have been white. So, in the latest issue of “The Inlander,” Robert Herold addressed the latest problem that Giuliani caused for himself. It was well put, eloquently stated, and doesn’t need to be added to. His article can be found at inlander.com.

Instead, I’ll say this. It would take being an utter moron, for Rudy Giuliani to say what he did. Or for other members of the GOP, to defend what Giuliani said. And I stand by that. Prior to the upcoming Presidential elections of 2016, there are somethings you ought not do; especially whereby anyone who does the research can immediately call you out. In Mr. Herold’s “Inlander” editorial, he refers to an author who did his research on Giuliani’s personal bio. Obviously, if the research is correct, then the GOP are hardly the party of high morality, let alone the party of law and order. Just as they have already made it plain that corruption has become a standard. The facts of doing business in government today.

Of course in tandem with the Giuliani issue is that of the GOP who wouldn’t take the road trip to Selma on the anniversary date of “Bloody Sunday” some 50 years ago. That is no way to attract new votes. Just like the voter ID laws/voter suppression laws are also guaranteed not to keep the GOP in power. But that’s to be expected, when you become increasingly the party of bigots. Added on to this particular issue that has become even uglier by the minute for the GOP, a Hindu priest is asked to open the morning session of the Idaho state legislature. Some Idaho pols turn their backs and walk out, and try to justify their blatant bigotry with all things “Christian.” Problem is, they have a bible and a Jesus Christ who would definitely disagree with their opinions of their beliefs. So some interesting individual seems to think the GOP are “bigoted against” (Idaho Statesman on the Facebook news feed) if the GOP are “criticized.” Do the research, you aren’t “bigoted against” for differences in political beliefs, only in race, religion, gender, or as of now; gender identity. Either you live in a country where political diversity can be freely held—democracy. Or you live in a country where only one political view dominates—totalitarian. And history shows us that many totalitarian regimes did exist over many thousands of years. Which is why this country became a democracy. But today, the poor “bigoted against” GOP can’t handle political, racial, and religious diversity. That would suggest, that the GOP is now the party of the totalitarian mind set. Never mind what the U.S. Constitution says, or for that matter, what their vaunted “faith” may declare.

So obviously, this isn’t just about President Obama. Next on the list, no one forces anyone to mourn for a television actor (sometimes featured on the big screen, as well); just because President Obama praised his fine career. Seems to me, that either you do, or you don’t. But to politicize such a death, because of whom you hate as the President, is also obscene and just plain moronic. The more the GOP go the route of jumping off the deep end, the more they will make any Democratic contender look even better.

I am going on record here, that Jeb Bush wins the GOP nod going into the 2016 November elections. Even further, regardless of his substantial baggage, he gains the Presidency. I mentioned this prediction the other day on a Salon.com news feed featuring James Randi, the so called skeptical nemesis of all things paranormal. I will therefore repeat it here. It is not a good prediction to have, but compared to the GOP clowns who will also crowd the campaign hustings, Bush will be preferred as the candidate “less likely” to hurt the party. On the flip side of the coin, I also predict that he will get attached to him, a highly hostile Congress. No matter what it’s ultimate make up will consist of. As I said on that Salon.com news feed that day, “Watch for it.”

When being “anti-tax” makes you Red

March 2, 2015

Remember Grover Norquist? Would you be prepared to argue that his “opposition to taxes” so that it ultimately “reduces government to a size that it can be drowned in a bathtub” as conservative? In this historical biography of Karl and Jenny Marx, “Love and Capital,” by Mary Gabriel; it seems that Karl Marx also touted an anti-tax argument. In fact, his argument about government’s dependency on taxes, “and the people who pay the government to keep them enchained,” sounds downright Libertarian, does it not? But in the context of the crowned heads of Europe and mid 19th Germany, the refusal to pay taxes was an argument for undermining and overthrowing an oppressive government. Incidentally, a very similar argument that Mr. Norquist has also made.

Personally, I see Mr. Norquist’s arguments as being based less on ideology and more on pure greed. He wants what the best things this country has to offer, but he doesn’t want to help pay for it. Nor does he take into consideration, that business interests who rake in a lot of subsidies, tax breaks, and etc.; actually do present a tax burden to someone. It becomes a tax burden against education, the poor, the struggling middle class, most certainly the elderly, and children, as well as the public workforce. What government gives away to the monied interests, it must then replenish from other sources. And once programs and the so-called “entitlements” have been squeezed dry—principally programs and entitlements to benefit the elderly, the children, the disabled, and the poor—then our sources of continued revenue comes under even more duress. The monied “class” doesn’t want to pay taxes, the very poor can not, and the “middle class” such as it is, can’t hope to make up the difference in over all city, county, state, and federal revenue. Which is why we become a debtor nation to such hostile financiers as China.

Believe it or not, unlike mid 19th Germany, taxes in the U.S. do not typically go to keep bourgeoisie in “liveried” comfort. Even if the “monied class” would like that very much. Actually taxes must pay for a lot of things, including the roads Mr. Norquist drives on. the public libraries he has ever frequented, emergency first responders, in the event his home was to burn down, the U.S. Military and the Coast Guard that keeps him safe, the public school he attended, and the members of Congress that he has lobbied. Just as, as I have already described above; the monied interests also find themselves highly dependent on those taxes, as a percentage of their profits. All you have to do is recognize the fact that government outsources much of what it does to private businesses. It pays the businesses on a contractual basis, for what ever work the business does. That would just be one example. It is still a telling example. The money to pay the business interests for their products, labor, or services; comes out of yours and my wallet. Absolutely it does. And while Mr. Norquist has been known to vent about “tax theft” from his wallet (a la Marx?); he is nonetheless a beneficiary of what that “tax theft” has done on his behalf.

Or you take such people as “The TEA Party” and their spokeswomen such as Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin. Undoubtedly some people would say how “Ayn Rand” it is to oppose taxes based on the “enslavement” argument. But factually, if Ms. Rand fled the Soviet Union that had presumably based its ideological principles [at all] on the theories of Karl Marx, then no that would not have been Ms. Rand’s argument. After all, she was supposed to have rejected the communal whole in the name of the individual goal seeker. But societies do not happen to exist as a collection of individuals, who in an anarchist manner, each goes their own way. Yes we are individuals, and yes we do seek individual goals. Mine, as I have since become a senior citizen, is to finally write my books. But, it takes a society to operate and make profitable, a business. It takes society to create an operational government. It takes society to care for the least of these among us.

I fully understand what Karl Marx meant by “Communism.” I knew that even before I finally acquired this particular biography of him. An advocacy of the proletariat. And the conditions that “working class” had to deal with, and they were very deplorable conditions by the mid-19th century; you could certainly understand Mr. Marx’s advocacy. And at the same time, shake your head at the people who “controlled their countries” through divine entitlement: they wouldn’t do anything for their citizens. People got sick, they starved, they got angry and began fighting. Then the government cracks down on them, and lays waste to a huge number of people, who only wanted to better their lot in life. In reaction, would Mr. Marx’s thesis have gained traction, if the monied interests, the royalty, the nobility had better taken care of their own? No, I don’t think so. The “red” argument, then was against obvious greed and the tragic consequences that it caused at the time. Now it seems, this same “red argument,” is on the behalf of greed. Thus in summary, my opinion is this: if for what ever reason you want to borrow left wing dogma and co-opt it for your own purposes, don’t call it “conservative.” Being anti-tax was an argument of rebellion, even in the founding days of this nation. Rebellions are left wing, because they are uprisings against established institutions. Well then, just call it left wing, and with Karl Marx also touting such a thing at one time, call it RED too.

Haters gotta hate

March 1, 2015

You wouldn’t know Lesley Haskell from Eve, anyone who doesn’t live in the greater Spokane, Washington area. But you will know the language of pure and unadulterated hatred. As it is a truly universal language. Mrs. Haskell? She is the wife of Spokane County Prosecutor, Mr. Larry Haskell. And according to social media accounts, Mrs. Haskell has stirred up quite a controversy, that borders on certain political embarrassment for her hubby. That’s because the woman went on social media, and started “tweeting” her hatred of Muslims (Muzlims, is how she spelled it) and anyone who disagreed with her.

That is when “The Inlander” picked up on this social media ruckus, and published a column about it…

Considering that the column will also be republished at inlander.com; anyone who wants to read Mrs. Haskell’s embarrassing commentary, can check it out there. Or, they can even search for Mrs. Haskell’s social commentary, for a tad more than some selective albeit, distasteful quotes. Just to get a better grip on what she was saying. Suffice it to say, I have read plenty of garbage comments like hers, on Facebook and other forms of social media. I have especially read the kind of garbage comments that come from people: “You disagree with me…” and basically, “I” become your victim. Right. Apparently, Mrs. Haskell and others who share this attitude in common, forget how quickly their hatred of others, creates victims. Of anyone who justifiably opposes such public comments, do in fact, ably demonstrate tolerance. That is, for the people who could easily be victimized by hatred. —Not political bias, or racial and religious bias, hatred! By the way, Mrs. Haskell, while you are demonstrating how offended you are by the deaths of the “unborn;” I don’t guess it would occur to you, that if those “unborn” were born instead, Fagan’s (who is currently serving on Spokane County’s Health Board) anti-vaccination stance, would have an argument that is counter-productive to this religious “pro-life” point of view. You should be outraged at Fagan’s position, as it could prove real costly and deadly, to all those babies you want brought into the world.

Among the remaining quotes, republished in “The Inlander” column, they were by and large, pretty childish. And obviously, those comments are not very helpful to a recently elected, country prosecutor.


Besides the fact that I am now five chapters away from the final editing of my new book, “Aesgard Awakening!”, I have read even further into Mary Gabriel’s biography of Karl Marx. Did you know, that outside of abolishing private property, that Mr. Marx held a similar opinion about: free speech, the freedom of the press, the right of the individual to be armed, the right to vote (suffrage) to be universal, and separation of church and state. Incidentally, these weren’t “new” arguments, because you will find them to also exist, in the Bill of Rights. Does this mean, that James Madison who authored the Bill of Rights, was a communist? Or instead should it mean, that Mr. Marx somehow learned about our American constitution, and incorporated its better qualities, into his overall ideological agenda. Seriously, it is interesting how these histories seem to parallel each other, at least in the beginning

Ignorant of history

February 14, 2015

I have a very good reason for not putting a new post on this blog for awhile, I am editing my new book, “Aesgard Awakening!” As of now, my edited material is almost halfway through the book. So, I am taking a brief break from my book to discuss the latest George Nethercutt editorial. He has spent many a column space discussing civics, and how students in modern classrooms apparently know less about this country’s politicians, and more about memorizing the lyrics of “Frozen.” But if Mr. Nethercutt wants to fancy himself as a “teacher” for this nation’s newest leaders; then those same students have a definite problem.

Seriously, I was going to read his editorial, saw a fraction of it where some dude out of history opined, “Where are the giants?” With reference to Lincoln, Jefferson, and etc. Plus Nethercutt’s personal opinion, that the voters of this country are looking to leaders to unite them. That was when I cracked up, and I have now decided, that will be one column I will skip reading altogether. Question, what made Jefferson, Lincoln, or any other President a “giant?” In the context of their era, of the cultural thinking of their time, not necessarily. Nor did such men, considered to be among the greatest in retrospect, unite an entire country behind them. Quite the contrary, President Washington encountered rebellion from revolutionary war veterans. Jefferson, was annotated as being embroiled in high levels of public and political dissent, over the formation of banks. Lincoln had the Civil War to deal with, and its aftermath would be felt by the rest of this society and by every other succeeding President, through at least the Civil Rights era.

And that is just the rough frame work of events for this entire nation’s history. Now for some of the particulars; do states’ rights arguments unite voters behind a single leader? Of course not. Would hyper partisan politics unite parties behind a single leader? No, and why should anyone think so. Just on those relevant and current facts, it would seem that Mr. Nethercutt is particularly oblivious. It also looks as though he wants to create a mythic president. It can’t be the current White House occupant, you see; he must be blamed for all the hatred and bigotry thrown at him. As though the hatred and bigotry shown by others, “proves” how President Obama has “divided” the country. Well, then Mr. Nethercutt should crack open a few history books; this country has always been divided. And given our diverse partisan and religious differences of opinion, it is highly unlikely that a people would ever unite behind a single man. Unless, and I choose to be snarky here, he’s some kind of anti-Christ.

So what would make a President “great” or a “giant?” I’ll put it very briefly, because they overcame tremendous obstacles and moved this nation forward. In order to be “great” or “giants,” they were also the ultimate liberals. In a word, that would run absolutely counter to Nethercutt’s presumptive political views.


I am also going to briefly discuss a new book I recently acquired: “Love and Capital Karl and Jenny Marx and the birth of a Revolution.” An historical biography written by Mary Gabriel. I am only now getting into this book, briefly in between, further serious editing on my fantasy novel. But what I have already been introduced to, in the book’s opening chapters: socialism was already the outgrowth of the American and French revolutions. Karl Marx did not invent it, he was introduced to it. And in the context of the time that communism had also surfaced as an ideology, the significant difference between itself and socialism, was of course the abolition of private property. Incidentally, these ideas would be floating freely in at least some parts of Europe—specifically France. Long before the Russian revolution, would establish some concept of “property abolition” to the most eastern part of Europe. And create as well, the Soviet Union. Because these ideas were already floating around, for at least a decade before the American Civil War. If anything, Karl Marx became the representative and the face of radical ideas that had already preceded him. And as I had finally learned was correct here, Thomas Paine in his “Rights of Man” had set the stage for radical socialism and communism. Whether his own influence could have been publicly acknowledged or not, some of what he wrote would be similarly quoted in socialist and communist circles. Amazing what people can and will do with the dangerous ideas of their time.

Marco Rubio

January 17, 2015

On the CBS Evening News the other day, Senator Marco Rubio (R) Florida, told a woman reporter who was interviewing him what he thought of higher education. Apparently, he’s opposed to the idea of it. It isn’t necessary or suitable for what this country needs. Later on, he appears on “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.” No, I did not watch the entire interview, I wasn’t about to. What I did see of it as the Senator was touting his book; Rubio’s answers to Stewart’s questions, didn’t exactly meet the challenge. Precisely, they weren’t intelligent answers, he kept stumbling, and geeze Stewart’s a comedian! How would Rubio stand up and deliver in a moderated debate scenario? If he can’t answer a comedian’s questions, his book is likely not worth reading either.

So, let’s address how “frivolous” higher education is. I will bet you that the late Steve Jobs would have disputed Rubio’s assessment any day of the week. As would Doctor Tyson of “Cosmos” fame. Bill Nye the Science Guy, would be shaking his head that anyone would dismiss the need for higher education. No, this isn’t a “segway” or a tangential argument. After Rubio appeared on “The Daily Show” on Wednesday. Jon Stewart’s latest, broadcast last night: was that of Jessica Williams discussing public defenders having to defend fetuses. Apparently, a new law that went into effect in Alabama. If that is correct, it is a law laden with pure irony, hypocrisy, and further, how stupid can you get? Alabama doesn’t have the resources to defend a fetus against a pregnant teenager, in a court of law. Let alone, any poor person who can’t afford a private lawyer. And if those resources factually don’t exist to defend a fetus; then what does that say about the 14th amendment rights, of those people born and living in the state of Alabama? Maybe for the radical religious, who want to use government to regulate and control private individuals, higher education isn’t essential. Or the doofus who made an utter fool of himself on “The Daily Show” last night, might have understood something essential. How does a grown man start out? Well, first he is a fetus.

A long time ago, the GOP made very public how they were going to engage in divisive politics… If this Alabama state law actually exists, that’s divisive politics. It pits the fetus against family, teenager also against family, fetus against the rights of due process for the society at large, and finally; the fetus against its own future interests. Which brings us back to Marco Rubio. He frowns on a higher minimum wage. Why if businesses had to pay for more expensive employees, they could just take those jobs away through full automation.

Machinery doesn’t come cheap. It has to be maintained. And currently, well educated and trained human beings maintain those machines. Second, supplying the workforce with a decent paycheck, is actually more cost effective and profitable. Why? Because it still takes money to make purchases. And money is produced by holding a job. So, if this country were to go to full automation, what would Senator Rubio suggest we replace our current “capitalist driven society” with? No one will have the money to buy anything. Which comes down to this, apparently Mr. Rubio wants to be President of a third world country.

Further, if he is an immigrant who became a naturalized citizen; he actually can not run for the office of POTUS. The same is just as true of Ted Cruz. You still have to be born in this country in order to hold that job. CBS Evening News I don’t think, cared to look into that.

Question, where does Mr. Rubio get his Congressional salary and other perks from? Who pays for it? Uh, his too expensive to keep employed constituents, I do believe. The well heeled business interests certainly aren’t forking over the tax dollars, to give Mr. Rubio some hundreds of thousands of dollars in a yearly salary. That’s why I don’t regard these people as “conservative.” They seem to be lost in Neverland all the time. Especially Senator Rubio. So, I’d certainly suggest that Peter Pan and Tinkerbell, haul Rubio’s ass back to Neverland and keep him there. This country can not afford him.

The “state” of Idaho

January 10, 2015

I was able acquire the latest “Inlander” today, 9 January 2015. Among other news items, the local news weekly discussed what state legislatures in Olympia, Washington and Boise, Idaho are facing in budget challenges. I’ll focus on Idaho. After all, I am only a native and long time resident of this highly radical state.

Last week, David Sheridan had published a letter about how “God loved Idaho” more than apparently, the neighboring state of Washington. Indeed, he even boasted of how our roads in Idaho, survived the constant use of studded tires in winter, better than the roads of Washington state. I submitted my own letter, of course I had no intentions of mentioning Mr. Sheridan’s name. I did point out what it is that “God was not likely to love,” with respect to political corruption, our lack of educational and employment advantages. At the end of my own letter published last Wednesday, 7 January 2015; I took note of the fact that tax dollars are usually required to create (or build) and maintain decent roads (over all infrastructure). I am quite sure that Mr. Sheridan realized, that my published letter to the Coeur d’Alene Press, was in direct response to his own. If ultimately he decides to respond, let us only hope he addresses these issues in a more serious matter than “God’s love” owing to our politically selective morality, or miracles coming from Jesus Christ.

So back to this week’s “Inlander” weekly publication; it was noted that our roads and infrastructure are in bad shape. —Presumably, God’s love has its limits. But of the list of office holders in the Idaho state legislature whom “The Inlander” managed to get some quotes from, apparently bad roads and infrastructure are not a high priority in a “tax averse” state. Elsewhere in the same article, the same Republican office holders were apparently all on board with the idea of “taking back” federal lands, and placing them within the state’s jurisdiction. I’d like to pause this highly political proposition for the moment and address two points: first, we don’t have the tax dollars to fix critical infrastructure. So how do we pay for a 62% geographical land mass in the state of Idaho? Especially when we would have to put a whole lot of moolah out front, to take care of that newly acquired landmass when it comes to critical resources. Second, how about that sale of now state land to private resource extractors? Is the state of Idaho going to recoup tax dollars from billionaire business owners? Probably not, if you constantly refer to how this state is “tax averse.” That says a great deal about how radical the GOP in recent years, has truly become. So radical, that they no longer consider what the ultimate outcome could be, of their whimsy ideologies of the moment.

The same argument also applies to our lack of educational advantages. If you don’t have the money to pay for school books and other supplies, district to district and this is the perpetual whine coming from District 271 nearly every year, then you definitely don’t have the dollars to “take control of massive federal land.” Where the Luna laws originally intended to deny tenure and etc. to public school teachers, in order to pass that “savings” onto out of state and for profit online educational companies; then no, we don’t have the monetary resources to “take back federal land.” Literally, the GOP in this state seems to live perpetually in Neverland. With faeries waiting in attendance, to hand “the lost boys of the Idaho state Legislature,” a juicy snack. You can believe me, this is what comes of the failure to think among the voters and politicians of this state.

This morning I saw a letter in the Press, that I absolutely had to applaud. I won’t mention the fellow’s name or even plan on putting his letter on the blog. Just suffice it to say, he was disappointed with the lack of “conservatism” with reference to one Raul Labrador. Perhaps this man was a Republican and voted for old Raul out of the justification that Labrador wasn’t a Democrat. If that is precisely how you would vote, paying no attention to the actions and certainly the voting record of the incumbent, then you would be bitterly disappointed. Raul Labrador was labeled, not a conservative. But our not so effective Representative here in the state of Idaho, has never been a conservative. The Cromnibus bill that this morning’s letter referred to, wasn’t the only un-conservative act that Labrador had ever engaged in. Make that, just the latest radical gesture that has come from the new left GOP. But if the Cromnibus bill that Labrador voted for finally woke this one writer up, so much the better. Oh and Labrador sent a flyer long after the spending bill cleared Congress. It consisted of a “survey” trying to justify the vote. I let Rep. Labrador know where I stood as a conservative.

Yeah conservative, of the don’t bash cherished institutions kind. Of the don’t trash your kids’ future even as you posture “right to life,” kind. Of the don’t put greed ahead of human needs, kind. Under the circumstances, I highly doubt that God loves a state, where we overly abuse the word “conservative.” Otherwise, some things would require a miracle, for people to continue to live in Idaho.

Too many gun tragedies

December 31, 2014

I am not going to name names with reference to the tragic accident that happened at the Hayden, Idaho WalMart Superstore yesterday morning; 30 December 2014. A two year old child messing around in mom’s purse, manages to grab her loaded gun and shoots her. Not only was this incident all over Facebook and other forms of social media, it was also broadcast on the televised news and last night, CBS Evening News had picked up on this particularly shocking story. A toddler shoots mom with her loaded gun. You have to figure that at some point, this just had to happen.

I fully understand why the 2nd Amendment was written as it was. At one time this country did not have a regular army and so, a volunteer militia made up of individually armed men would have to muster and train, in order to defend their towns or villages, even the country if called upon. That was the assumption anyway. At least until a regular army, navy, marine corps, eventually a coast guard and air force was authorized through Congress. Because of the above changes in the formation of an official military, the original intentions of the 2nd Amendment went the way of history. Fast forward to the present with various “Open Carry” radical groups that insist on taking their guns everywhere. I could see some child playing with a fully loaded semi-automatic rifle, like he or she thought it was a toy, with tragic consequences. Like what happened yesterday at WalMart. Because anyone dumb enough to open carry such a weapon into a Target or where ever, wouldn’t have the common sense it would take to keep a child away from a dangerous weapon. Sorry to have to say this before a now grieving family and children scarred for life because of this incident: but when I was a child, the 2nd Amendment was not threatened if mom and dad were not openly carrying or carrying concealed any weapon into a store, theater, or restaurant. That was over 50 years ago. My how attitudes have changed and dramatically, since I was a child.

The NRA became more politically radical in those almost 50 years from the time of my birth. You didn’t used to hear of the NRA or any other “gun rights” group prepared to take up arms against this nation, or this nation’s government. Actually, it is treasonous to make that kind of argument. But with the political donations that the NRA routinely gets, it is also a treasonous argument that routinely gets a pass and a wink of the eye. Because of the corrupting influence of private money in public political campaigns. So, at what point does the NRA begin to recognize that guns are not toys and are instead dangerous weapons? Just how many excuses can they keep coming up with when finally, toddler fires on mom and kills her almost instantly. How many members of the NRA can keep arguing that there is a “dictatorship” behind gun regulation; when children are accidentally shooting other children, because parents are careless about where they store their dangerous weapons?

I have thought about this many times since I had last posted to this blog, and it involves “looking in the mirror.” Millennials was addressed at length in “The Inlander” of Spokane, Washington. Brief interviews on the street, in which actually older people were included among those voicing opinions about same; the older people in particular voiced some particularly nasty condemnations. Maybe they forgot that, they are the parents or the grandparents of these same millenials. And with their own “me first” political views—inclusive of my individual rights to my dangerous toys—why shouldn’t the millennials make the assumption that “things” can be handed to them as well. The NRA was granted a very liberal entitlement from SCOTUS after all, with reference to their “Chicago decision.” So, if the NRA can get one branch of government to hand them something, then “entitlements” are also presumably procurable for everyone else and any other walk of life. Which leads to a 2 year old toddler reaching into mom’s purse, playing with her loaded hand gun, and killing her.

Idaho is a gun crazy state, it can not be denied. Idaho hunters love their guns and want every possible permission to use those guns, to hunt and shoot everything in sight. Whether it is of any profit or useful to them, or not. Now we can add to the list, mom’s little boy kills her with her own weapon in a Hayden, Idaho WalMart. Am I rubbing this in? Yes, I sure am. No, I am not a mom. It is probably just as well that I am not one. But for anyone who is a parent; if you are going to insist on taking a loaded weapon where ever you go; show some responsibility. Children are inquisitive and they are going to get into everything. That is why there are warning labels on bleach and other cleaners, and further notification of, “Keep out of the reach of children!!!” A smart parent or parents would understand that. Precisely, a parent who is smart enough to exercise some common sense. The same is equally true of your handgun. If through the NRA and the SCOTUS decision that so thoroughly liberalized the 2nd amendment that it is no longer recognizable, you can individually own as many dangerous weapons as you wish, keep them out of the reach of children for your own sake and theirs. That is your responsibility as a parent. And yes, this was a preventable tragedy. The only people I will truly feel sorry for, is that toddler and the other children who were witnesses.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 135 other followers