This is how I’d like to see the White House Press Corps respond to this administration’s bullshit artists.
This is how I’d like to see the White House Press Corps respond to this administration’s bullshit artists.
I’ll admit it. I’m DISGUSTED!
I know I’m not alone in this, but I can say with heavy duty authority that in the aftermath of the 2016 Presidential (s)election, my disgust has peaked at levels I’ve never known before, levels that, until November 9, I would have never guessed attainable, much less even possible. But it happened. Somehow, the most narcissistic, egomaniacal, misogynistic, xenophobic, bigoted, racist, fascistic and ego-driven presidential candidate in American history has been (s)elected (at least via Electoral College terms), and will become POTUS on January 20, 2017.
My initial reaction was to rant (which I did), then attempt to listen to those voices of ‘moderation,’ those voices that try to convince us “radicals” that hey, this is America where the voice of “the people” — not of the tyrant — is heard, is determinative of the nation’s (and the world’s) future. Those voices of moderation are, of course, nonsensical in that they ignore the obvious consequences that invariably occur when the entire government of a nation is turned over to what is, effectively, a far right wing politic, a Fascist majority. And sadly, that is precisely what ‘we the people’ did on November 8, 2016; we “elected” a Fascist president, and left in place right wing majorities in both the Senate and the House along with a vacancy on the Supreme Court which will now be filled by an extreme right wing appointee, thus granting control of the entire of our federal government to the American Fascist Movement.
That should be the point that causes any salient mind to rant and rave for hours on end about electoral national destruction, but then again, to the “salient” mind, what would be the point? As Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar noted, “The die is cast.” Besides, it does one no good at all to imagine being down in the pit, surrounded only by idiots, white supremacists, Republicans, Fascists — assuming there’s a difference. There are, after all, other places — peaceful and quiet places, places brimming with ‘salient’ life forms — places that are far better, that inspire rather than denigrate one’s imagination.
Here’s an example: a six line poem by longtime colleague and friend T.R. Nissle, words which he penned some 40 years ago in response to a few photos I managed to ‘snap’ during my frequent and solitary sojourns “out there” on some then relatively undisturbed corners of the Sonoran Desert in southwestern Arizona. Six lines with six photos (the top three ‘inspired’ the poem), together offer a refreshing look at the living world — though not expressly through human eyes.
▲Thou, whoever art above, hear me die –▲
▲Hear my silent, lonely prayer –▲
▲For tongueless creatures everywhere;▲
▲We neither savage, jest, nor boast of soul –▲
▲But flower unmaliciously –▲
▲Disjoin us from Humanity.▲
Those six photos are of the Sonoran Desert’s most unique life form, the Giant Saguaro Cactus, in various stages of both life and death. Curiously enough, the Saguaro’s longtime scientific name Cereus giganteus (Britton & Rose) was, in recent years, changed to Carnegiea gigantea in honor of renowned wealthy industrialist-become-philanthropist Andrew Carnegie who, in his last years prior to his death in 1919, donated (as 2015 share of GDP) some $78.6 Billion (approx. 90% of his accumulated wealth) to charities, foundations, and universities. I suppose it could simply be my naivete, but I seriously doubt that any of today’s billionaires will ever wind up with a signature cactus named after them. Trumpissonia gigantea? Probably not.
The bottom line remains: If humans would take a moment and agree to (1) abolish all war, (2) disallow greed, hate, and irrational fear, (3) abandon their never-ending savage quest for power, and (4) agree to never again boast of soul — but flower unmaliciously, the world would fast become a livable place for all its creatures, big or small. Including even ourselves.
I remain filled with doubt, however; human history has yet to suggest that humans are uniformly capable of being earth-friendly in any context. More than two centuries ago, for example, William Wordsworth noted that though . . .
There was a time when meadow, grove, and stream,
the earth, and every common sight,
To me did seem
Apparelled in celestial light,
The glory and the freshness of a dream.
It is not now as it hath been of yore;–
Turn wheresoe’er I may,
By night or day,
The things which I have seen I now can see no more.
To which I can only add, in MY voice to all of earth’s creatures everywhere:
Disjoin US from “Humanity.”
With the most consequential election of my lifetime now just one day away, a scene from Star Trek: Next Generation’s “Best of Both Worlds” Part 1″ keeps returning to my mind. It takes place before the battle with the Borg, as Captain Picard paces through the Enterprise, and finds Guinan alone in Ten-Forward:
Guinan: “Trouble sleeping?”
Capt. Picard: “It’s something of a tradition, Guinan – Captain touring the ship before a battle.”
Guinan: “Hmm. Before a *hopeless* battle, if I remember the tradition correctly.”
Capt. Picard: “Not necessarily. Nelson toured the HMS Victory before Trafalgar.”
Guinan: “Yes, but Nelson never returned from Trafalgar, did he?”
Capt. Picard: “No, but the battle was won.”
Guinan: “Do you expect this battle to be won?”
Capt. Picard: “We may yet prevail. That’s a… a conceit. But… it’s a healthy one. I wonder if the Emperor Honorius watching the Visigoths coming over the seventh hill truly realized that the Roman Empire was about to fall. This is just another page in history, isn’t it? Will this be the end of *our* civilization? Turn the page.”
I wish that I had the calmness, almost equanimity, with which Captain Picard views the possibility of approaching doom and the likely takeover of the United Federation of Planets by a heartless, merciless “race.” I cannot view a similar fate for our country without a feeling of utter dread.
“We may yet prevail” as Picard says, if by “prevail” one means that Hillary Rodham Clinton wins the Presidency. If that happens, in my humble opinion, we the sane will have only one night, possibly, to feel the relief of dodging a bullet. As long-time students of politics and human nature, particularly ‘American’ human nature, we Critters and Zoosters and other reality-based folks are all too well aware that a final election result which denies Donald Trump the Presidency is just the beginning. There inevitably will be a barrage of ‘bullets’, figuratively at best, to continue to dodge. And it may well “be the end of *our* ‘civilization’.”
Guinan offers hope of a sort:
Guinan: “This isn’t the end.”
Capt. Picard: You say that with remarkable assuredness.”
Guinan: “With experience. When the Borg destroyed my world, my people were scattered throughout the universe. We survived – as will humanity survive. As long as there’s a handful of you to keep the spirit alive, you will prevail – even if it takes a millennium.”
And while Guinan could be right, that “[t]his isn’t the end”, I wish that *our* people were able to scatter throughout the universe. “Humanity” may survive, but will it still be recognizable as “human”?
This is our daily Open Thread–talk me down?
Okay, this is going to be a little long, so go ahead and get your favorite beverage/sustenance. Are you sitting comfortably?
I received the following email the other day from Michael Sherrard of Faithful America:
A new group calling itself the “American Evangelical Association”[**] is generating headlines with a letter attacking Faithful America.
Signed by dozens of Donald Trump’s biggest supporters on the religious right, it makes a wild series of accusations against Christian social-justice leaders and organizations.
The letter names Faithful America alongside Sojourners’ Jim Wallis and evangelical creation-care advocate Rich Cizik, and claims that our activism has contributed to “a growth industry trafficking in human baby organs,” “violent inner-city lawlessness,” and “increasing drugs, disease, crime, gangs, and terrorism.”
The charges are bizarre, but the letter’s signers – several of whom have been named by the Trump campaign as official advisors and endorsers – have a clear mission: Delegitimizing Christians who dare to challenge Trump’s politics of fear and hatred.
With barely a month left before Election Day, polls show that Trump continues to hold a double-digit lead among white Christians, and too many Christian leaders have been intimidated into silence.
With no buildings, denominations, or charitable tax status to protect, Faithful America is free to take on the Christians who are baptizing Trump’s heinous agenda. But we need your support to do it. Donate to Faithful America
The full letter is almost eight pages long, but here’s an abridged version and some of the most significant signers:
“An Open Letter to Christian pastors, leaders and believers who assist the anti-Christian Progressive political movement in America”
After years of earnest but less public attempts, it is now with heavy hearts, and a hope for justice and restoration, that we Christian leaders urge ‘progressive’ evangelicals and Catholics to repent of their work that often advances a destructive liberal political agenda. We write as true friends knowing that most believers mean well. We desire the best for you and for the world God loves.
As recent leaked documents confirm, and as Rev. Jim Wallis of Sojourners eventually admitted, wealthy, anti-Christian foundations, following the lead of billionaire George Soros’s Open Society Foundation, fund and “rent” Christian ministers as “mascots” serving as surprising validators for their causes. The consequent realities include injury to countless people, the Church, the family, nation and the global Church including many martyrs.
We must reclaim the Church’s witness in the world. Biblical truth and wisdom are the highest love for human beings. While God loves justice and mercy for all, many “social justice” campaigns are politically crafted and not the true Gospel. Only the truth of our sin, both personal and systemic, and Jesus’ atoning sacrifice for our salvation and rebirth, is true hope for persons and nations. The gospel charges all things with hope.
Consider some of the consequences of Progressive political activism over the past eight years:
1. A growth industry trafficking in human baby organs and body parts – funded and defended by the Democratic Party.
2. The abandonment of a biblical view of marriage that protected and liberated children and adults from centuries of pagan slavery, poverty, polygamy and non-life-giving sexuality.
3. The Transgender agenda imposed by Obama-government edict, including gender re-education to be forced on our citizens, businesses, schools, military and churches.
4. Doubling of our national debt, economic stagnation and increased welfare dependency.
5. Increased minority unemployment, poverty and violent inner city lawlessness, with an accompanying loss of opportunity, self-determination and family stability.
6. Heightened racial division and tension, and the growing phenomenon of paid demonstrators being recruited and dispatched to instigate protests that often become riots.
7. Open borders and ‘sanctuary’ cities increasing drugs, disease, crime, gangs and terrorism.
8. Forced refugee resettlement in hundreds of American cities without citizen consent, mandated by the federal government in collusion with the United Nations. “Refugees” are primarily non-assimilating Muslims, while authorities reject persecuted Christians.
9. Hostility towards Judeo-Christian religious liberty in our courts, media and universities including the suppression of conservative speakers, free thought and moral education.
10. The widespread, political use of the IRS to intimidate conservative, patriotic and Christian groups that disagree with the current political establishment.
For many years, Soros’s Open Society and other liberal foundations have funded not only most of the disturbing campaigns mentioned above (1-10) but also the Religious Left, using and creating ostensibly evangelical and Catholic organizations to “message and mobilize” Christians into Progressive causes. They use the Marxist-Alinsky tactic of funding “ministers” who cherry-pick faith language to confuse and divide the Church’s morality, mission and vote.
At a time when many Christian ministries are struggling, a few of the Soros network “faith” and “interfaith” grantees are Jim Wallis of Sojourners, Richard Cizik’s New Evangelical Partnership, Telos, J Street to malign Israel, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, Faithful America and Gamaliel. Faith in Public Life to “counter” Christians and the Tea Party in the media and, with PICO, advocates for amnesty, mass Islamic migration, and even sought to influence the visit and priorities of Pope Francis himself. Billions of additional dollars to “Christian VOLAGs” for large scale “refugee” and migrant resettlement often comes from the Obama administration.
We urge you to question the true intentions of persons or organizations that receive money from Soros and other billionaire globalists. We must not give their surrogates four more years.
And so we ask again, why do those who claim to share our faith in Christ continue to advocate for politicians who will pass legislation, and appoint justices and judges who will attack Christian liberty and persecute believers? Turning our nation over to the enemies of biblical faith does not honor Christ, promote love of neighbor, or advance God’s kingdom in the world.
We ask those who have intentionally or unwittingly aided the Progressive agenda in the past to look at the actual consequences of their policies. Please stop inviting fellow believers to assist global profiteers and political activists who are determined to de-Christianize America.
Please repent and turn away from those who attack the Church. Say “no” to blood money. Refuse funds from anyone attempting to put the Church and America in chains.
Lt. Gen. Wm. “Jerry” Boykin (U.S. Army, retired)
Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely (U.S. Army, retired)
Bishop Harry R Jackson, Jr. (High Impact Leadership Coalition)
Dr. Everett Piper (President, Oklahoma Wesleyan University)
Dr. Gerson Moreno-Riano (Executive Vice President, Regent University)
Dr. Wayne Grudem (Phoenix Seminary)
Dr. Jay Richards (The Catholic University of America)
David Barton (author and speaker)
Rep. John Becker (Ohio state representative)
Dr. Jim Garlow (Senior Pastor, Skyline Church, San Diego)
Pastor Steve Riggle (Grace Church, Houston TX)
Pastor Steve Smothermon (Legacy Church, Albuquerque NM)
Fr. Frank Pavone (Priests for Life)
Eric Metaxas (author, talk-show host)
Tim Wildmon (American Family Association)
George Barna (Researcher and author)
Mat Staver (Liberty Counsel)
[**Note: A Google search found nothing about this “American Evangelical Association”]
Next, an insane exhortation to his fellow Evangelicals by Paige Patterson, Op-Ed Contributor to the Christian Post, titled “How Evangelicals Should be Like Hitler’s Army on Election Day” [yes, he said “Hitler’s Army”]:
What do April 30, 1945, and Nov. 8, 2016, have in common?
The first date was the culmination of World War II. On that fateful day, Adolf Hitler apparently shot himself in the mouth as Russian soldiers moved in on his compound. But in the midst of all that tragedy, an interesting saga played itself out in Germany.
Before Hitler realized that he had lost the war, almost all other Germans knew it well. The Russians were closing from the East, and the Americans came from the West.
The dilemma of many German troops was relatively simple: “Shall we surrender to the Russians or shall we head west and surrender to the Americans?”
Apparently no small number made every effort to fall into the hands of the Americans.
No one knew for sure what would happen to them if they opted for the American option. But the German army knew well what would happen if they were overtaken by Russian generals. In the end, it was what they knew, not what they did not know, that forced their choice. Having heard and often experienced the kindness of American soldiers, many decided that this was the best hope for the future.
And what about Nov. 8, 2016 — election day in America?
Apparently, there has never been an election quite like it. The two presidential candidates both sport disapproval ratings among the highest of any candidates in history. What on earth shall Christians do? Some have said that they will stay home that November morning and stoke the fire in the fireplace. Others will write in a preferred name — some have even said that this name will be “Jesus.”
There is another interesting aspect to this dilemma. There are actually three different ways to vote for Hillary Clinton. The first is the one that she prefers. Pull the lever for her to be the next president of the United States. But if you cannot bear to do that, then write in the name of a candidate who has no chance of winning or pour another cup of coffee and watch a vacuous TV show at home. Mrs. Clinton will be pleased, because she is confident that the vast majority of Democrats and other liberals WILL vote for her even if they intensely dislike her and do not trust her.
“The sons of this age are more shrewd in relation to their own kind than the sons of light” (Luke 16:8).
We know what will happen if the win goes to Mrs. Clinton. Judges throughout the judiciary will be appointed from among those who support the execution of preborns under the dubious rhetoric of caring for the health of women (those who managed to be born, that is). These same judges will continue to attack the religious liberty of evangelical Christians, and the preaching of much that the Bible teaches will be interpreted as “hate crimes,” especially if proclaimed in a public setting.
On the other hand, we have no idea what Donald Trump will do. His record is anything but stellar. But we do know what he has promised, and we are already aware of the docket of judges from which he promises to name those charged with the protection of constitutional rights. Should he keep his promises on only half of these issues, Americans will have a chance to save the lives of infants still protected in the wombs of their mothers and the sanctity of religious liberty. The first freedom that alone gives meaning to all of the others will be maintained in a world that desperately needs this witness.
A presidential election is not about whether you like someone. Neither is it about whether you agree with him on everything. When was the last time you voted for a president with whom you agreed at every point?
Like the Germans and their surrender, the question is simple: Do you cast a ballot, in any one of three ways, that you know for sure will be devastating to preborn infants and to religious liberty, or do you cast a vote for a candidate who offers some hope?
We must hear the warning of Christ and see to it that the children of this world will not be wiser than the children of light. Every infant must be the recipient of a voting parent or grandparent who wishes to give that child a chance to live. And our religious liberty must be preserved!
Choose the candidate who offers hope, not the candidate who guarantees disaster. And you will make that decisive choice!
There’s just too much delusion, and too many lies, buzzwords, and dog-whistles here for one person to pick apart. So…
…This is our daily Open Thread – go ahead, everyone, have at it!
Last month, the Christian Post editors published this assessment of the Republican Presidential Candidate, Donald J. Trump, aka “Scam Artist Trump”, and the Democratic Presidential Candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton, aka “Crooked Hillary”, focusing on which candidate would most benefit the Evangelical Christian agenda.
I characterize the article that way quite deliberately. Not once, either in the discussion on Trump or the discussion on Clinton, is there any mention of, for instance:
– which one would be better for Americans as a whole?
– which one would be better for America’s status and reputation in the world?
– which one is more likely to, in a fit of pique, do or say something to start a war or provoke another terrorist attack?
And so on – you get the picture. The point being that, at the very least, Evangelical Christians – whose voices are purportedly represented by the Christian Post – consider themselves “Christian” first and foremost, and “American” a very distant second (if that high.)
Since I’m writing this at 1:30am Eastern Time, I’m not going through it point-by-point, there’s way too much that I could rant about. So I’ll just throw out one of the most egregious lies in the “Hillary” section. An excerpt (emphasis mine):
“While we will not endorse any candidate in this election, here are several factors we believe Evangelicals should prayerfully consider when thinking about what to do on Election Day.
First, Evangelicals should not vote for Hillary Clinton.
She supports taxpayer-funded abortion for any reason until the moment of birth. Given the importance of valuing life, this position alone is sufficient for an Evangelical Christian to disqualify her for the presidency.
Yeah, well “this position” is a total lie, and if the CP had any integrity, they’d print a written retraction. Neither Candidate Clinton nor any other person on the pro-choice side has EVER supported “taxpayer-funded abortion for any reason until the moment of birth.” [I am going to adapt this post and try to get it published at CP–wish me luck!)
I’ve been checking off and on for the last month to see if CP prints any sort of update to this piece, without success. I have to wonder, though, if anything such as the C-in-C “debate”, other Trump (or his spokemokeys’) insanities, or incriminating revelations about Trump’s shady business and political dealings, would sway the “Evangelical Christians” to lean a little more toward the saner candidate, Hillary Clinton? I sure as hell hope so.
For other CP content that doesn’t really encourage my “sure as hell hope”, please see their Politics page – I dare ya, some of the headlines/authors alone are, to borrow a phrase from a Raw Story commenter, “basket-worthy.”
This is our daily Open Thread–talk about the above, or anything else that strikes your fancy.
I have a great idea concerning the means/way to absolutely SOLVE the entire spectrum of Wingnuttistanian freak-out over the U.S.-Mexico border’s cross-trafficking (bi-directional, I assume) by people in search of a more suitable life. It’s simple, really, because:
1. People from Mexico want to cross the border northward because they’d like to find what they believe to be a “better life,” and
2. People from Amurkkka would like to head south across the border because they’d like to find what they believe to be a “better life.”
Seems so simple, doesn’t it?
My proposed solution is both simple and logical, and it’s based on the FACT that both Mexico and Amurkkka are parcel to the North American continent, the continent discovered by European sailor Christopher Columbus way back in 1492 (and think of it — I was born in 1942!! — is that cool or what!), a continent which has, ever since, become a mixture of virtually every human race and ethnicity known to plants (and mosquitoes) the world over — details which bring up that eternal question: why the never-ending squabbling about borders, about boundaries, about who can go which way, who can or can’t live here, or there, etc.? Ridiculous. Here’s why:
The above photo, taken in November 2002 from a campsite just east of Arivaca, Arizona, is of a sunset over the Baboquivari Mountains, a landmark range of desert mountains that rises from the desert floor about five miles north of today’s US-Mexico border, and just to the west of the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge. The Baboquivari Mountains also define the eastern border of the Tohono O’odham Nation, the lands of which cover some 2.9 million acres in what we know as southern and western Arizona. Baboquivari peak, the high point (7,730 ft) of the range , is sacred to the Tohono O’odham people who know it to be the home of I’itoli, their Creator, their Elder Brother.
The first Western eyes that gazed upon Baboquivari Peak belonged to Spanish/Christer Captain Juan Mateo Manje who described the peak in his journal, in 1699, as “a high square rock that…looks like a high castle.” He named it Noah’s Ark.
Baboquivari represents, in “modern” topography, the approximate point where three (human) cultures merge: the aboriginal Tohono O’odham, the Spanish/Aboriginal derivative aka Mexico, the European/Aboriginal/Asian/African/Muslim/Irish(?) culture aka Amurkkka; and intermingled amidst those three, the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge which lies in the valley just to the north of Mexico and between the Baboquivari Mountains/Tohono O’odham Nation and the rest of eastern Arizona/Amurkkka.
Today there’s a wall that runs along the Arizona-Mexico border (and the Tohono O’odham southern border with Sonora, Mexico) and defines the point where Amurkkka ends, abruptly, where the Tohono O’odham Nation ends, abruptly, and where Mexico ends, abruptly.
Why is that? Who thought that whole mess up? Why is it that the only life forms that give a damn about silly stuff like border walls are politicians and the occasional militaristic nutcase? I mean, birds don’t care. Rabbits don’t care. Lizards and snakes don’t care. Cougars and wolves probably care, but only because they can’t get over. under, around or through the damn wall. The stars at night surely don’t care anymore than the sun cares during the day, that much I know for sure, and right here’s proof:
That’s a November mid-afternoon sun. The mountains in the foreground still go by their Spanish name, the San Luis Mountains, and they straddle the open space between northern Sonora, Mexico, and the tiny town of Arivaca, Arizona. Arivaca is roughly 10-12 miles north of the Mexican border and maybe 15 miles east of Baboquivari Peak — the Tohono O’odham boundary; the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge fills most of the vacant space in those fifteen miles. The sun, meanwhile, shines down from around 93 million miles up in the sky and in the process, illuminates all of Mexico, all of Amurkkka including the Tohono O’odham Nation and the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge. Some say it even illuminates the rest of the hemisphere and, at the same time, several other planets in the solar system. And it does all of that — illumination! — with no worries about ethnicity, or borders, or boundaries, or even walls.
If the sun doesn’t care, why do “we”? Speaking for myself, I (two of us, actually) spent, back in November of ’02, several days and nights camped on the desert near Arivaca during which time our only contact with other life forms involved some birds, a few bugs, a couple of cows, thousands of desert plants, and nothing/no one else — save for the universe above, of course. Oh, and then there was the quiet stillness, the same peacefulness that was there millennia before any human critter arrived to lay out borders and build walls, etc. We did enjoy, however, one memorable instance – the one where we spotted and photographed a vicious looking alien intruder in our campsite:
Couldn’t tell whether it was an illegal immigrant or a patriotic(?) militiaman or simply a Buenos Aires Wildlife wanderer, so I didn’t say “Papers Please!” I actually did nothing other than say hello; the critter didn’t respond, didn’t stay long either. Never did learn its nationality. I suppose I should have called the border patrol, but . . . well, you know, no cell phone signal down that way back then, so I had to back off and put up with the intrusion.
Anyway, out of allathat lookin’, watchin’, and thinkin’ came my brilliant and final conclusion(s), my plan to fix all that’s wrong with “us”:
Borders and Boundaries suck; they serve none but the horribly small-minded (i.e. humans, also Republicans);
There ain’t no need for Amurkkka, no need for Mexico — N. America is the domain of Tohono O’odham, Hopi, Cherokee, Lakota, et al. et al., along with wolves, bears, grasshoppers, et al. et al., along with European, African, Asian, and all other global ethnic immigrants;
Conclusion: NO MORE BORDERS! The time to negotiate and create the UNITED STATES OF NORTH AMERICA has arrived. Freedom! — for immigrants and all their descendants to come, to go, to stay, to move on; Freedom! — for aboriginal cultures to exist, to reclaim and practice their ancient beliefs in a nation where EVERY person has the right to live as s/he wishes, providing there is no interference with others who choose to do the same. TOLERANCE!
After we pull this off — next up, CANADA!! Come join the Union of Civil People and their critter friends!
Seriously, why can’t we ALL just get along? Uh . . . oh. Yeah. Sometimes I forget. We ain’t quite there yet. Still have to find the means to raise the IQ of the Orange whatchacallit to the level of the more cerebral critter. Tricky.
Guess which one likes border walls and which one could care less?
I found one of these videos posted in the Raw Story comments by “sam202.” All the words are Trump’s own, but a genius named Peter Serafinowicz dubbed him to sound all catty and Liberace-like.
I think the dubbed voice is more appropriate for the gossipy content of Trump’s speeches anyway.
This is our totally late — so late we’re down to leftovers — open thread.
To paraphrase Inigo Montoya, with the word in question being “Liberal” instead of “Inconceivable!” (you have to read “Inconceivable!” in Wallace Shawn’s voice, of course): “You [conservatives] keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
The premise of the following three Christian Post articles is a discussion of recent books about the various authors’ [mistaken] ideas regarding liberals. I started out trying to keep this somewhat brief, but in the interests of keeping the salient points in context, it took on a life of its own. I’ll just share a excerpt of each.
In the earliest of the three articles, “Is Free Speech Just for Liberals?” CP guest contributor Susan Stamper Brown sez:
In the biography, “Churchill: A Life,” author Martin Gilbert writes how Winston Churchill loudly voiced his grave concerns about the apathy shared by those seemingly impervious to the malevolent National Socialist Movement’s intention to steam through Europe like volcanic lava, destroying everything in its way, including free speech.
In direct response, Hitler began warning Germans about the “dangers of free speech” and said, “If Mr. Churchill had less to do with traitors … he would see how mad his talk is …”
History revealed whose talk was really mad.
Truth is, Churchill’s words touched a nerve the annoying way truth always does. Hitler was incapable of engaging in intelligent debate, so he changed the subject, lied, and attacked Churchill’s character. Hitler knew his movement couldn’t stand on its own for what it really was, so the only alternative was to silence opposing views.
Throughout Germany books were banned and ceremoniously cast into blazing bonfires intended to squash divergence of thought and stifle man’s God-instilled unquenchable thirst for truth.
Historical accountings provide a glimpse into the warped psyche of those behind a movement that wrongheadedly believed they could build something worthwhile by shutting down debate, then dividing a nation by race and ethnicity.
They coldly chose their target, the Jewish race, and purged some of the greatest minds in history from all levels of teaching. Schools and universities suffered.
Before the movement decided to burn bodies as well as books, Historyplace.com cites that “Jewish instructors and anyone deemed politically suspect regardless of their proven teaching abilities or achievements including 20 past (and future) Nobel Prize winners” were removed from their professions, among them Albert Einstein.
I would’ve been one of those “purged professionals,” based on what I’ve heard lately from some disgruntled left-leaning readers. Because of my personal opinion about the president, one reader called me “a racist,” a “religious bigot,” and “a political terrorist.” While calling me a “political terrorist” is noteworthy at least, most telling is this poor man’s statement that my column, as offensive as it was to him, “was permitted” in his newspaper.
Apparently, free speech is just for leftists.
After that, the author continued to talk more about herself, so I tuned her out. I probably should have done so when she first mentioned Hitler, but her description of Hitler’s reaction, which I highlighted above, sounded so much like Trump that I had to share it with you.
In the next article, “If Intolerant Liberals Succeed, ‘Conservatives Should Be Very Afraid,’ Expert Says”, by CP’s Napp Nazworth, the breaking point came after this bullshit:
Conservatives would have much to fear if intolerant liberals succeed in their goal of transforming America, says Kim R. Holmes, author of “The Closing of the Liberal Mind: How Groupthink and Intolerance Define the Left.”
The illiberal, or intolerant, Left has come to define liberalism in the United States today, Holmes told The Christian Post, and if these liberals gain control of the Supreme Court and other levers of government, conservatives will be punished for their views.
Then these portions of the interview with the author:
CP: Why did you want to write this book?
Holmes: Like a lot of people I saw how closed-minded and intolerant progressivism had become. Whether it was speech codes or “safe spaces” on campuses, or attorneys general issuing subpoenas against so-called climate change “deniers,” abuses in the name of progressivism were getting worse.
I wanted to understand why. I wanted to tell the story of how a liberalism that had once accepted freedom of speech and dissent had become its opposite — a close-minded ideology intent on denying people their freedoms and their constitutionally protected rights.
CP: Liberalism was once defined by tolerance and open-mindedness, but liberals have become increasingly intolerant and closed-minded. We are beginning to see this phrase “illiberal liberal” more often, which gets confusing. How are we to make sense of what liberal means today?
Holmes: A classic liberal is someone who believes in open inquiry, freedom of expression and a competition of ideas. Its founders were people like John Locke, Thomas Jefferson and Alexis de Tocqueville. Among its most important ideas are freedom of conscience and speech; individual (as opposed to group) rights; and checks and balances in government.
Although progressives are sometimes referred to as “liberals,” they are not classic liberals in this sense. They are philosophically more akin to socialists or social democrats. Classic liberalism as defined here is actually closer to the views of American conservatives and libertarians than to progressives and leftists.
The term “illiberalism” is the opposite of this classic style of liberalism; it represents a political mindset that is closed-minded, intolerant and authoritarian. Although illiberalism can be historically found on the right (fascism) and the left (communism), it is today not commonly associated with American progressives. Nevertheless, it should be.
Progressives are becoming increasingly illiberal not only in their mindset but in the authoritarian methods they use to impose their views on others.
~~ and ~~
CP: Last week, President Barack Obama sent a letter to all public schools threatening to withhold federal funds if they don’t change their bathroom and locker room policies to allow use based upon gender identity rather than biological sex. Does the Left’s new intolerance help us understand Obama’s actions?
Holmes: Yes. Obama comes out of this illiberal strain of the left.
Last, this misleadingly-named piece of utter drivel written by CP’s Brandon Showalter, “Liberals Use Gov’t Power, Intimidation, to Silence Christians, Author Says.” It doesn’t take long to realize that by “Christians”, both the author of the article and the author of the book actually mean “conservatives”, and the complaint is about the fight against “Citizens United”:
WASHINGTON – Conservatives and Christians are being intimidated by the Left and an increasingly abusive government, says Kimberly Strassel, author of The Intimidation Game: How the Left is Waging War of Free Speech.
In a Thursday presentation at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., Strassel told The Christian Post that overt hostility and harassment of people of faith “is clearly a big issue.”
In light of the 2013 IRS scandal where it was discovered that conservative and Christian groups were unfairly targeted, CP asked Strassel how many people she interviewed had experienced an overt assault on their faith.
While “the people that I talked to generally felt as though all their views were under attack,” Strassel said, “they certainly felt as though one aspect of them, was in fact their faith.”
“We are seeing this a lot, obviously, in the war on faith out there that we have had with the battles over Obamacare and contraception,” she added.
In her book Strassel examines the Left’s penchant, particularly in the Obama years, for bullying their opponents and their use of government agencies to silence citizens from participating in the political process.
Although she touched on several facets of the Left’s intimidation game in her presentation, the core issue she covered was the right of Americans to form associations and participate in representative government. This the Left cannot abide when conservatives do it successfully, she argued.
“The reality is that money is a proxy for speech,” Strassel contended, and Americans have always formed groups to get their message out. To the incredulity of the Left, she argued we we need more money, not less, in politics. More money means more speech. More free speech yields a more vigorous debate and a healthier democracy.
Let me repeat those last two lines: “More money means more speech. More free speech yields a more vigorous debate and a healthier democracy.” What happened to the “FREE” part of “FREE SPEECH”?
Money CANNOT equal speech – the poorest man can still speak and vote – well, vote ONCE; on the other hand, the richest man can buy as many votes as he wants. The whole argument of Citizens United was and is specious, and the Supremes fucked us over real good when they decided on that piece of shit.
This is our daily Open Thread – have at it!
In the video above you find a compelling explanation what Brexit is about really. Having watched some of the debates and quite a bit of coverage on BBC, ITV and a couple more news sites, I can fully agree with him. It is about immigration. And nationalism and then some immigration.
I’ll watch some of the BBC voting night coverage and will give you the first couple of developments live as they unfold. Then I will probably collapse, because I am not as young as I used to be when I joined you all for a night of music, booze and cigarettes on Music Night.
Whatever is the result tomorrow morning, I’ll let you know.
Fair warning: If they vote “Leave”, I will be seriously pissed off, because I still haven’t given up on the hope to spend my retirement in the North of England. I would have to go to Scotland instead, because the Scots will then leave the UK and reenter the EU.
Here’s a heat map of how Britons stand on the issue:
So let’s get started….and hope for the best.
As I’m sure you’ve noticed by now, I like to check out what “Christian news” sites have to say on current events and other topics. I’ve been finding the Christian Post useful as a place to see what issues are being discussed, in an attempt to glean what self-styled “Christians” deem to be of importance.
So when I saw an article titled “God Is In Control”, I just had to find out how someone would explain that claim. The article, by Don Anderson, opened with this image:
[I have to say, “God” (apparently Jesus, not the OT “God the Father”, at least in the cartoon) looks a bit wild-eyed and not at all “in control.” And is that an ocean of piss that they’re navigating?]
After the cartoon, a link takes one to the following article, titled “Rick Warren: Want Serenity? Let God Take Full Control”. Here’s an excerpt:
Rick Warren: Want Serenity? Let God Take Full Control
To achieve serenity in life, God wants you to let go and know He is in control, Pastor Rick Warren says.
Warren, senior pastor of Saddleback Church in Orange County, California, wrote in a recent devotional that although we as Christians may fight to take control of our lives on a daily basis, we must also remember that ultimately, everything is up to God.
“[…] stress relief always starts with letting God be God,” the evangelical leader writes. “It always starts with saying, ‘God, I’m giving up control, because you can control the things that are out of control in my life.'”
Because no one knows what will happen in the future, we need to let go and let God do the rest.
“I don’t know what you’re going to face this week. You don’t, either. But I can already tell you what God wants you to do: Let go, and know. Let go of control, and know that God is in control. Let go, and know! This is the first step to serenity in your life,” Warren explains.
Christians tend to react to stress in one of two ways, Warren explains. While some attempt to over-control a situation, others give up and pity themselves.
Both of these approaches are destructive and don’t ultimately alleviate stress, the megachurch pastor says. Instead, Christians need to surrender themselves to God and His plan.
“The number one reason you’re under stress is because you’re in conflict with God. You’re trying to control things that only God can control,” Warren explains.
A good way to maintain a high level of tranquility in the face of stress is to pray the Serenity Prayer, Warren says.
The evangelical leader points specifically to the last eight lines of the prayer, which read: “Living one day at a time, enjoying one moment at a time, accepting hardship as a pathway to peace, taking as Jesus did this sinful world as it is, not as I would have it; trusting that you will make all things right if I surrender to your will so that I may be reasonably happy in this life and supremely happy with you forever in the next. Amen.”
Okay, let’s look at this piece-by-piece:
“”[…] stress relief always starts with letting God be God,” the evangelical leader writes. “It always starts with saying, ‘God, I’m giving up control, because you can control the things that are out of control in my life.’“
There’s a couple of things wrong with this; let’s start with “letting God be God” (this would be way too long – okay, way too much longer – if I began with “stress relief always starts with…”)
In an earlier piece, Warren talks about how [in essence], despite the fact that the Old Testament “…rarely describes God as being a father…”, somehow miraculously “…this changes after Jesus is sent down from Heaven to save humanity…After this event, God is described as a father much more frequently…”…and now “…wants to have a relationship with us…”
So, god used to be a petty, vindictive, insecure, genocidal tyrant, but suddenly he becomes a father and is now kind and loving and wants to get to know the subjects he had previously threatened with hellfire and brimstone? Seriously? And yet Warren and conservative christian leaders STILL utilize a few specific Old Testament god’s ‘rules according to (some guys who wrote the OT)’ when fighting to be allowed to discriminate against certain groups, or to make others live by those particular OT rules. Which should no longer apply, if god is really an all-loving father, right? If we’re supposed to ‘let god be god’, which god are we letting him be?
As to “giving up control” because god “can control the things that are out of control in my life”, then where does man’s “free will” come in? What about ‘personal responsibility’? The conservative christians who believe that the poor are poor because they chose to be, well maybe the poor are poor because your god is in control and he really hates poor people? And considering the chaos going on in this world, I don’t think that anyone is in control, let alone a god.
On to: “…Because no one knows what will happen in the future, we need to let go and let God do the rest…I don’t know what you’re going to face this week. You don’t, either. But I can already tell you what God wants you to do: Let go, and know. Let go of control, and know that God is in control. Let go, and know! This is the first step to serenity in your life,” Warren explains.”
Hmm…how about ‘because no one knows what will happen in the future’, we can take steps to make our future what we want it to be? Why “Let go”, and, if we do “let go”, what will we “know”? One can still attempt to at least control one’s “present”, even if there is uncertainty about the “future.”
And let’s put it bluntly, “Pastor” Warren: you and your megachurch/televangelist ilk have plenty of money and are living quite comfortably on the fleecing, er, ‘tithings’ of your sheep and your speaking and appearance fees. You truly don’t have to worry about many of the day-to-day issues with which we poorer folk struggle. The main cause of stress in most civilized societies, i.e., lack of MONEY to live and to feed yourself and your family, is not stooping your shoulders or affecting your health, mental and physical. And that goes for christians just like any other demographic, despite Warren’s assertion that “The number one reason you’re under stress is because you’re in conflict with God. You’re trying to control things that only God can control…” Um, no, nope, I think the number one reason is money (which is currently how most people access the basic needs of life.) Sorry, Rick, you’re just wrong.
Next, what about: “Christians tend to react to stress in one of two ways, Warren explains. While some attempt to over-control a situation, others give up and pity themselves. Both of these approaches are destructive and don’t ultimately alleviate stress, the megachurch pastor says.” [Well, DUH!]
I hope that Warren is oversimplifying here, otherwise those two ‘reaction to stress’ choices make christians sound like two-dimensional fools. Humans of all types generally react to stress in all kinds of ways, not just the two extremes given. And often, we react to stress in any number of ways at any given time, the key being our own control over our own lives and reactions. Again, what about the conservative mantra of “personal responsibility”, so hypocritical from people who never, ever, not-freaking-ever, admit to any fault or wrongdoing.
And lastly, on to Warren’s “Serenity Prayer” solution. Which can be dismissed, because it’s about as useful for solving real problems as the “moment of silence” is for “honoring the victims” of the mass-shooting-du-jour. In either case, one might just as well ‘count to ten.’
For CP’s “Christian”-colored view on current political issues, see here. Plenty of fodder for discussion there, too.
This is our daily Open Thread–so, what’s on you’re mind?
Yesterday at work, after glancing at my calendar, I did a mental double-take, thinking, ‘holy jeez, it’s May 20th already, 2016 is going by too quickly!’ Later, after some Trump BS refocused my attention on the upcoming election, my thoughts changed to, ‘holy jeez, there’s still nearly six months until the election, I wish we could just jump ahead to November and get it done and over with!’
I doubt if any of us, during the campaign season that led up to King George being anointed by the SCOTUS, and even during the eight years that we (and the rest of the world) suffered through under the BushCo maladministration, ever thought that any candidate for the Presidency could come along who was even more unqualified than Dubya, and just as amoral as Darth Cheney. The stress of those years pales in comparison to what we, and everyone else in the reality-based world, are experiencing during this unbelievably mind-numbing Trump campaign.
A continual state of stress is unhealthy for an individual both physically and mentally, as we all can attest to. Is it any wonder that the heightened stress of these last several months is having an even worse impact on so many Americans than that of the Bush years, even with the never-ending war(s), the “you’re either with us or against us” mantra, and the economic crash that affected every American except those who caused it?
And after BushCo, the undercurrent of American racism, which slowly became ‘acceptable’ when President Obama won in 2008, turned into the norm in an ever-growing and ever-more-violent tide that has eroded the foundations of the Republic nearly to the point of collapse. Even if Donald Trump doesn’t win the Presidency, will the added pressure and stress of the national and international turmoil brought about by Trump’s – and his followers’ – jingoism, ignorance and hatred be too overwhelming to keep this Union intact?
Personally, I think something’s got to blow under all of this pressure, because it’s not going to ease anytime soon. It only leads one to question: when, how big, and how toxic will the fallout be?
This is our daily Open Thread – what’s on YOUR mind?
Here’s two (well, sort of – you’ll see what I mean) predictions about frightening futures, which we seem to be fulfilling here in the largest superpower on the planet.
First, an interesting article entitled “Neil Postman Predicted Trumpocalypse 30 Years Ago”, by Dr. Richard D. Land at the Christian Post. Dr. Land discusses a 1985 book by Neil Postman called Amusing Ourselves to Death. Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. An excerpt:
Postman started off his book by contrasting the two most dystopian visions of modern civilization’s future, George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World (1932).
Postman’s contrast of the two dystopian visions of the future is chilling:
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies . . .”
The Internet has changed the basic DNA of our culture, including our social and personal relationships and our information access. It has radically democratized communication, while at the same time condemning any effective editorial or verifying filter as the unwelcome control of a hated elite. Consequently, we are being engulfed not only in a sea of moral relativism, but information relativism as well. The immersion of our culture in Internet speak has brought us perilously close to a denial, if not a revocation of the late, great, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s statement that “you are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.” Now, opinions too often masquerade as facts, and fewer and fewer know the difference and increasingly fewer care.
As Postman pointed out, Huxley was trying to warn the future “that what afflicted people in Brave New World was not that they were laughing instead of thinking, but that they did not know what they were laughing about and why they had stopped thinking.”
This is our daily Open Thread – you know what to do.
I admit it: I can’t get enough of Drumpf getting the shit startled out of him when a protester made it past the security gates (although not on stage). I wish I were more of a computer geek, so I could make a loop of the initial panicked grabbing of the podium, through the “I just want to go home” look when the secret service guys let him go back to inciting the crowd.
Drumpf was probably hoping they’d just rush him back onto the Drumpf Aeroplane, so he could he could have a bit of a crying jag — and then have his manservant bring him fresh drawers. He talks tough, but I think he actually pissed himself in Dayton, OH.
You reap what you sow, you bombastic blibbering baboon.
This is our daily open thread — Watch it again!
Via RawStory (various headlines):
“On behalf of the court and retired justices, I am saddened to report that our colleague Justice Antonin Scalia has passed away,” Chief Justice John Roberts said in a statement on Saturday, calling Scalia, 79, an “extraordinary individual and jurist.”
My dear old Mom always said, “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.” So here’s me sitting quietly…
Obama speaks about passing of Supreme Court Justice Scalia. Our President is such a kind man…
And finally, this apropo headline from The Onion:
Justice Scalia Dead Following 30-Year Battle With Social Progress
*HT to John Cleese in Monty Python’s “Dead Parrot” sketch for the headline of this post.
This is our daily open thread — Leave your thoughts in the comments section, while I sit here quietly.
I know I’ve posted this video a few times over the years, in one form or another, but I’m posting it again.
Why? That’s a good question. I’m glad you asked.
I don’t know if it’s because I’m feeling especially pessimistic or cynical these days, but I’m thinking that we haven’t learned anything over the past year. Maybe it’s just that the United States is absolutely fucking bonkers right now, and I’m having trouble seeing the good in the world; or maybe we’re at a critical turning point, and, much like correcting a naughty child, the behavior gets much worse before it starts getting better.
I hope it’s both, and I hope the “getting better” part starts happening soon.
This is the last Sunday Roast of the year — What do you think?
I can’t bring myself to post about the environment or food politics.
The events in France just overwhelm. Can’t think of one fundamentalist religion that has ever done the world one bit of good, ever. It’s the 21st Century. You would think people would be beyond this now. It has been quite evident for some time that people can act morally and humanistic-ally without religion. I just don’t see the draw.
Away from food politics and environment for a moment, here is an essay on the presence of guns in the US with respect to other countries and the comparative murder and suicide rates. Surprised to actually find this at a CNN site.
I’m only a day late, but it’s been 25 years (yesterday) since the famous photo was taken by Voyager 1.
I don’t know about all y’all, but every time I hear Carl Sagan talking about “the only home we’ve ever known,” I weep like a baby. It’s so hopeful, but, at the same time, it’s a severe reality check.
This is our daily open thread — Remember, we’re all in this together.
Cha-Ching cha-ching… the elephant in the room.
Open thread. Discuss.
Moscow, Idaho — May, 2007, New York Times
The police said Mr. Hamilton had been drinking at a bar with another man until about 10 p.m. Saturday. Then, they believe, he went home and fatally shot his wife in the head before setting off for the courthouse carrying two semiautomatic rifles. Around 11:30 p.m., he opened fire at the building, eventually firing some 125 shots at the courthouse and at the people who responded to the scene.
Mr. Hamilton killed one responder, Officer Lee C. Newbill of the Moscow police. Officer Bill Shields was hit in the leg by bullet fragments as he went to Officer Newbill’s aid. A sheriff’s deputy, Sgt. Brannon Jordan, was shot several times but was not seriously wounded and was expected to leave the hospital on Monday.
Peter Husmann, a 20-year-old mechanical engineering major at the University of Idaho, in Moscow, heard the shootings and rode his bicycle to the scene armed with a .45-caliber pistol, said his father, Sam Husmann. Peter Husmann was shot in the back, fell to the ground, and was then shot in the calf, neck and shoulder, his father said. He was in stable condition on Monday.
After the shootings at the courthouse, Mr. Hamilton entered the First Presbyterian Church, directly across the street. He had worked there as a custodian for American Building Maintenance, which had a contract with the church, and he knew the church’s sexton, Paul Bauer, Chief Duke said.
Moscow, Idaho — August, 2011, ktvb.com
July 14, 2011: UI requested Moscow Police participate in a threat assessment concerning the threatening behavior of Ernesto Bustamante. University investigators met with Benoit to review Bustamante’s response and notify her that they would be interviewing him on July 19. She was asked to stay somewhere other than her apartment. The Moscow Police tried to call Benoit several times, leaving messages. Benoit did not return the phone calls. Police told the university that she wasn’t calling back. The university indicated that Benoit had been referred to Alternatives to Violence of the Palouse and a safety plan had been discussed. The Moscow Police informed the UI that Benoit did not want police involved.
July 22, 2011: University called Benoit to ask her where she would be staying until the start of school. She said she would be in Moscow. They encouraged her to take safety precautions and contact Moscow Police Department if she felt the need.
August 19. She was warned to be vigilant and call police if she had any safety concerns.
August 22, 2011: Katy was shot outside her home at 8:40 p.m.
August 23, 2011: Moscow Police find Ernesto Bustamante dead in a hotel room at the University Inn-Best Western.
Moscow, Idaho — January 10, 2015, ktvb.com
Police say they first responded to a call of a shooting at around 2:30 p.m. at the Northwest Mutual on E. Third Street. Police say the two victims at the first reported shooting were 76-year-old David Trail and 39-year-old Michael Chin of Seattle. Trail, a Moscow businessman, was taken to Pullman Regional Hospital where he was declared dead. Chin was taken to Gritman Medical Center and is currently in critical condition.
Minutes after the first incident, police say a second shooting was reported at an Arby’s restaurant on Peterson Drive. Police say Lee entered the restaurant and asked for the manager. When the manager, 47-year-old Belinda Niebuhr, came forward Lee reportedly opened fire. Niebuhr was declared dead at Gritman Medical Center.
About a mile and a half away from the Arby’s, police say a fourth victim was found dead at a residence in the 400 block of Veatch Street. The fourth victim, 61-year-old Terri Grzebielski, is reportedly the suspect’s adoptive mother. Police say Grzebielski was a physician’s assistant at Moscow Family Medicine.
You may be asking yourself what is the significance of posting these three items about gun violence in one small town in America, so I’ll tell you: These are stories of suicidal rage, mental illness, murder, blood, obsession, fear, and a gun sickness in this country, the “cure” for which seems to be more and more guns — and, consequently, more and more gun violence.
The significance to me is the fact that, in each of the above stories, I knew one of the dead:
Crystal Hamilton died a bloody death by gun violence by the hand of her husband. She was the head custodian at the Latah County Courthouse, and was a lovely young woman. She always had a smile for everyone.
Ernesto Bustamante died a bloody death by gun violence by his own hand, after having become a murderer. He was my psych research professor — my favorite professor — and he was gorgeous, with his long, shiny black hair, devastating smile, and ironic sense of humor. He was an occasional chatting partner in my peer advising office in the psych department, and he murdered a promising young grad student, Katy Benoit.
Yesterday, Terri Grzebielski died a bloody death by gun violence by the hand of her adopted son. She was a physician’s assistant in the University of Idaho Student Health Department, and was my PA for the four years I attended the U of I. She was an amazing woman: Very tall, very thin, full of energy, ready smile, and she truly cared about her patients.
In addition to these people, a childhood friend’s sister was killed with a gun, and her murder was never solved; my former mother-in-law’s boss was murdered by his crazed daughter-in-law; and the husband of a dear friend died as a result of a gun accident.
This is fucking excessive, people! Does everyone know this many people who’ve died by gun violence?
I don’t know the solution to the gun sickness in this country, other than collecting all the guns and melting them into plowshares, but we all know that will never happen. One feasible solution is strict regulations placed on guns and gun owners, but that would take political integrity and honor, and that exists in very small amounts in this country.
I’m sick to death of gun violence in this country, and I’m SO fucking done with “gun rights” being more important than human lives.
This is our daily open thread — Fuck you, trolls.
Supposedly MIT scientists have found new insight as to what killed off the dinosaurs 66 million years ago. The more important question is why are there still Republicans around?
Open thread. Discuss.
Although I’ve only been back online since the beginning of the weekend (my home computer crashed early last week, and access from the office was hit-or-miss, too), my search for intelligent life in American politics found little. So for today’s post I’m turning to the infinite wonder and majesty of “space, the final frontier”, in the hopes that maybe, just maybe, there could be a civilization out there that isn’t aiming to destroy itself through its own arrogant stupidity.
The following are just a few of the more recent Hubble Deep-Space images from a photo gallery that I found at space.com:
This is our daily open thread – feel free to discuss intelligence, life, whatever you want.
About a dozen years back (plus or minus one or two), and after watching the Dubya Bush administration make one mess after the other, I decided to sum up my impressions of the clearly failing human experience via a poem — a Shakespearean-style sonnet, to be exact. It turned out thus:
Paradox of Humankind:
Brash vanity ordains that Mankind be
Superior to all other life on Earth,
And curious source of this Mythology
Derives from Bible’s unintended mirth.
Thus bold is he who advocates the case
Of Genesis errant, where metaphor,
As whimsical devise, cannot replace
Realities which each confirm the Core
Of Life: that every living form appeals
To Duty greater than itself alone.
A single moment’s intellect reveals
One Truth, as if inscribed in tempered stone:
Each bird and beast, each flowered weed, each tree
Expounds on Man’s Inferiority!
My conclusion was obvious: humans are absolutely and positively INFERIOR to every other life form that exists, probably even to such brilliances as light and the empty space it illuminates. In any case, every now and then “the course of human events” causes me to reflect once again, then to explore the thesis of “Superior Inferiority” that inevitably seems to define the human species.
Following is the latest exploration. The large photos are my own; the small ones are captures, over the years, from various internet sites and are, far as I know, unattributed. Still, comparison does seem to tell a tale, to support said thesis. Am I wrong? Y’all be the judge.
* * * *
Natural Black Fly on Natural White Flower:
Natural Black on Natural Green!!
Tan Bugger and Black Bugger on a Yellow Background?
How about a Tan Bug on a Black and Yellow Background?
Next up, the Natural Void: Solar, anyone?
I’ll tell you how the Sun rose / A Ribbon at a time
Rooftop Solar is Ugly??
NO WAY!! Rooftops Themselves are Ugly!!
Solar Solar Solar!
Maybe it’s Frogs that are Ugly?
Nah. Frogs are NOT Ugly, esp. when compared to their Human Counterpoints, e.g. ex-POTUSes.
The Prosecution Rests.
I ran across the following video the other day on a C&L page which began with the words, “A BBC crew filming a gathering of Ku Klux Klansmen recorded one of the group’s leaders discussing a plan to use returning military veterans to train KKK members in combat techniques.” This kind of crap frankly sickens me, and, were I not so angry I might be able to at least chuckle at the collective stupidity that has come to define such a significant portion of this country’s dregs.
In any case, the nine minute video is enough to sicken the spirit of anyone who cares for each and all of those previous, present, and future victims of irrational racial hatred, hatred which sadly persists and lives and probably even thrives, at least amongst the decidedly ignorant, the stupid. Sadly, these same nine minutes would likely serve to fuel the hatred of those who have no means of knowing anything other than the irrationalities embedded within their evil and shriveled souls.
One more time it’s the same old vitriolic mentality. I thought it was over, but still it goes on. And on, and on, and on.