Monthly Archives: January 2017

Oh, Ye Gentle, Benevolent Liberals

[Holy moly, I didn’t realize how seldom I post things political. I didn’t even have a politics category to choose from. I hate politics as a discussion. I’ve never seen a single mind changed – ever. Funny that. I changed 99% of my entire fundamental philosophy from Objectivism to near 100% Catholicism in 3 years – yet a lefty is a lefty and a righty is a righty.]

As some may have guessed, I am far from a liberal, a progressive or a leftist, and as far also removed from what is called a Democrat. I prefer the tag “reality-bound.” Meaning I am in it, and you ain’t.

Anyway I posted this over at Mr. Wright’s site as a comment and thought it would be a great means to chase away most of my remaining readers.

Ha ha ha.

It’s a ways done in a quote box after some more comments.

It is about the double standard that exists for the left (or, as Thomas Sowell calls them, the self-annointed ones) versus for the right. This was just a comment I left and not an exhaustive essay. There are countless variations that play out everyday and I chose the ones that stand out most poignantly in my mind.

Probably the most significant one is the difference in reaction (vulgar and abusive language coming – you were warned) between the most powerful man in the world at the time (Bill Clinton) jamming a cigar into a young, impressionable woman’s pussy – and a presidential candidate caught making “guy talk” a decade prior about “grabbing pussy.”

There was no liberal outcry over Clinton’s abuse of a young woman (nor the Clinton’s subsequent attempts, mostly successful, to drag her down and destroy her) in the OVAL OFFICE by the left at all. In fact, they spent their time, not only defending Clinton, but in going after the Republicans for making a “big deal” of it. As if it were nothing.

One wonders if the leader of the free world hadn’t had his mind on so much twat instead of global threats like, say, terrorism, whether we’d be in a better position now. He could have done something. Democrats can always do anything.

Anyway, if it shines light on the scene for you, you are welcome and God bless. If not – FUCK OFF! HA! Psych! Just kidding. Obviously if it does not for you, I really won’t know why, so God bless.

The Democrats have always got away with whatever they pleased. They entered us into 4 of the 5 major wars in the 20th century (two of them disastrous for us) and yet people think Republican = war monger/military-industrial-complex baloney. To be a liberal, a progressive, a Democrat is to be for peace.

Democrat abuses young woman in Oval Office – no reaction – Republicans poo-pooed for making “a stink” about it. Republican presidential candidate heard on tape in 2005 talking “guy talk” about women crassly (a conversation everyone knows old Billy could have participated in and beat them all at). BIG FUSS.

Obama’s six month moratorium on Iraqi refugees (it has been officially renamed “a slow down” along with a number of other re-characterizations that are not differences in kind from Trump’s order) is not even noticed. I had never heard of it. Why would anyone report it? If they did, it was a real small story. Why? Because it was a move by the benevolent leader, his motives were pure. Trump’s motives are automatically, no matter context, or facts or anything are from hate – that is the starting axiom.

If anyone is unfamiliar with this case and the scary circumstance that caused it, read this: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda-kentucky-us-dozens-terrorists-country-refugees/story?id=20931131

Obama, being a lefty would never have to answer for something like this from the article.

One Iraqi who had aided American troops was assassinated before his refugee application could be processed, because of the immigration delays, two U.S. officials said.

One wonders what senator Cory Booker had to say about that since he says of Trump’s order supposedly denying entry to people who have helped the US armed forces “… a crime and a sin.”

We all know the answer – nothing. He said nothing at all.

As to the two terrorists that were found in Kentucky through our vetting process:

Last year, a Department of Homeland Security senior intelligence official testified in a House hearing that Alwan and Hammadi’s names and fingerprints were checked by the FBI, DHS and the Defense Department during the vetting process in 2009 and “came in clean.”

One wonders. What improvements could they or have they made to the vetting process since that time?

The list of lies and double standards is mind boggling.

And, if no one noticed the latest in double standards. Did anyone note how swiftly, instantaneously, the label of “terrorist attack” was applied to the lone gunman shooting of the Quebec mosque? All leaders, all news outlets “terrorism!” You can’t strangle that word out of people’s mouths when it is non-Muslims killed. 49 killed in Orlando nightclub. “Officials are still investigating whether or not….” San Bernardino, “Police are looking into a motive and possible…” Fort Hood, “Officials won’t say…” And then you wait a couple days and people have forgotten and you go about your way.

Even when we get their names (you can win money betting on the name Muhammad!) letters, communications with terror organizations it is like pulling teeth to get them to say the word. Muslims, traced directly to ISIS training, screaming “Abu Akkbar!” and gunning down everyone at St. Patrick’s Cathedral would warrant five weeks of “Officials are still unclear about a motive…”

Ug, the f of it all.

Advertisements

It is Time

Gather around, brothers, sisters. The campfire is grown now and mature, she will burn through the middle of her life for a time and keep us warm. It is time to get back to it.

To writing.

20161201_204136

The last time I wrote was January 21st 2015. And then I had that catastrophic idea of going into medical coding.

Still haven’t found work in that area. They do not like newcomers in that field. I might never. But, and pardon my French – fuck it – I gotta write. Over two years with not even the time to think about wanting to write. Nothing.

I fear, like a person who finds an ominous lump in the wrong place on their body (but mine would be the anti-lump, a hole, a void where flesh should be) that I may have lost what I had. Like the last two years twisted me as though through some twisted form of baptism, from poet (at least in heart, I can be quite hideous in my use of language) to logician.

But there is nothing for but to dive – not step! DIVE! with thy whole body! – back into that river and lose self to its churning flow. And to see whether I still have the scales to survive or to be torn apart by my rigidity.

It is really too bad that I had to decide such a course at the time that I did.I had just started to produce sentences, and even paragraphs, son, that I felt good about. The lack of a desire for a match tells me the prose is good. Good, at least, enough for me.

I’m still going to go the typewriter route for the first draft stuff. I did a self-taught touch typing course last month and got myself up to 49 words a minute. I imagine I can attain 60 when I am actually looking at the paper! I just can’t do it on the computer. The thing is a distraction machine.

Hold it, is that the color I want to use? Let’s Google a red color palette so we can peg the exact hue we want! Yes! Right now! I couldn’t possibly write another line without this knowledge!

Two hours later I’m checking out yurts in northern Arizona.

However such meanderings have their place in dreamland where you wander wherever ye may. And so I do not have a problem with throwing together ideas and rough outlines on the computer. In fact, with this program:

scrivener

it is optimum.

I had, before the school debacle, thought of pursuing a degree in theology. It is my humble opinion that there are more answers about man and the world to be found in theology than in modern “wisdom” or even in science. Note, that is a very limited statement referring to ultimate ends and aims and morality. Obviously theology will not inform you on how the eye works, nor on its physiology, that belongs to science. But theology will answer many of the very crucial questions that science can say nothing about.

That would be a discussion unto itself, I merely state my motivating factor and go about my way. But I had been thinking about an AA in Catholic Studies from Catholic Distance University. Two years later and I’m thinking about my approach to my 50’s. Damn me, I’m thinking cash value nowadays.

I have many things to repent.

There is a backlog of projects stored in Scrivener I haven’t looked at in over two years. That, my friends, if you don’t already know, is like going into an old family chest, the contents of which you only vaguely remember and you are not the same person you were when you first engaged these objects. Or maybe the photo album analogy is better?

If any of you play a music instrument then you know the feeling. Sometimes I get to play my guitar a couple times a week and I can get rather stale. But stay away from it for a few weeks and suddenly I’m riffing and chording from a whole new perspective.

Anyway, I am looking forward to opening the chest and looking forward to going back to Elfland, to my imagination. Lot’s of friends there.


The Summa, Archipelago, The Devil is Dead

mte1oda0otcxntqxnji4ndi5

I am trying to get further into my catechism class, although January has been a bitch to get things started. One of the problems is the lengthy portions of the Thomas’ Summa you have to go through.

It is not that the sections of the Summa are necessarily difficult (although you do have to keep aware of the structure of his arguments, if you let your focus lapse you’ll get lost), but most of the points raised would never have occured to me. For instance I am on the baptism of Christ and John the Baptist. In the related Summa reading material there are questions (articles) that are stated thusly: Should He have been baptized with the baptism of John? Was that dove a real animal? Whether those who had been baptized with John’s baptism had to be baptized with the baptism of Christ? Was it right for him to be baptized when he was (at 30 instead of as a baby)? Etc, etc.

Now, I suppose that by the 13th century these questions had not only all been brought up a number of times, but were probably argued over a great deal. But, to be truthful, I have read the Gospels, and most of these questions never occured to me. Of course I can’t expect myself to ask the questions accumulated by over a millennia of men. I am just not creative enough to have thought to ask: Was that dove a real animal?

It is not a bad question. Is the wafer really the body of Christ? Is it really, or is it only symbolically and is really only a wafer?

In order to not simply fall asleep, I have to, before I tackle his argument, recognize some significance to the question being raised. Sometimes the objections will provide it, sometimes the replies. But sometimes I have to sit there and ask: what difference does it make?

Also, they sometimes have you read sections from the Baltimore Catechism which is literalist in a lot of places. For instance:

Q. 345. How many years passed from the time Adam sinned till the time the Redeemer came?

A. About 4,000 years passed from the time Adam sinned till the time the Redeemer came.

Eh, are we sure about that one? I would rather have a larger number range. How about sometime between 4,000 and 50,000? Do we really want to say specifically when man was first man? Man to be the first man in the Bible? Man to be responsible for sin before the sight of God? If we are going to take some parts of Genesis as non-literal, then I also think it wise to make all time measurements in the loosest possible sense.

19376473

So, I finished Archipelago last week. What can I say? It’s Lafferty! It is hard to say anything definitive about the story although the thesis of it is contained in a letter from Mr. X to Absalom Stein:

“There is Pride in all of us, Absalom, and it must be broken. We all come to the passions and are shaken by it; Finnegan who goes to his many deaths; Casey who was dead and lives again; Hans and Henry who were born to balanced power and will both be broken to gibbering weakness before they die; Duffy who must find Him who is more than Melchisedech; Vincent who made peace with the world and will find that the world will not keep it; Dotty herself, and the Urchin, and Margaret the bonfire.”

Archipelago ends in a shoot out and Finnegan and Dotty (was it Dotty?) laying shot on the ground but their fates undecided. The Devil is Dead, presumably, picks up at an earlier time in Finnegan’s journeys. Although this is Lafferty, we cannot be sure if his journey in The Devil is Dead is before he was shot, after, concurrent, or even post-mortem.

The easiest character line to follow in the series (such a word to use for these works) is Finnegan. Finnegan, says Mr. X goes to his many deaths, and that we all come to the passions and are shaken by it. Finnegan is a vagabond drunk. His line is easy to see… for the moment. The others are harder to see. But they may get their time to line their paths plainly in the sand for us to see.

The Devil is Dead, so far, is a much more straight ahead piece of work; whereas Archipelago is very much like its name if you consider each character an island. After the surprise ending of Archipelago, we find Finnegan in a black-out state entangled with a group of people and a situation he has to figure out. He soon ends up on a voyage on the sea with the Devil himself. So far the story is mainly in the horror vein.