Being Superior, Historically. Patriotically, and Conservatively

ACCORDING TO THE CONSERVATIVE VERSION, liberals do not like the United States, consider it to have been "wrongly founded", for nefarious purposes, and to have established repressive institutions, with dubious results. Conservatives, who don't even seem to know much about themselves, think themselves to be experts on the mind sets and motivations of liberals. Bless their little mind reading hearts. If only they would devote their energies more to reading history books, by either liberal or conservative historians, take your pick. Rush Limbaugh, for instance, once said that the Magna Charta was written sometime in the 1500s. Just the other day he said that when he was in grade school lunch cost twenty five cents, and that his mother would give him two fifty each week to cover the expense. This, from the bastion of broadcast excellence, mistake free, as he says. We can presume that Rush pocketed the extra buck twenty five, used it to start building his fortune, and didn't pay much attention in alementary math class. Had he paid attention in history clas, he might know, or he might not, that the Great Charter was writtin in the year 1215. But let's give Rush a break. He went to college for about one semester, and flunked everything. As Casey Stengel often said, you could look it up. "Hagiography" is the popular form of history among American conservatives; history written by Americans, from the point of view of Americans, by people who dearly love America, to the greater glorification of America. The problem with this is that is is not objective, and therefore not honest. Hagiography is biased, and distorted. Conservative American historiography is to American historiography what the Old Testament is to the hebrews who wrote it; self aggrandizing. The point to writing good history is that you the author are and must be neutral about your topic; you niether love nor hate it, you research it, and you seek to remain objective at all costs. Hagiography is what happens when those who madly their country write about it. Patriotism, a wise person once said, is the convenient refuge of scoundrels. Patriotism, as Goethe said, corrupts history. Our conservative American colleagues spew out so much love of country, sans objective historical truth, that one is tempted to say that no only do they love America more than liberals, but that they are superior for so doing, albiet hagiographic, and very superior, patriotically.

Using Our Smart Phones For Thumb Fitness

WE AMERICANS HAVE FORGOTTEN how to use our telephones, it seems like, almost. Until fairly recently, phones were used to talk to each other, at each other, or through each other, using vocal chords. A phone was a big, immobile box sitting on the table in the corner, and when it rang, we jumped and ran to answer it, because that was our one and only shot. Otherwise, we would never know who called. Now we stare blankly at them while walking into telephone poles, or driving into ditches, or engendering the annoyance of the cop in his car with a radar gun and an eye for other people's bad choices. We punch them with our thumbs, truncating and destroying the King's English. That's all well and good, of course. To each his own, and all that. Its all good, unless one actually collides with an object at rest while serving as an object in motion, obliviously. Unless one's thumbs develop arthritis. Nobody like to use a telephone in the traditional manner - everybody says that, just like everybody says "I don't get mad very often, but when I do, watch out!". The only people who actually like being vocally on a telephone were teenagers between 1940 and 1990. Today's millenails and teens text, and only text, far as the eye can tell. Try calling somebody, nobody ever answers their phone, even though its in their front pocket. They are "doing" lunch, and simply cannot be bothered. What the hell, my time is valuable, the caller's is not, so, screen it baby. You leave a voice mail; nobody ever calls back. They text. Ah, there was a time, in the halcyon days of telephonic yore, when such behavior was considered rude. Our smart phones may be dumbing down our language skills and inundating us with cancer causing microwave radiation, but by God, they have raised the bar on rudeness, and, really, if we amdit it, that's what we all want.

Avoiding Sinners, At All Costs

AS WE ALL KNOW, or should know, there are at least two sides to every circumstances, usually more. In Georgia, U.S.A., the state legislature passed a law which exempted faith based enterprises from non-discrimination laws, thus enabling Christian entrepreneurs to legally refuse service to gay, lesbian, and transgender human beings, and presumably, whomever the hell else they choose. And, hell, why the hell not? What self respecting man who used to be a woman, or woman who used to be a man, or man who is sexually attracted to men, or women...well...what self respecting person of color, non christian creed, or sex change would even be interested in entering into a house of sanctimonious bigotry, and laying down perfect good hard earned lucre for goods or services offered for sale by the spiritually and compassionately challenged, of the religiously zealous dogmatic narrow minded variety? None, one might hope, but, well, it takes all kinds, as we often say. The governor, who, if a republican, sure as hell aint acting like one, vetoed the bill, much to his open minded and commerce seeking credit. And what self respecting Christian would want to deal with anyone who is not a perfect mirror image of thyself? Let them go their separate but equal ways! But when corporate entity after corporate entity threatened a boycott of the peachy state, it was a no brainer for the gov, as it would be for anyone holding the office who wants to attract, not repel, business enterprise. Folks these days, including capitalists, who are usually themselves Christians, if they know what's good for them, tend in general to oppose bigotry, exclusion, narrow minded judgmentality, much to the credit of their sweet money makin' hearts and souls. And again, kudos to the govnah. But also, let's take a quick peek at the other side of that which we ought to render unto Caesar. It would almost seems as if members of the Christian community should have a perfect, sanctimonious right to not fellowship, capitalistically, or any other way, with those of whom they approve not, which, of course, leaves it wide open. Why on earth or in heaven should a good fellowshipping Christian be forced to transact business, or to do anything else, with gays, lesbians, transgenders, non Christians, including Moslems, agnostics, and of course those worst of all sinners, atheists, liberals, democrats, African-Americans, or anyone otherwise unsuitable and beneath them? maybe they shouldn't be, and for that reason, the Georgia state legislature, conservative republican dominated, again enters the picture, bless their lil ole conservative bigoted hearts, and now threatens to keep right on passing laws overriding vetoes, standing up for the right to sanctimoniously discriminate. You wouldn't even be surprised if said legislators tried to impeach and remove from office, the very gov himself. After all, that's what the sanctimonious among us do, when given the chance to speak right up for religion freedom, which includes, or at least should include, the sacred right to be downright mean.

Two Peas In a Pod: Hitler and Trump

THERE ARE THOSE TO WHOM Donald Trump is remindful of Adolf Hitler, circa 1932. He lives in a nation awash in fear and anger, in decline, seeking comfort in a super strong leader who promises to bring a return to the glory days of the past. Both Hitler and Trump gave the promise of a return to glory, both used bombastic, aggressive rhetoric, and we see how tat act played out the first time around. America will provide an encore at its own peril. what frightens me, and maybe some other folks, is that I like Trump. I, a left winger, liking the Donald. that worries me. We all seem to like his brash, bold, unrehearsed style, his apparent honesty, which is only apparent. Maybe we're all a bit angry, or a lot angry, and are looking for our own Uncle Adolf. Whatever, we should all sit down, take a deep breath, and ask ourselves: "why"?... Hitler's scapegoats were communists and Jews, Trump has chosen Moslems and Mexicans as his targets of opportunity. Hitler, to his credit, was reasonably articulate, if a bit histrionic and banal, but at least had the good sense not to say things like: "I listen to myself for foreign policy advice, because I have a good brain, and I say a lot of things." Strike one up for der fuhrer, and a red check mark on the Donald's usage exam. If Hitler had talked like that, he might never have gained power in the literate German nation, and the world might have averted the second world war. Both Trump and Hitler have/had enormous charm and charisma; in private conversation, both are reputed to have been warm and gracious, for all the good that does a duped electorate. Seventeen million Germans voted for Hitler in 1933. At least that number have already voted for Trump, and might well do so again, unless cooler heads prevail. Fat chance of that in the land of smoke and mirrors in the great American funhouse. Hitler was angry and obsessed; Trump is cocky, self absorbed, and constantly seeking attention. Take your pick.

Condemning the Wrong Religion

WE, INCLUDING THE OFT MALIGNED President Barack Hussein Obama, are admonished by our conservative colleagues to use the term "Islamo-fascism", or "Islamic terrorism". By so doing, conservatives can more closely associate terrorism the one point billion Islamic faith, although their stated intent is to enhance accuracy. Conservative Christians have the utmost disdain for the Islamic faith, as they do for anyone who is neither conservative nor Christian. This ignores the fact that Moslems overwhelmingly, like everyone else, condemn all forms of violence. Every white American slave owner was a self described Christian. Only the native Americans who owned slaves, and there more than a few, were not. A large majority of Christian Americans either owned slaves, advocated slavery, or accepted it without a whimper of protest. The Bible was incessantly used to justify slavery, because the Bible condones slavery. Today we have black churches, and we have white churches, and seldom do the twain meet. Post Civil War segregation and racism, which continues in somewhat diluted form to this day, is a christian conservative phenomenon. The atheists and agnostics. mostly liberals, are missing in action. Timothy McVeigh was a Christian, so he said, and we are all free to self identify. Every member of the KKK, from Nathan Bedford Forrest to the present, is self identified Christian. The Klan did not and does not accept non Christian members. Thus in America we are confronted with our demonstrated history of Christian based racism, and Christano-fascist slavery. Make no mistake, conservative christian colleagues; Islamic terrorism is a distortion of fact, a lie, Christian racism is not. Ted Cruz, a veritable fountain of bad ideas, wants o to enhance police surveillance in American neighborhoods populated by Moslems. President Obama does not. Here we go again. A conservative strategy predicated on religion. Throughout American Islamic neighborhoods, all terrorism is condemned outspokenly, but we tend not to notice. Cruz has probably not considered that enhanced police surveillance of Islamic neighborhoods would most likely serve only to greatly enhance the alertness and secrecy of anyone who might be making bombs in the bedroom. Of course, how could he possibly be expected to understand that?

Taking The Plunge Among America's Uneducable Senior Set

THE BEST ADVICE I can give is: never, ever saunter into the local senior center in a small conservative southern American town and mention to someone that you consider most of the members to be provincial, poorly educated philistines. Even if you can back up your accusation with cold, hard facts, don't do it. Refrain. Or, as one of America's preeminent past first lady philistines once said about drugs: just say no. (oops, there I go again, just like her husband once said to someone). Somebody might overhear you, and challenge you, with righteous indignation, to prove your case, and worse, you might decide to accept the challenge, and succeed, with ease. All you'll get for your effort is a smug dismissive, condescending stare and sneer, and reduced acceptance within the geriatric community. But if you decide to unwisely take the plunge, here is one option. Say to the challenger: consider socialism. Nearly everyone in this place of conservative republican ill repute makes two generic, oft repeated conservative comments about this much maligned but highly effective economic system: it doesn't work, and its never worked, anywhere in the world. Then provide a list of the socialistic enterprises right across the street in the town square. Include the local police department, local fire department, city streets, public library, the senior center itself, and a few other publicly owned non profit enterprises, like bridges, state and federal highways, public parks, public schools, public universities, and last, but not least, the social security checks which arrive without fail the third day of every month. Gently but firmly remind your poorly educated philistinic challenger that all of the above named enterprises work like a charm, and that without them, the deniers of socialism would themselves be, as they say, shit out of luck. (substitute the word "manure", if you prefer, which you do, whether or not you know it). Then mention Denmark, highly socialistic, but with the highest per capita living standard in the world, well ahead of the U.S.A., which, with its devotion to and submission to corporate capitalism, checks in at about number ten, at last count. You needn't even mention that the other nations ahead of the U.S. are, well, socialistic, even more than our beloved land of the free, which, as mentioned, aint too shabby in its own right in its use of collectivist economics. Tell the challenger, truthfully, that were it nor for socialism, capitalism would collapse, and that they themselves, as mentioned earlier benefit directly form it each and every living day, even as they reject and condemn it. Invite them to tear up their social security checks, Then, run like hell, if you're smart. But again, the best advice is to not take the plunge in the first place. After all, you're dealing with narrow minded, provincial, poorly educated folks here, and by their very nature, they resist the truth, even when its laid out before their very brains in good, plain English, sans obscenities. And after all, they are, dare we say, conservative, which, by definition, means uneducable.

Trying To Endure Trump and Cruz, but Failing Miserably

The republican controversy is more entertaining and amusing than ever. A Ted Cruz political action committee posted a picture of Donald Trump's latest wife, his latest trophy babe, less than fully clad, and it, shit, hit the fan. Cruz disavowed any association with it, but he seems never to have lectured his supporters about the desirability of proper behavior. Contact between PACs and the political candidates they support is strictly limited by law, but let's face it, it happens, and a little moral advice from the best (most obnoxious) moralizer in the U.S. Senate might've come in handy, before Cruz's low life supporters posted the gratuitous pic. Trump, never one to miss a good fight, responded in kind, kinda, by posting photos of his fully clad spouse (the incumbent), alongside Cruz's significant other, and offered the American people a ready opportunity - invited the American public - to compare. Cruz, ever sanctimonious, went ballistic, calling the donald a "lowlife coward", or something equally and decidedly un-christian. One might wonder whether he finished his morning prayers before calling Trump a coward, and whether he said said prayer from his knees, from which position, for some reason, he thinks anyone serving as American president should begin his or her every day. So the beat goes on. Now we find ourselves wishing the two candidates would actually debate. Would they throw barbs, or even first stones at each other, while the governor of Ohio ducks between the two of them? This could get even more interesting. Both men are probably trying like the dickens, we must hopefully assume, to control their behavior, which is frightening when you think about it. They simply are not succeeding, are they? The thought of either of the two having his finger on the black atom bomb-toting briefcase is almost more than a meek and peace loving citizen can endure. But where do we go from here? Hillary, with an indictment hanging over her head, whether or not she deserves one? Hillary in federal court, up the river, out of the race, in handcuffs? Like it or not, my fellow conservatives, the only candidate who is telling the truth, and talking about the important issues, is the self identified socialist Bernie Sanders. Eat your hearts out, hold your nose, and vote, if you can stand to.

Trying To Dislike Bill O'Reilly, and Nearly Failing

IT IS POSSIBLE to be a part liberal, part conservative, although you wouldn't know it from listening to current American discourse. It is possible to be open minded. Perhaps you're familiar with Bill O'Reilly, whose confrontational television program draws much attention on the FOX network, fair, balanced, and conservative. O'Reilly is mostly conservative, but independent. Liberally, he believes that climate change is real and man made, and his favorite politician of all time is Robert F. Kennedy. He also believes that marijuana should be decriminalized, but that dealers of harder drugs should be punished extremely. Arrogant and rude, O'Reilly explains that he is just naturally that way, and that he has no alternative, because in his "NO Spin Zone", powerful and famous people, if not confronted, tell lies and justify bad behavior.That, plus, he was raised in a working class, tough neighborhood in New York, and learned how to fight, early and often. If you listen to him, he makes sense, most of the time. He reminds one of Goethe's statement: "confronted with great merit, there is no resistance but admiration." Yet, you want to resist. Its easy to try to dislike O'Reilly, but its difficult to actually do it, if one is fair and balanced. Like the rest of us, he claims to be seeking the truth; unlike most of us, he seems to comes fairly close to succeeding. In many ways, particularly in aiming straight at the truth and pulling the trigger, you could find a far worse role model. Like the rest of us, O'reilly is an occasional hypocrite. In his books he encourages us all to be paragons of undisputed virtue: keep your friends, always show kindness, earn respect through honesty and consistent behavior, and so on, blah blah blah. Marriage, according to the big O, is indispensable to a successful life, a successful life defined as "earning the respect of others". Say what? Marriage? Indispensible? Like, I am soooo totally sure. Thi advices was given before his own marriage ended in an acrimonious divorce, and a three year custody battle, which he lost. Not quite virtuous enough in divorce court, Bill? He was subsequently accused of abusing his ex spouse, a charge he quite naturally denied, vehemently. Then too, there was this unsavory business of the sexual harassment suit brought by one of his television producers, which ended with Bill making an out of court settlement payment of an undisclosed, but presumably substantial amount. Make sure your kids have straight teeth, and never, maintain good table manners, and never, ever use cliches in polite conversation, says he. Like, whatever.

Yo, Dawg, Lernin' To Get Down Wiff New Forms of Artistic expression

WHEN JAZZ EMERGED as a new american art form, early in the last century, it engendered immediate controversy and disapproval. It wasn't gospel, and it was black, and that in itself was sufficient to warrant its summary dismissal. Slowly, it caught on, and is now traditional and respected. Sinatra was, early on, the bane of the parents of teenage girls, but he settled in to a nice career as a perfectly respectable crooner among the middle aged and middle classed. Rock n roll got off on the wrong blue suede foot too, and Elvis was forced by popular demand to sneer and slick back his pompadour without showing his swaying hips on camera. Ed Sullivan had the same problem with the Beatles and the Rolling Stones, and a few other early rock bands; not suitable for the family. Hair over the ears and crude cockney accents did not fill the family bill. Elvis and the Beatles are now tame, if not downright passe, and the Stones, over the age of seventy all, are out on tour, as usual, filling arenas with multi generational crowds. We Americans can be a tad judgmental and narrow minded when we put our minds to it. Enter rap and hip hop, which, as far as can be determined, are essentially the same thing. Just don't try to tell an African-american that the art form was invented by a white female vocalist, Blondie, although it may have been. Rap has taken a bit longer to settle in and gain respectability, possibly because, like Jazz (an African word which means "to have sex"), rap is black. Tupak Shakur and Sean Puff Daddy Combs and Eminem have helped delay rap's acceptance among the respectable on account of some incidents of highly questionable personal behavior, such as brandishing weapons, hangin' with street gangs, and referring to women, sometimes their own mothers and wives, as "hos" and "bitches" (american slang words which mean "unsavory females"). Actually, rap is an important relatively new form of music, for one primary reason; it talks about anger and hatred and violence, breaking a barrier of silence, just like jazz and rock unleashed the forces of sex and drugs. Amid an avalanche of folksy, schmaltzy torch, love, and heartbreak popular music, somebody is finally directly addressing two of the most prominent components of human nature: anger, and hatred. Not to say there's anything wrong with a few pick up trucks, girls in tight blue jeans, dogs, and horses, but we need more. We need to talk about these things, all this anger and hatred which lurks within the mind of humanity, whether we want to or not, because its there, and other than rap, it aint hapnin'. Go check out the movie "8 Mile", in which Eminem, aka Marshall Mathers (not to be confused with Jerry Mathers, aka "the Beaver") plays himself, and you'll see. Its an absolute masterpiece of a movie, and Mathers does an Academy Award quality performance, while the film forces us to take a long, hard look at American urban socio-economics. In the words of Eminem, "we gotta lotta growin' up to do, yo, we gotta lotta throwin' up to spew".

Seeking Personal Responsibility

YOU HOP IN YOUR RIDE, and head out to run a few errands. first, you swing by the drive thru liquor store and grab a six pack. then, a stop at the Dollar General for a pack of ciggies and a pound of coffee. Finally, you stop off at a friend's house, noticing that the light is on, and are able to score a quarter ounce of good skunk bud. Then, back to the crib to pop a tab and roll one up. The coffee goes on the shelf, right above the Proctor Silex, ready for sun up manana. With how many drug dealers have you now dealt? Three, at least, and more, if you include corporate. The pot dealer is, of course, the one who takes the rap. However, but for the grace of God, the vicissitudes of legislative lobbying, the fickle finger of of societal tastes, and demand, so would the others. were caffeine and tobacco being discovered today, they would likely be banned by law. The pot dealer, the coke dealer, the meth dealer is the pusher, the bad guy, the criminal. as if the customer is somehow an unwitting victim. the dealers of caffeine, tobacco, and alcohol are respected members of the Chamber of Commerce. We preach the doctrine of personal responsibility, but we don't practice it. If we did, pot and cocaine dealers would join the other business people at the chamber's annual Christmas party. Prohibition goes beyond the bounds of reason, said Abraham Lincoln, in that it attempts to control a man's appetites by legislation, and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. prohibition strikes a blow at the very principles upon which this nation was founded. but what should we expect. We live in a culture in which most of us are perfectly to let someone be tortured to death to atone for our sins, sins for which we already have paid, in the here and now. What goes around, comes around, as they say. has anyone seen any personal responsibility lately?

Embracing Both sides In the "Cultural War"

THERE IS, ACCORDING TO SOME, something going on in America called a "culture war", consisting in an alleged, perceived battle between the traditionalists, and the secular progressives. By "traditionalists", what is meant is "conservative Christians". The term "secular progressive" refers to people who are liberal, and who either do not embrace Christianity, or who embrace it but do want it to be a prominent feature of American civic life. Surely, there is, in a vast continent, room for both. There always has been.The founding fathers were for the most part non Christian, but rather "deists", a term roughly synonymous with the term "pantheist". Jefferson was often accused of being an "atheist", and since he once referred to the Bible as a "pile of dung", it can be construed that the term fit, at least from a Christian perspective. Then too, there is the famous letter Jefferson wrote to Madison, in which he advocated a wall between church and state, which we largely have today, with but a few exceptions. Had the founders been "traditionalist", not only would they have been ardent Christians, they would have favored retaining the "political bands" which connected them with another. Thus, for the most part, America's founders were secular progressives. America's founders, alas, were more than "progressive", they were revolutionary. and let us bear in mind that many liberals are indeed christian, and that it is indeed quite possible, and sensible, to be both christian and secular, with regard to civic concerns. Which traditions should we embrace, which which should we reject? And which Judeo-christian value should we retain, and which should we discard. Let's keep the work ethic, and discard, at long last, our long tradition of excluding minorities from mainstream american life. the Bible says, in Leviticus and again in Mathew, that children who curs their parents should be put to death. Let's remove that from scripture. Slavery is a Judeo-christian value, according to the Bible. Strike that one. But let's consider eliminating the designated hitter, and returning to the tradition of having the pitcher hit for himself. Perhaps there is room enough in all of us for a bit of tradition, and a bit of progress.

Dealing With Our National Anger

THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, we all seem to agree, are angry. This has been apparent for some time; finally, we are talking about it. The next step is to deal with it.Our venting options include: taking it out on each other, launching foreign wars of aggression, or both. Why limit ourselves? Consider, for instance, President Obama. He must surely be a mite miffed at the Senate majority leader right about now. the president could have nominate the most conservative jurist in town for the high court, and then sit back, and watch the republicans hop to it. Then, by prior agreement, he could watch the nominee withdraw his or her name, and Obama could replace it with a more moderate name, like, say, Mr. Garland. would the G.O.P. senators then return to their prior intransigence? Only at great peril. They would then be exposed not as defenders of any high and mighty "let the people decide" principles, but rather, as champions of right wing jurisprudence. They would scream bleddy murder in all likelihood, furthering their entertainment value. As long as fifteen people are collectively wealthier than one hundred million other people, there will be anger. One does not simultaneously create a nation of happy people, and run millions of them our of their homes. One does not simultaneously prepare for war, and make war, while talking peace, and remain happy. Like Thomas Jefferson, we should fear for our nation, by remembering that God is just.

Renouncing Nonsense

"EVERYONE WHO SERIOUSLY pursues science becomes convinced that a spirit, vastly superior to humanity, is manifest in the laws of the universe", said Einstein. No other religiosity is necessary, or appropriate, it says here. Think about it. How likely is it, really now, that the creator of the universe would reveal truth in a book which says that the world is flat, the value of pi is, oh, three, and when Christ returns, the stars shall fall from the sky and smash upon the ground like little glass trinkets? Whatever God is, surely God is not a liar. Mark Twain, a notorious atheist, said that he read the Bible, and that he found within some noble poetry, some clever fables, a great deal of obscenity, and no less than one thousand outright lies. The group of red clad cardinals convenes at the Vatican, and begin voting. Finally, a new pope is elected, and the smoke rises from the smokestack, white. The announcement is made: God has selected a new holy father. God, the delegater of authority, who expresses his divine will through pencil and paper, among contentious factions of clerics, by vote. God, who allows the nascent Christian church to languish in fractious disarray for three centuries, then decides its time to canonize the faith, and sends hundreds of people to a small town in Turkey, for the purpose of placing His holy word on paper, through a process of deliberation, argumentation, and balloting. Mighty strange and indirect way to do business, one might think. presidential candidate Ted Cruz said that in order to quality for the American presidency, a person should begin each day on his or her knees, in prayer. Here's another idea: in order to qualify for political office in the United States, a person must be required to renounce all forms of superstition and nonsense, such as religion.

Trying To Stop Trump

FUNNIER THAN HELL, the strange and diverse bedfellows who want so desperately to stop Trump. Mainstream, upright, establishment republicans, mainly, and a left wing lunatic fringe, both of whom often appear at Trump's circus-like rallies, and try to disrupt them. Next thing you know, the protestors at Trump events will be fighting among themselves, and ignoring their original purpose. Trump has even gone so far as to acccuse Bernie Sanders of orchestrating the whole problem, which is quite a stretch, but, so what? Welcome to the era of the big lie, oft repeated! Bernie has better things to do, like, disrupt Hillary Clinton rallies. Make no mistake: we do not, under any circumstances, want to limit the getting out of the message of the Donald. Let us all, a candid nation, hear his words, and judge for ourselves, without our flow of information, no matter how inane, being truncated by rude people. These right and left wing nut cases who protest his speeches; shame on them, and their petty, arrogant presumptuousness. Why are so very many conservative christian types supporting Trump, is the big question. Why, for that matter, is anybody supporting him? Thrice married, proud of his affairs and indiscretions, hardly the evangelical christian type, the Trumpster. You're tempted to think that a whole lot of different people could run of president, and have at least an outside chance right about now. One thing seems obvious, however: the evangalical christians who support Trump are allowing their political views to Trump their religiosity.

Reasonably Regulating

ONCE, JUST ONCE, I'd like to see a famous athlete get caught using performance enhancing drugs, get punished, call a press conference, and tell the world: I used this substance deliberately because I have an inherent right to control my own bodily functions, notwithstanding society's well intentioned but horribly misguided attempt to eliminate a fundamental freedom for convenience, in defense of a highly questionable abstract moralistic belief." I'd be a great scandal. We'd all love it. For a brief flicker of a moment, there, I was thinking Maria Sharapova might be the one, but, no go. The system grinds us all into submission. These performance enhancing drugs, steroids, are in fact wonder drugs, which ought to be thoroughly researched, tested, and utilized, for improved human health and performance, transparently. Obviously, like anythign else you put into your body, you can put in too much, too little, or at the wrong time. But let's sit back and take a deep breath, and ask ourselves: are we really going down the right path in society by requiring people to submit to an examination of their internal bodies to determine what has been ingested? Or, should we all have as an unalienable right the right to do with our own bodies as we see fit, for good or ill? If you are allowed to run with artificial legs made of metal and plastic, win an olympic marathon, and keep the first prize, which you are, then maybe, just maybe, we should think twice about trying to maintain rules and regulations about what and what not people can ingest through their oral orifice. We know better than to outlaw harmful drugs such as alcohol, nicotene, sugar, and caffeine. Protein drinks and milkshakes with vitamin supplements are still allowed, are they not? How much longer will Gatorade be legal after a good workout?

Becoming Educated

THERE IS NO SHORTAGE of intelligence in America, and presumably no where else. Plenty of talent to go around. And just think of the hundreds and hundreds of great universities in the United States! You'd think we'd all be really, really smart. And no, those universities are not hangouts for wacko ivory tower loser types, but rather, they are bastions of learning, intelligence, and progress, where very intelligent people gather. So, what is our problem? Why all the misinformation, the ignorance, the outright stupidity? It takes a lot of training to fully utilize those big human brains, and, due to evolutionary factors, those brains often get in their own way. Thus, we end up with a society full of superstitious, fearful citizens, people who embrace primitive, false religions and philosophies, people who do not want to accept the reality of the modern world that has been and is being revealed to us through the advancement of knowledge. It may be that the best form of government, in the long run, is a benevolent dictatorship; but its too late for that. We have decided that we must govern ourselves. So be it, all well and good, but self governance requires well educated people, with critical thinking skills, as our American "founding fathers" understood. It the critical thinking skills we lack, our failure to turn ourselves into citizens and philosophers.Maybe our descendants will do better than we. If they don't, heaven help them, and may the devil take them.

Thanking Mr. Trump: The American Four Party System

ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, Donald Trump is going to continue running for president, all the way through the election in November, and maybe even beyond that. He's having too much fun. If the republican establishment somehow miraculously succeeds in getting him off the republican ballot, does anyone really believe that the Donald will humbly surrender the nomination, and go away quietly, smiling? He'll run as an independent, which'll be great news for Hillary Clinton. Maybe Bernie Sanders will also decide to run as an independent, although that seems extremely unlikely, since he has said nothing about it. The best outcome would be for all four of them to run, on a four party political system. Sanders could usher in a new social labor party, which every civilized country has, and Ted Cruz and that extreme right wing part of the republican party could form a Christian conservative coalition, or some such. Then, everybody would be represented. Its happened before. Several times in American history there have been three and four candidates running for president, and each time, not only did the republic survive, but became stronger through the survival struggle. In 1800 a mad scramble of an election gave us the Thomas Jefferson presidency, and in 1824 Andrew Jackson survived a four man dog fight, with a little bit of old fashioned political wheeling and dealing, aka "corruption". Jefferson and Jackson are now regarded as two of our greatest presidents. 1912 was another crazy multi candidate election, with a strong socialist candidate, Eugene Debs. Social and communist candidates also appeared on the ballot in 1920 and 1932, so, it certainly is not unprecedented. Think of it like this: Hillary versus Trump is going to be a dream matchup; a truly entertaining event. How much more exciting to include a couple of crazies like Cruz ad Bernie? The conservative republican side needs at least two parties; one to represent business and capitalism, and one to represents the Christian viewpoint, whatever that is. Currently, there is only the "Jesus, guns, and money" party, aka the G.O.P., and, well, it seems to be falling apart before our very eyes. Thank you Mr. Trump

A Cause Worth Pursuing

WHEN I WAS in sixth grade, our teacher told us to never, ever discuss two subjects with anyone: religion, and politics, as you may've guessed. Those two topics, above and beyond all others, divide people, and start arguments. And, without even thinking about it, you can see her point. At the time, I must already have been a rather disagreeable little snot; my first thought was: gee, Mrs. Stirewalt, that's takes away the two most interesting topics. what else is there to talk about? Besides, can't we all just get along, accept our differences, and respect them? You can kinda see that viewpoint too. The whole problem, the reason we can't talk about it, is categorical thinking, thank you very much Aristotle. People, being social animals, (thanks again Aristotle) tend to organize into groups, many groups, some of which are based on religious or political points of view. As if we all feel comforted by being part of a group which shares viewpoints, groups such as a political party or a church or an organized religion. America's founding fathers didn't like political parties, and considering what's going on now, you can certainly understand why. Wouldn't it be wonderful if humanity ceased all attempts to organize people into groups according to politics or religion, and we all accepted the reality that those choices are purely individualistic, ultimately? The abandonment of uniformity and conformity, and the celebration of billions of different religions and political points of view! Then, at least our conflicts would be minor. That, my fellow citizens of Earth, is a cause worth pursuing.

Evolving Religion

SURELY BY NOW WE HAVE ALL NOTICED that our religions are more trouble than they're worth. They require that we get out of bed at strange times, and embrace primitive beliefs. We are asked to worship some deity thousands of years old, with eh value system of primitive humans. If the god of the Old Testament is real, then the universe was created ans is governed by a petty, psychotic serial killer and mass murderer. Read it for yourself, and weep. Why not let our religious beliefs evolve? It wouldn't be nearly as painful as one might think, and in fact, religions do in fact evolve, such evolution is inevitable, and necessary. You can help. Next mass, quietly pass on communion, eschew the symbolic cannibalism, if you can without starting a scandal. George Washington did, and he seems not to have aroused much scandal, although more than a few folks wondered what his religious views really were. Politely, when appropriate, mention unto others that you to think that God inspires all true human art and intellectual achievement. You might even mention that you enjoy wandering the stacks of large libraries, for the sheer number of books, the sheer amount of human scholarly erudition at your fingertips. No particular book, in this context, stands out as superior to the human mind. Salute the brave souls at the Council of Nicea, who intrepidly persisted until they had agreed upon an official canon of writings for the christian church. Thus was the bible born; in convention, through human collaboration, historically verified. One might even assert that if one feels the need to pray more than five times a day, one should do so without fear of divine retribution, surely Allah is not petty. Bad ideas and beliefs and modes of thought stalk the planet, in all of us, holding us back. We can retain all the virtues of religion, without keeping the fear and superstition. In any reasonable system of thought, "do unto others" makes perfect sense; why cloak it in dogma and rigidity of thought. We need to arrive at a time and place where religious differences do not cause human strife, and the sooner the better. Long live religious individualism, down with religious uniformity. And, as always, long live the Earth.

Combining Conservatism With Christianity, Somehow

EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS believe that everybody should be a Christian, so its surprising that more of them seem to support Donald Trump than Ted Cruz. After all, Cruz is outspokenly devout, while Trump is not. Cruz begins each day on his knees in prayer, he says, and Trump, meanwhile, appears to have a very non Christian lifestyle, replete with money, women, and pride. At least one evangelical christian minister is trying to remind us of this, and steer the flock away from Trump, but to no avail. Another evangelical Christian minister explained it by reminding us that we are not electing a minister of the United States, we are electing a president of the United States. And yet, Cruz seems to have all the right stuff; he is extremely conservative, and extremely Christian, and, for whatever reason, the two go together in American politics. The more conservative an American, the more likely said American to be extremely devout, the pattern seems to be. The Christian faith is a long standing tradition, and political conservatism embraces tradition, while liberalism embraces change. Perhaps the answer to this strange combination lies in that fact, somewhere. Hence we have, as the late great Gore Vidal called them, the "Jesus, guns, and Money " crowd. They don't like being called that, you might notice, if you try it sometime. But why not? Isn't that description accurate? The fact that the message of Jesus is the exact opposite of the conservative guns and money message makes no difference; conservative Americans find no problem reconciling christian faith with corporate capitalism, the carrying of firearms, and the rebuke of cooperative economics, taxation, and redistribution of wealth. So, at least for the time being, "render unto Caesar" and "give unto the poor" will have to manifest among the progressive wing of the American political spectrum.

Evolving Matrimony

FIRS THE FIRST TIME, as far as we know, the number of single women who have never been married outnumbers the number of married women in the United States. let's just call that a good thing, and leave it at that. No reason to go negative, and panic. Let it be. it is what it is, as we like to say. God bless the free market of mating. The most probably explanation is that as more and more women pursue careers unavailable to women of previous generations, more of them chose career over marriage and family, at least at the beginning. For instance, even as we speak, there are more females than males in American law schools. Our legal future is very feminine. There is no reason to suspect that the very institution of marriage is easing out of existence, a victim of broader social evolution. In fact, it seems reasonable to believe that, considering how many social needs the institution of marriage in its traditional forms, fulfills, that it will always be with us, to a certain extent. But it may be that alternatives are coming into being, as society changes, and becomes more tolerant of all manner of diversity. Gay marriage is now the law of the American landscape. Being single is no longer semi-scandalous, as it indeed once was in Victorian America. Children are more expensive than ever, and the human race has a greater number already than ever. Economic factors can affect the marriage and birth rate. It may even be that forms of marriage, such as multiple partner or interlocking marriage arrangements lay ahead. If memory serves, there is a Robert Heinlein novel in which a whole group of people are intermarried with each other, in what Heinlein called a "line marriage". You'd have to ask him more about the details, but since its in a book, its real. You just never know. The only sure thing it that, like everything else, the future of marriage will differ considerably from the present.

Bottoming Out

JUST WHEN YOU THINK it can go no lower, it does. The good news, though, is that we've probably reached the bottom, for we can surely go no lower. When you have two presidential candidates on national TV arguing over whether one of them has a large or small penis, you've hit rock bottom. Anyone over the age of fifty can attest that American culture has been on a gradual but steady decline for several decades, and has been wondering how long it will continue. Well, its over. The days of national cultural decline are behind us...aren't they? Surely it can get no worse, though, I must warn you, there are those who insist that it can and will. The people predicting that it can and will get worse are the second coming of Jesus crowd, and for their sake, I hope they die still believing. All I know is, for the foreseeable future, I'm not leaving the country. All my recreational travel, beginning immediately, shall be confined to the United States of America. There is no way on earth I am going to travel in any other country, risk being found out as an American, and ridiculed the way I suspect I would be, and indeed probably deserve to be. Nor do I want to saunter around, say, Europe, wearing a Groucho Marx mustache, nose, and glasses. You simply have to wonder what people in other countries must think about us, about all this Trump related stuff - and yet, you really don't even want to know.

Turning the KKK into a Liberal Organization, Amazingly

I DON'T WANT TO BE UNFAIR. But, goodness, what will right wingers come up with next? Donald Trump did not distance himself quickly enough from David Duke. That's what started it all. There was the furor over that. Then, some right winger made the brilliant observation that the KKK was an organization founded and operated by democrats, therefore, it was and is a left wing orzanization. Say what? So, according to the right wing, the KKK is a left wing organization. I daresay you could ask any member of the KKK, from its founder, Nathan Bedford Forrest, to today's scattered membership, every menber, and not one of them will call himself or herself a liberal, no KKK member ever has identified as liberal, and in fact, they will all identify as conservatives, and Christians at that. Go give it a try, see what happens. Surely you know some Kluckers. The republican party was founded as a liberal party, the free soil party, but eventually became conservative, aligned with business, which it reamins today. The democratic party once housed many conservative members, mainly from the south, since the party of Lincoln, the G.O.P. was hated in dixie. But that's all changed now. Now, the dems are all liberals, the republs all conservatives, the conservatives have fled the democratic party and the south has kicked out the democrats. Indeed, in the days when conservative southerners inhabitated the democratic party, many clansmen were democrats. But they were then, as now, conservative, as every political science teacher knows, as every historian knows, and as every klansman knows. Funny that the right wing nut jobs of present America find it necessary to fabricate such crazy fiction, but, really, what else is new?

Changing Our Ways, Out of Necessity

IT IS A GOOD THING, that the movie "Spotlight" won the big prize. Relevant, important story. What did it do, highlight the evil of pedifilia, the corruption of the institutioin whence it occurred, and the courage of those who exposed it? If so, that's all well and good, but we need to go deeper than that, to the real heart of the matter. The truth is, we have created a civilization in which basic, "normal" human impulses, impulses such as sex, gay and straight, any and all ages, are stifled, demonized, and punished. That's all well and good, but remember; humans are animals, with animal urges, like hunger, thirst, sex, and survival. A religion in which one must deny all sex and marriage to become a priest is, perhaps, shall we say, "questionable"? Oh, so many of our human traditional institutions and ways of thinking are questionable, worthy of reexamination, if not altogether insane. Alas, unintended consequences, like say, pedifilia. Are we ever going to really create a sensible, stable, workable world for everyone when billions of people believe that God reveals truth in a book, and billions of other people think god reveals truth in some other book, and the two groups fight about it, like, constantly? I mean, C,mon now. That's just plain old nutty .We need to do more than condemn institutional pedifilia, the institutions which nurture it, and paraise the bravery of all of us who oppose it. we need to look at our culture, very very closely, and find out what's wrong with it, what makes sense and what doesn't, and change it. We need to change many of our fundamental vlaues and institutions and attitudes, amny of which we stupidly consider sacred, becuase many of them are harmful. Its twenty sixteen. A supreme Court justice recently died, one who said that evolution is nothing but a guess, and a very bad one at that, and this guy is held up as some sort of legal genius. I rest my case.

Trump, Telling The Truth

THE MOST RECENT republican debate, the one with all the simultaneous yelling, was a complete train wreck, and just when you think the G.O.P. campaign discourse can go no lower, it does. Daily, Rubio and Cruz attack Trump more insanely, less reasonably, and Trump approaches the finish line.Oh, how teh ergular mainstream repubs hate Trump! The farther he gets, the more likely the destruction of the repub party. Go Donald. People accuse Trump of tapping into, and thus taking advantage of, america's fears and anger, as if those who vote for him do so at gunpoint, as if Donald Trump is respondsible for everyone's fear and anger, and the way they deal with it. And it really is hilarious, listening to far right wing conservatives complain about Trump being a racist, because it took hom more than point oh oh oh one second to condemn David Duke. suddenly, Mitt Romney shows up, that splendid former candidate for president, dogging the Donald, accusing trump of being a "fraud". Trum might wish to reply that every last dollar of his nine billion is real, not counterfit, not fraudulant, and that if Mitt can prove that the Trump fortune was in any way gotten fraudulanty, have at it. Romney's speech against Trump sounds like a third grde playground spit wad fight. Desperate, and pathetic, America's far right wing. Trump, neither liberal nor conservative entirely, is redefining conservatism, moving it back toward the middle, towards sanity, and that's a good thing. Hillary and Trump, a dream match up, for all of us, the media political punditry, and we, the audience. People seem to like Trump because he says what he thinks, and doesn't seem to out his words through a filter. pPeople, myself included, like that, because it contrasts sharply with the usual canned, highly prepared remarks made by all the other politicians. To a certain point, filters are a good thing, but beyond a certain point, they render a person horribly insincere. Trump doesn't do any of that, thus he often sticks foot in mouth, or seems to. Trump has become a politician. He can no longer be described as a non politician, having run for president for many months now. But he remains an unusual, even a unique specimen. He speaks the truth, insofar as he can see it, which is questionable. You get the feeling that if Trump gave a speech to a bunch of other billionaires, and praised them for being wealthy, he would be willing to admit it. But not Hillary Clinton. And probably, not the rest of the bunch either.