The intent of this blog is to promote human equality, human progress, human peace and justice, and optimism. To accomplish this, to encourage the discussion of ideas after identifying and discovering problems, and then creating positive solutions for "we the people," in order to provide for the "general welfare" and "domestic tranquility" of America now and its "posterity" into the future. To encourage an emphasis on separation of religion and state for all, no matter if this is for those "of faith" in a Maker / Creator (Deists, God-loving people, Christians, various people of spirituality) and atheists or agnostics.

Archive for October, 2012

IndependentLens: Discussion about Bishop Gene Robinson

Jesus spoke of love for one another. The Old Testament focus in Leviticus was about a lack of children in society. Homosexuals did not perpetuate the birth of children, so were going against the grain of the society. Thus stringent measures were taken, which are not necessary in today’s society. Our world is different today, requiring all kinds of forms of loving families, even alternative families with same-sex parents, to lovingly care for children of unwanted pregnancies and from broken homes in an over-populated world.

Jesus Christ never endorsed traditionalism. Yet, in this program about Bishop Gene Robinson, there were those who talked about “2000 years of tradition.” So what? If the traditionalism is not the solution, then why do we stand by it? Jesus did not believe in idolatry. Yet, the man in this IndependentLens program… the man from California who repeatedly used the words, “Bible-believing,” sounded as if he worshiped the Bible, not God. That is idolatry and blasphemous and would NOT have been favorable to Jesus Christ.

In another portion of this program, a man speaking against the pro-same-sex measures of the Episcopal Church said, “The needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few.” Jesus Christ said, “the road to hell is large and spacious and many would be on that road; whereas the road to everlasting life, few would find it.”  The words this man spoke before the Episcopal gathering were words abrasive to those of Jesus Christ. This recognition is the reason why our American justice system finally abolished Jim Crow measures against a minority. The larger numbers who persecuted the minority were/are evil in God’s eyes. Besides the fact… Jesus Christ said, “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” “Love God; love your neighbor as yourself.”

The same book of the Old Testament speaking against homosexuality due to the need for more children also endorsed the stoning of rebellious children and forbade eating a number of foods, including shell fish. Why would we pick some and not the other? Because of men who don’t feel comfortable with themselves and who have endorsed continuing “traditions” which don’t mean a rat’s tail.

And at Genesis 19, there was only a threat of homosexual rape, but nothing actually took place. Yet, to hear the word, “sodomy,” one would believe there were explicit sexual acts at Sodom and Gomorrah. There were none. God disliked the violent rape, not the sexual acts.

Furthermore, the “traditions” at Sodom and Gomorrah were about deliverate violent homosexual rape acts with strangers visiting the area in order to discourage strangers from visiting. God had said those people should accept strangers in their midst, but they disobeyed God by promoting rape with strangers.

Glen Beck’s point about accepting civil unions, but not marriage, is not acceptable.  Even when same-sex marriage is accepted, there is no church which can be forced to perform such acts, as long as the separation of church and state remains. No person should be forced or coerced into a same-sex union of any kind. Yet, millions upon millions of GLBT are coerced by tremendous societal / religious peer pressure and intimidation (how many times did we hear, “why are you not dating some girl?”) to marry someone of the opposite sex.

Jesus is about love and acceptance. He never turned anyone away, whether he/she might be a GLBT lay person, a pastor or priest, or a bishop. “There can be no peace without justice.”

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Tagged with:

Failure or Success? Perspective Matters

Dr. Joseph R. Fischer wrote the 1997 book titled, A Well-executed Failure:  The Sullivan Campaign Against the Iroquois, July-September 1779 (published by U. of South Carolina Press).  Irritated as I was in learning the title of this book – due to my ancestor, Ensign John Barr, who was a soldier in that campaign – I obtained the book by Interlibrary Loan and read it.  In fact, Dr. Fischer, a military historian, commended General Sullivan for a “tactical victory.”  He rated General George Washington as leader of a “strategic failure.”

Why did Dr. Fischer, at first blush, seemingly condemn General Sullivan and his troops in the sub-title of the book?  Was it a deliberate statement?  Further research might be necessary, particularly to once again obtain the 1984 History doctoral dissertation at SUNY Buffalo describing the Sullivan massacres as an answer to the British and their Native allies (Mohawks and Senecas – ?) massacre of colonist villages.  This Paul Stevens dissertation (not referenced in Dr. Fischer’s book) describes General Sullivan’s disgust at the time he resigned his commission in person before General Washington*.

Another conclusion to be drawn might be recognition of a diplomatic victory on the part of General Washington, without jeopardizing a soldier’s (Dr. Fischer) compulsion to support a military victory.  I am no expert at all on military events.  As a lay person, I would say the only means of a strategic military victory in 1779 would have meant genocide.  Perhaps General Washington recognized this and worked to a diplomatic victory when the treaty was signed?  A diplomatic victory is NOT a failure, but perhaps a military man had a need to put it this way?  I speak gingerly regarding this issue as I acknowledge speculation on my part.

References

Fischer, J.R.  (1997).  A Well-executed failure:  The Sullivan Campaign against the Iroquois, July-September 1779.  Columbia, SC:  U. of South Carolina Press.

Stevens, P. L. (1984).  His Majesty’s “savage'” allies:  British policy and the northern Indians during the Revolutionary War–The Carleton Years, 1774-1778.  [Ph.D. Dissertation].  Buffalo, NY:  State University of New York at Buffalo.

Category:

Book Reviews, New Comments

Tagged with:

Hypothesis for “Where Have All the Leaders Gone?”

Mr. Iacocca, perhaps I am not wealthy enough to be allowed to make conclusions.  Perhaps I have not made it to the top of the heap, as others have done, so I am simply a stupid intellectual to be ignored.

Nevertheless, my recent reading of essays about the wealthiest persons in the world, Andrew Carnegie, I may have stumbled across the answer to the question you posed in your 2007 book, Where Have all the Leaders Gone?

Andrew Carnegie believed CEOs of corporations had to learn what work ethic is and that those who inherited wealth don’t know what true work ethic is.  Therefore, these people should not lead.  They become false models for those who work for them.   The problem of work ethics lies not in the workers, but in the leaders.

In order to fix this idea of “work ethic,” the late Kenneth Lay and other living  stupid leaders force the Ayn Rand “ethics” or “virtues” of selfishness and greed – espoused by Greenspan and Paul Ryan – upon employees like a communist leader or the pope, elders of Mormonism, and the late Jerry Falwell of the Southern Baptists (and other leaders)  claim there is “utopia” if people only follow one way of thinking.

There is no objection to the role greed and selfishness played in the rise of the poor son of Scottish Presbyterian immigrants, wealthy tycoon, Andrew Carnegie, to the accumulation of massive amounts of wealth (when considered for the days he lived).  There is no denying statements by 18th-century economist, Adam Smith, in the claim capitalism should be free of interference.  But to embrace ONLY these statements to validate Ayn Rand’s irrational thoughts about “virtues” or Barry Goldwater’s irrational statements about greed –  there is a virtue in NOT “compromise” – is absurd.

Mitt Romney admires Goldwater’s nonsense “virtues” and Paul Ryan admires Rand’s nonsense “virtues.”  Both fly in the face of one of the wealthiest men in the world.  Andrew Carnegie also believed the wealthy have a duty to society.

Mr. Carnegie lived at a time when unions had not been established, so he agreed with the others in his management cronies.  They were all against unions.  But his reasoning was based on the fact that HE insisted he never had any assistance (or so he claimed – and he is wrong) to earn his wealth.   A teacher had assistance from my mother, became wealthy and departed from the teaching profession, and then spurned my mother.  How many wealthy ones like him disavow the assistance they received from peons along the way?  Thus, it is right for unions to provide assistance to those who don’t have it.  The problem, as you point out in your book, Mr. Iacocca, is when unions become as unreasonable as the wealthy CEOs have also become.

Romney received help from Daddy.  Paul Ryan had an attorney as a father who likely made more money than teachers.  George W. Bush had assistance from his daddy and made a LOUSY leader (as pointed out in your book, Mr. Iacocca).  These are all lousy leaders who have inherited wealth.

Barack Obama worked his way up.  Joe Biden worked low-paying blue collar jobs as he worked his way to the top.  By Andrew Carnegie’s standards, the choice is clear.  Obama and Biden.

Perhaps there are some detected levels of imperfections in these two guys.  Perhaps the same can be said about Andrew Carnegie, too.  When these two guys “step on toes” of others – as Romney / Ryan do all the time – the roar of Fox Noise is deafening.  My bet is that Andrew Carnegie never had that kind of sabotage, but even if he did, his extreme wealth could shut it down immediately.

The problem lies in racism, too.  After all, who are the guys who have likely inherited the wealth today?  Stupid white men who carry a hidden objection to African Americans or Hispanics working their way to the top.  Deceptive men (and women?) who live in denial of their hidden racist attitudes.  And yes, there might be disappointed good white Anglos who are passed over, due to affirmative action.  But why do these idiots continue to vote for stupid white men like Bush, Romney, and Ryan, rather than work together with those who recognize the value of diversity?  Actually, I have heard African Americans, perhaps familiar with Andrew Carnegie’s success, who have spoken out against affirmative action, too.

Where have all the leaders gone, Mr. Iacocca?  Perhaps this blog provides some answers.  But who the hell am I?  Nothing but horse shit, don’t you know?

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Tagged with:

Letter to Jeff Jacoby, The Boston Globe

Dear Mr. Jacoby,

I came across your May 6, 2012, op-ed on the web:  “Thanks, Obama, but wealth is not theft.”
First of all, “those who peddle class resentment” are today’s wealthy 1%.  They pay less taxes than the wealthy did in the 1950s when the economy hummed along quite nicely.  American CEOs are the highest paid in the world and the gap between CEO and the lowest paid worker has increased astronomically.  Yet, when I was working in a corporation and executives respected management guru, Peter Drucker and CEO, Lee Iacocca, more than Ayn Rand, the Drucker idea about the gap between the highest paid CEO and the lowest paid worker was advocated.  It’s a much smaller gap than what we see today.  Business worked quite well under these circumstances and more people owned a piece of the American pie.  I refute your negativity towards working people and the 99% of America.
Philosophers might argue about what “piece of the pie” means.  The argument might be:  my statement presumes there is a limit to wealth.  I choose to think in terms of an infinite “pie.”  So nah nah nah nah nah nah… to all the detractors who wish to make an issue out of something and miss the point:  the small business merchant class has been destroyed in America, the same as what happened in Ancient China as that economy imploded due to austere measures.
Descendants of American individuals who once owned their own retail outlets and small farms are now forced to work for the big conglomerates with CEOs making 200 to 300 times what the lowest-paid worker makes.  What I am saying here is not an advocacy for socialism or communism, but a revelation of the facts that small farms which once provided enough finances for individual families have been destroyed by big agri-business with a few people at the top controlling the wealth and paying the descendants of small farmers peanuts while expenses within the economy – the things that block family “profits” or discretionary income – have risen astronomically when considering more than just the “government breadbasket” statistics which are out of whack.
Secondly.  Funny, but Romney and Ryan have created a platform in the Republican Party rife with fascist definitions of the family, but refuse to acknowledge the facts about family profits.  The pot is stirred up regarding envy and jealousy of those who make better five-figure salaries, while never recognizing the number of people who make six-, seven-, eight-, nine-, ten- or more figure salaries.  There is a definition that de-values work from teachers, but places great value on techies, accountants, and lawyers who make far more money doing things like – ambulance chasing, figuring tax deductions and how the wealthy can escape paying their fair share.  Teachers can loose their jobs while these others are a valued part of the economy?  Lawyers and tax accountants are sacred cows?  While the average family is told by the Republicans how morality is supposed to work and “if you make too much of a five-figure income” and just beginning to turn a profit, after many years of living paycheck to paycheck , you ain’t worth shit.
 
Mr. Jacoby, perhaps you need to consider there are gray areas, not just black and white.  For if you work from the premise there is only black and white – socialist or capitalist – then you can come to the conclusions you drew in May of this year.  BUt I challenge you to stop being stubbornly ignorant and consider the gray areas.  Consider the role President Obama plays in stimulating free-market capitalism which flies in the face of the McDonald’s, Wal-Marts, and Chick-fil-a’s, whose focus is about destroying competition (and those they disagree) than to compete with them on a level playing field.  McDonald’s vision years ago was to destroy the “mom and pop” restaurants.  The same is true today with Wal-Mart.  But in either case, you probably will not see such “vision” written down on paper. just deceptively implemented.  
 
Something I recently read about wealth and wealthy tycoon, Andrew Carnegie:  Andrew Carnegie condemned wealthy leaders who inherited their wealth.  Examples of Romney, Ryan, and the Bush family come to mind.  Apparently, he believed that those who inherited the wealth had no idea what it meant to WORK in order to EARN their wealth, so were not worthy of being “captains of industry.”  He believed those who worked hard, earned their money after many years of hard work, made better leaders because they know what it is like to EARN, rather than destroy competition and take from others.  Carnegie believed in being a giving person.    Those modeled after Carnegie’s ideas would be Barack Obama and Joe Biden.  Barack Obama was chastised in 2008 for “lack of experience.”  But such criticism, by Carnegie’s standards, was unwarranted.  And what do the Republicans do to those who have gained this wisdom after many years of experience and working their way up from little or nothing?  These hapless SOBs wish to put most of us “out to pasture” with little means of supporting ourselves.  Just when we “begin to turn a profit,” the rug is pulled out from beneath us by wealthy people claiming “there is not enough of the American pie to go around.”  As I said, it’s an infinite pie which the 1% wish to claim is finite.  
 
There are numerous statements from some wealthy people who preceded the jackass wealthy of the 21st Century which berate the attitude of the Ayn Rand followers.  What is unbelievable is that those who embrace the Ayn Rand attitude act like communists who took power in Europe in the 20th Century.  They believe utopia is found when everyone believes the same thing as these wealthy ones believe (this is called fascism) and wish to rip apart everything from the past, as if it was always a failure – except some perceived idea of perfect morality which existed in the past (a fantasy).  America became a great nation, due to attitudes from Adam Smith, Andrew Carnegie, and “trust buster,” Teddy Roosevelt (conservationist, too).   These attitudes  conflict with those of Ayn Rand and others.  
 
America became a great nation due to religious leaders like Dr. Norman Vincent Peale and the “power of positive thinking” which would have negated the focus and generation of extremist attitudes towards minor negative aspects of ObamaCare.  This negativity generated by big business ignores many of the positives about ObamaCare.    
 
Dr. Peale’s “positive thinking” flies in the face of conservative religious dogma generated by the pope, elders in Salt Lake City, Liberty U. (and the Southern Baptists) in Virginia (and Dixie), and Billy and Franklin Graham, among other televangelists.  Original blessings is really what Jesus Christ endorsed, not the concept of original sin.  Original sin is a doctrine from a church of men.  The pope and others do not like this Dr. Peale positive attitude, so, as conservative Republicans wish, the pope and others wish to destroy those who endorse original blessings.  The pope has already done so by excommunicating a priest who endorses original blessings.  To the pope, elders, and deacons of narrow-focused dogmatic churches, I say:  “Seek wisdom, not certainty.”  
 
Mr. Jacoby, there ARE gray areas, not just the black and white defined by narrow-focused religions and their goons in business leadership.  

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Tagged with:

Humble Pie or Truth be Hiding – by Deceptive People?

Humility is tough when eating crow.  But do I eat crow and acknowledge a mistake?  Or is there another answer?

Andrew Carnegie.  In my brief look at Andrew Carnegie’s life, I am impressed.  His Scottish-Presbyterian background places him in a better position than the Koch brothers or other super-wealthy today because, at the very least, he believed in Christian principles.  Yes, he was against unions during the time of the robber barons and formation of trade unions in the USA.  But did he actually state his opposition to unions or go along with “management ID” and “management groupthink” of his day?  Unions were perhaps untested in his day, so did this influence Carnegie’s thinking.

The problem with the web today – and I am just as guilty – is the Vannevar Bush syndrome of “hypertext.”  When I read something on the web, I place it in my brain and often forget to document it.  This is a problem for which perhaps causes me to eat humble pie.  Or does it?

I recall reading a quote attributed to Andrew Carnegie.  It went in one of two ways:  “Wealth is created by society, not individuals.”  The other way:  “Wealth is not created by individuals, but by society.”  This quote was either in an op-ed in a newspaper like The Palm Beach Post or it was on the Internet.  It was most likely in the newspaper.  Nevertheless, the Internet has become so pervasive that one can typically find the quote again later.

What has happened is this.  I have quoted this from the piece of paper where I wrote the UNDOCUMENTED quote down.  In other words, I wrote the quote attributed to Andrew Carnegie, but not the source of the quote.  I have quoted this piece of information several times on my blog.  Now I attempt to locate this quote as associated with Andrew Carnegie and the only place this is to be found on Google is the three times I have included it in my blog.

What gives here?

In doing research of this question, I have reviewed numerous writings by Andrew Carnegie himself (http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/rbannis1/AIH19th/Carnegie.html, June 1889) and others:  (1) well-referenced article by Nicole Notario (http://learningtogive.org/papers/paper80.html) for a graduate research paper; (2) a Fordham U. essay (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1889carnegie.asp); and various others.  One might conclude from this material (and others) that Carnegie might have made such a statement.  But an actual attribution would take further research.

I am puzzled who wrote this quote and claimed attribution to Andrew Carnegie.  I did not dream this up on my own.  I did not just write this down out of thin air because, at the time, I barely knew diddley squat about this man, except to recall a library at my alma mater, Syracuse University, named after Carnegie and an entire university in Pittsburgh bearing his name.  QUite frankly, having a library named after this man placed him in high regard.  So when I read a supposed quote attributed to him, I took it very seriously.

I am not an idealogue, so I would have had no presumptions or biases.  I found it fascinating that a wealthy tycoon of the late 1800s would make such a statement.

I have also read (and again, perhaps I need to document this) that Carnegie sold his steel companies to a ruthless man named J.P. Morgan in order to devote his time to philanthropic measures.  It was J.P. Morgan (now part of the name of one of the largest banks – one which has screwed consumers with regard to mortgage loans) who gave Franklin D. Roosevelt a hard time, as the Koch Brothers do today to Barack Obama.  It was J.P. Morgan who purportedly (unproven, just word of mouth to me) had his servants cut out pictures and stories of FDR from the morning newspaper each day – before Morgan sat down to read it.  Sounds like the fans of Fox Noise – “don’t tell me anything else but what Fox Noise says.”

Nevertheless, perhaps it was Morgan who was more anti-union than Carnegie?   A hypothetical question.

Ayn Rand has ruined this nation by creating a strong groupthink of selfishness and greed via a fantasy tale.  The visual Media, in particular, has grabbed this extreme fascination with greed and selfishness which causes materialism among the people.  Madison Avenue is a shameful group of hyenas who lack any human qualities whatsoever, as they endorse the principles of greed and selfishness, clouding the picture of what true capitalism, as defined by men like Adam Smith, Andrew Carnegie, Teddy Roosevelt, and others had to say about it.  Jeff Jacoby’s op-ed this past May in the Boston Globe is a tribute to the stupidity of people who view the world only in black and white.  These people say, “either President Obama is a socialist or capitalist, but never can anyone be in the gray areas between and call themselves problem-solvers.”  Like narrow-focused religions – Roman Catholic and Mormons, for instance, there can be no consideration of “gray” areas.

Nevertheless, if I am wrong in attributing this quote about individuals, society, and wealth, then I stand corrected.  However, my admission that I am wrong is more than what egomaniacs in the wealthy class would be willing to do as they hide their money overseas and refuse to divulge their tax information.

BTW.  My scathing remarks about specific religious denominations should not be taken personally, except perhaps those who are hypocrites within those churches.  Perhaps they feel guilty, so therefore take it personally.  But then, imagine the berating my own denomination took in 2008, at the brief glimpse of statements made by ONE of the myriad pastors and clerics within my church.  Double standards in America which remove my liberty and freedom – and the separation of church and state.  Are we afraid to speak about the Christian beliefs of Adam Smith and Andrew Carnegie because such Presbyterian beliefs go against the grain of the dogma and doctrines of huge hierarchically-based churches with strong dictatorial leadership?

Is it humble pie for me or the truth being hidden – by deceptive people … no… deceptive egomaniacs – who seek power and control first,  before reasoning and rationality?  I would like to know.

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Tagged with:

Self-righteous Right Wing Fascists in America Today

From the Guideposts daily thoughts:

“If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14”

Learning takes place when people are humble.  Self-righteous people who believe there is only one way to solve a problem are not humble.  This passage does not advocate legislating morality, yet that is what fascist right wing people advocate, proclaiming somehow their “rights” are being trampled should they not be allowed to tell everyone how to live their lives.

Ayn Rand was a wicked person.  She advocates for individual greed and selfishness.  A person cannot be humble when they are greedy and selfish, seeking only what is best for his / her self.  Such people lacking humility remain stubbornly ignorant, never listening to the other side and making an attempt to learn something different from the “traditionalist” stuff which often has been proven NOT to work.  Diana Butler Bass said, “seek traditions, not traditionalism.”

Yet, Libertarians and a man named Paul Ryan worship Ayn Rand and nixes ideas about seeking solutions which would be good for society.  Allen West, lacking humility and remaining stubbornly ignorant, attacks those who don’t agree with him as being “communists.”  Yet Ryan and West attempt to call themselves “Christians” and attract a whole bunch of people who wish to legislate morality – in supposed “Christian” churches.  Dale Carnegie:

“Carnegie held that societal progress relied on individuals meeting their moral obligations to themselves and to society.[63] Thus, he believed real charity supplied the means for those who wish to help themselves, achieve their goals.[64] Moreover, Carnegie urged other wealthy people to contributed to society in the form of parks, works of art, libraries and other endeavors that improved the community, and contributed to the “lasting good”[65] Carnegie also held a strong opinion against inherited wealth. Carnegie believed that the sons of prosperous businesspersons were rarely as talented as their fathers.[66] By leaving large sums of money to their children, wealthy business leaders were wasting resources that could be used to benefit society. Most notably, Carnegie believed that the future leaders of society would rise from the ranks the poor.[67] Carnegie strongly believed in this because he had risen from the bottom. He believed the poor possessed an advantage over the wealthy due to their receiving more attention from their parents, and were taught better work ethics.”[68]

This is quoted from Wikipedia and links to the particular references are included.  Did Romney and Ryan come up from the bottom?  Neither one of them knew what it was like to be blue collar and actually labor for a living.  They have no idea.  They are both elitist snots.  Barack Obama and Joe Biden did work their way up from the bottom.

I recall Anne Richards’s speech at the 1992 Democratic Party convention which nominated Bill Clinton for president.  The words ring true with one of the most wealthy this nation has ever seen:  “Poor George, born with a silver spoon in his mouth.”  Shrub, with the silver spoon and fake way, did not know how to lead.

Taxing the wealthiest portion of America when that part of America refuses to invest in its own nation and puts money and jobs overseas is NOT a wrong thing to do, according to Carnegie’s standards.

When there is something these elitist right wing fascists don’t like, they take the minor parts of such ideas and blow these parts up out of proportion to what is good about such issues.  Take ObamaCare.  I have seen reports which equally discuss the good, bad, and ugly with regard to the plan.  But to listen to the mainstream Media, particularly Fox, all discussions focus on the parts which some people might find offensive, but do not truly have the knowledge (and thus the wisdom) to really understand.  Crony capitalism makes judgments based solely on their wealth, not on the good of society.  Diana Butler Bass:  “Seek wisdom, not certainty.”

Right wing fascists expect perfection, especially from those who don’t agree with them.  Yet, they are not humble enough to realize that the hand with the finger they point in judgment at another person also has three pointing back at themselves and the thumb is thumbing God.  “Judge not lest you be judged.”  Diana Butler Bass:  “Seek to practice, not purity.”

References

Andrew Carnegie (2012).  Wikipedia.  Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Carnegie [63], [64], [65], [66], [67], [68].

Bass, Diana Butler.  (2006).  Christianity for the rest of us : how the neighborhood church is revitalizing the faith.  San Francisco:  Harper.

Daily scripture & reflection newsletter.   (2012, Oct. 27).   OurPrayer daily newsletter (Guideposts) [Email distribution].  ourprayer@email.ourprayer.org

Category:

Commentary, New Comments

Tagged with:

Allen West Lost His Rights When he Hurled False Label of Communist

When Allen West falsely accused his colleagues in Congress of being “communist,” the man lost his rights to be a representative in our Federal government.  Just as justices finally struck down Jim Crow laws, those who supported hateful measures such as Jim Crow Laws lost their rights.  Hate is not an opinion.  We don’t have a right to wrongly label people “communist” when they are not.  Allen West has no right to represent ALL the people in his district because he is a hateful man unwilling to consider the opinions of others who might not agree with him.  His actions truly do represent fascism.

I am a problem-solver.  I tend to find capitalism a better economic system.  I don’t like communism at all, especially the type implemented in the former Soviet Union, Communist China, and Cuba.  I don’t like the type of overwhelming socialism which squelches capitalism.  Yet, when the demand-side of a market is a perpetual one with people ALWAYS having a need – such as healthcare – capitalism does not work as well.  Paranoid Nixon implemented a healthcare insurance system based on huge corporate conglomerate monopolies.  He was afraid of communism and socialism.  Yet his solution was the worst possible capitalist solution which could have been dreamed up because inevitably large monopolies become nothing more than the huge centralized bureaucracies which existed in the former Soviet Union.  If Allen West would come to understand this, rather than acting like a bastard and a jerk, he would garner more respect.  But I have absolutely no respect for the man, no more than I respect the white men who imposed Jim Crow on HIS people.

Healthcare ALWAYS has a demand.  The products sold at Wal-Mart and other retail outlets may not always have a demand.  Even with food, I have food I have grown myself sitting in my freezer, so I could find a way to survive for some time, if necessary.  But we are not able to always create healthcare for us.  There is a perpetual demand.  An insurance monopoly, always having a demand, can set prices  on the supply-side to whatever it wishes.  It’s not about what the market will bear – as in retail, but about how much insurance monopolies can scalp us all.  Allen West and others don’t get it, even when many of us speak in terms of CAPITALISM.

ObamaCare proposes measures to create smaller competitive businesses pooled together.  They have not all been put in place.  Some might figure it may not go far enough, while others wish to disband it entirely.  If it does not go far enough, the answer is to tweak it and make it better, not suspend it entirely.  There are too many good things which are part of the plan.  Republicans are simply stupid in not considering these other aspects and shutting many of us down by calling us “communists.”  The only “communists” are paranoid ones like Nixon who stupidly invoked monopolistic practices.  Stupid ones like Reagan who MANDATED hospital ERs take care of poor people.  Between monopolies which raise costs at whim and the expensive costs forced upon hospitals, American healthcare is too damned expensive.

At the university where West’s wife sits on the Board, I was a student of music.  I made a class presentation which discussed the alliance between government and private interests in supporting the arts.  I neglected to condemn people like Jesse Helms, but I felt like it.  This other student in that classroom called me a “communist.”

Like I said, I am a problem-solver, not an idealogue.  Fascism is not an ideology, but a form of politics which believes there is only one solution.  As a problem-solver, I stand in direct conflict with fascists because they believe there is only one solution.  I am in direct contrast of the student in the class who mis-labeled me a “communist.”  I am in direct contrast to Allen West and insulted when he called Ron Klein a “communist.”

Allen West does not deserve to be re-elected to Congress.

Category:

Commentary

Tagged with:

About Being Gay and the Nasty Politics / Religion Today

Recently, a “bishop” told congregants of some church that those who vote for Barack Obama are “going to hell.”  There are many churches with bishops.  The Roman and Anglican (Episcopal) and the United Methodist (once called the Methodist Episcopal) all have bishops.

Let’s take note that sane religious groups do not make such statements.  But if we did, we certainly have plenty of reason to say, “don’t vote for Romney / Ryan or you will go to hell.”  The biggest reason is Paul Ryan, but there are plenty of reasons why Mitt Romney is evil.

Let’s take Mitt Romney.  He bullied gay people when in high school.  You like that kind of man for president?  A bully?  You do, huh?  You like that?  How about if I, as a gay man, bullied YOU because you, as a man, have sex with a woman – out of wedlock?  How about if I bullied YOU for not taking responsibility for your actions and just freely having sex with the “one who you are with?”  HOW ABOUT THAT? Why don’t I bully people like that?  Because of Jesus Christ.  Jesus Christ taught us to love our neighbor.  Jesus Christ taught us to do to one another as we would have done to ourselves.  I don’t know about you who actually bother to read this post, but I would not bully myself, so why would I bully another person?

Then there is Paul Ryan.  His worship of Ayn Rand makes him very evil.  At least those Roman Catholics who accept gay people are following the words of Christ:  love your neighbor and do unto others as you would have them do to you.  The pope rejects the true Christians, but would accept a congregant who follows the words … no WORSHIPS … an atheist anarchist who believes no one should take responsibility for his/he actions?  How can Paul Ryan have any conscience and attend a Roman Catholic Church?  How can the pope accept such a person, but would deny John Kerry the sacraments because he supports gay people?  John Kerry practices the true Christian religious beliefs.  Paul Ryan and countless other HYPOCRITES are evil creatures doing the will of the beast whose name is created by adding a “d” to the word “evil.”

Barack Obama does not go around ADVOCATING abortion, but accepts the fact that women have a choice.  Ayn  Rand ADVOCATED abortions.  Do people even realize this as they go to the polls in America?

But it’s being gay which impacts me.  My freedom and liberty could be curtailed, should a Republican administration take charge.  Does anyone even care enough to consider this?  I am a RESPONSIBLE gay man, unlike the homosexuality promoted by Ayn Rand – “do your own thing and don’t give a damn about those around you.”  “Love the one you’re with,” according to Ayn Rand.

Here I have spent a lifetime being careful to take responsibility for my actions.  And due to a stupid Jewish woman – an atheist – her followers could really bully me by using churches and universities like Palm Beach Atlantic U. to do their dirty work.  These irresponsible people who promote anarchy USE a bishop to tell his congregants to be self-righteous and judge a good man who has worked hard for the Middle Class for four years now.  Stupid suckers in America who buy this crap from a bunch of paranoid losers fearful that they might be gay.

It matters not that I have had to endure those who FORCE me, using the fear of societal “traditions,” into heterosexual relationships when I truly was always gay.  So, Mr. Rick Santorum, the devil himself, how did YOU lose your freedom and liberty?  Who removed that from you, … you SOB?  Who did that to you?  And the owner of Chick-fil-a… who removed YOUR freedom and liberty?  Did someone FORCE either of you bastards to marry someone of the same sex?  Sorry to use such strong language, but if the truth were known, I wonder what these guys say under their breath about people like me?

Paul Ryan and Rick Santorum (and others) are paranoid losers propped up by a Nazi pope.  PERIOD.  And what did Jesus Christ have to say – FORCEFULLY – about HYPOCRITES?  Maybe you should read your Bibles, Mr. Romney the bully and Mr. Paul Ryan and Mr. Rick Santorum.  And I have a suggestion.  Don’t rely on “traditions” and THEN go to the Bible to dredge up your stinko stuff.  That’s called proof texting.

Romney is a paranoid bullying loser propped up by the money extracted from the members of his faith – as the elders in Salt Lake City command.

Where, Mr. George H.W. Bush, in the supposed “liberal” mainstream Media, do we hear what I just said?  NO WHERE.  Screw your “new world order,” Mr. Bush … and Mr. Romney.  Screw your “kinder, gentler nation” horse shit, Mr. George H.W. Bush.  HYPOCRITES – as Jesus Christ said.

All of you have a hidden agenda.  Push gay people back into the closet or into drag.  I despise drag and I don’t wish to be pushed back into a closet.  There are gay people who might like drag, too.  Let them like it. That is the freedom we are SUPPOSED to have in the USA, but which the witches of the right wing wish to deny us.

Consider this.  There are many of us who truly are gay and are gay for many reasons, some of which consist of physical things like genetics and hormones and such.  But the reason for being gay is not limited to physical reasons, either.  But are there gay Ayn Rand worshipers who also maintain a hidden agenda?  Are there gay people who pretend to be gay in order to NOT take responsibility for ones self in society and make loads of money?  After all, with no kids to raise, a gay man can become filthy rich, don’t you know?

And that is the irony of the platform of the Republican Party.  The position of that evil party is to trash gay people who are responsible, in favor of the Ayn Rand type of gay man or woman.  Trash the ones who are responsible, then use an iron-fisted approach to those who insist on being outside the closet.  Deny these responsible people finances and jobs and healthcare and retirement, don’t you know?

The gay couple who wishes to adopt a child from overseas.  Trash them because they don’t fit the “traditional” definition of a family.  But the promiscuous ones?  Well… just don’t do it in front of us – same with you promiscuous heteros… just keep it quiet … and DON’T GET CAUGHT… or else!  LOL!  Shallowness! LOL!

The gay couple who wishes to live a private life in a committed relationship, rather than cruise the streets and bars.  Trash them, too.  But the ones who get their jollies from multiple partners – either hetero OR homo… why… just let them do their thing – the Ayn Rand way… go down low… with multiple partners…. be irresponsible, but … OH!  don’t get caught doing it.  And LOL!  Shallow laugh!

Jesus Christ:  “Satan is the father of the lie.”  Jesus Christ:  violent reaction against DECEPTIVE business people bilking the masses as they went to the synagogue.

Ayn Rand encourages promiscuity.  Domestic partner and marriage / civil union laws acknowledge what Jesus Christ said.  Ordination of gay clerics allows the ministering to those who are being responsible in committed relationships and having to face the horse shit of bullies like Romney – who apparently has Romnesia.

And yes, I may not be an executive like Lee Iacocca who published the words I just used.  But I am no different from someone who has money – and don’t you forget it.  Position does not give more rights to do something that others cannot do – and that includes the elevated position some people give the representative of Satan himself – the pope in Vatican City… or the elders in Salt Lake City.  If you are a bully, you are a bully, Mitt Romney.  It matters not how much goddamn money you have, Mittney, when you use if for evil purposes – like ship jobs overseas.

Ayn Rand followers promote promiscuity, whether it be in the heterosexual or homosexual communities.  These are shallow people who lack compassion for their fellow human beings.  “Down low” deceptiveness is okay, but not committed relationships and responsible families, regardless of sexual identity.  They sucker in those of institutions like Palm Beach Atlantic University and other institutions promoting the destruction of gay people.  Even those of us who are AGAINST abortion, but believe legislation of morality, a failure for centuries, is NOT the approach to use.

Nasty politics from nasty people who lack compassion.  These people promote a vicious form of capitalism called crony fascist capitalism – based on Ayn Rand and Libertarian evil beliefs.  I prefer the type of capitalism NOT modeled after Vatican City and Salt Lake City.  I prefer democracy and democratic capitalism which consists of free market capitalism and nixes the huge corporate conglomerate monopolies which don’t compete, but destroy their competition.  I prefer the model of capitalism of the ‘trust buster” and Republican who ran for president exactly 100 years ago – Teddy Roosevelt.  Teddy Roosevelt and Nelson Rockefeller and Jacob Javitz were all better Republicans than the lot we have today which consist of evil people.

And that is the problem with the paranoid Taft family of Ohio.  That election of 1912 split the Republican Party in half.  Teddy Roosevelt had more people who believed his PROGRESSIVE REPUBLICAN way, but nasty right wing Howard Taft – with the smallest numbers – insisted in being right.  Think about it.  Where is the Taft family of Ohio today?  What impact did that family have on the 2004 election?  Think about it.  Where are the Teddy Roosevelt folks today?  I’ll tell you.  They are being brushed aside by nasty Republican fascists today.

The ones who deserve respect are the responsible gay people today, not the Ayn Rand irresponsible ones.  But nasty politics brush good people aside – as the nasty politics destroy good RESPONSIBLE people, too.  The people who have actually worked hard to EARN their money, rather than take from others.

 

Category:

Commentary

Tagged with:

I Support President Obama and the Democrats

I support our leader, President Barack Obama.  I support most of the ideals of the Democratic Party.

I find the Republican Party message to be offensive and fascist.  It’s a message from a bunch of people unwilling to negotiate, whether those negotiations take place across the aisles in Congress, at a collective bargaining negotiation session, or at the diplomatic negotiating sessions in the Middle East.

I am against handouts, so therefore find some of what Democrats support to be offensive. But it’s far better than what I hear on the Republican side, particularly the narrow vision of the Republicans with regard to civil rights and related social issues.

I would prefer to see a Federal agency like the WPA replace unemployment benefits.  I would prefer to see the military spend some of its money on “defense” projects such as our American infrastructure which, when could reverse crumbling infrastructure such as dams and levies (to name a few) which leave us vulnerable in some situations.  The Army Corps of Engineers, for instance, could handle such projects.  I would prefer a mandatory 2-year military service time for all American youth and part of that could be work on infrastructure projects.

I would prefer such projects provide enough money to feed those who are involved in them.

But I have heard no such proposals from EITHER of the political parties.  Nevertheless, based on historical facts about the impact of these two political parties, I choose the Democrats.

I don’t make my decision based on a candidate’s personality, although there are times when that does make a difference.

I don’t make my decision based solely on the person, but I make my decision based on the people who surround the person.  There are racist and bigoted goons surrounding Romney and Ryan.  I don’t like hateful, mean-spirited people and recognize that a vote for Romney / Ryan provides ammunition and power to such goons.

I also recognize that we are human beings and at times need to recognize that President Obama is not perfect.  I need to reduce the expectation of perfection.  My apologies to the president for comments I made on this blog  a year or so ago.  But it is tough, at times, to deal with what is heard coming from the fat negative putrid mouths of many of the president’s detractors.  I do remain consistent in attacking such negativity and false commentary.

Category:

Commentary

Tagged with:

Billboards of Lies

Not long ago, traveling north on I-95 near Boca Raton, I viewed a billboard with the words, “Barack Obama supports abortion.”

Now it’s the president’s business to file charges of libel.  But if my name were attached to that – and I have faced such a situation from a judgmental person who calls herself a “Christian” – I would be filing charges of libel.

I am against abortion, but I am also pro-choice.  I would work to encourage, if at all possible, someone whom I loved NOT to get an abortion.  I would frown upon anyone who uses abortion as a means of contraception.  Such a move shows a lack of responsibility.

But when it comes down to it, the choice of an abortion resides with the woman carrying the fetus.  I would also argue that the male who was involved in the action should have a say in the decision as well.  But the ultimate decision is the female carrying the fetus.

I support abortion in cases of rape and I don’t want to change the definition of rape – as does Allen West.

In 1901, the world lost my great-grandmother, Angeline MacLennon Eldridge, and her unborn child in pregnancy.  I have thought about this:  what if abortions DID exist in those days?  Would my great-grandmother been enabled to make a decision which would have saved HER life and allowed her to continue to have OTHER babies?  The anti-abortion advertisements about the loss of a child on a swing set is just as effective when considering the loss of life of mother AND baby, when abortions were illegal.

I believe in a positive world working to increase knowledge about being responsible, not a negative world which chooses to criminalize young women.  A negative world helps create an abortion black market which lacks hygiene, leading to the death of young females who might, at one point, forget the need to take responsibility.  And even then, we need to recognize that we are imperfect human beings with hormones raging at a young age.  We need to effectively come to grips with this situation, rather than invoking boneheaded criminalization solutions to deal with something called … HUMANS.

We are not “economic units,” as the character, Harvey Nigel Bains, says on the Britcom, Waiting for God… “We the people…”  Stop the lies, particularly those lies about President Obama and the lies on billboards purchased by high-powered people who thrive on deception and lying.

Category:

Commentary

Tagged with:

Tag Cloud