WARNING: No minced words here. İ rake the muck of the 'other', the so-called open-minded side who's preference is to whine and distort reality. If still suckling mom's tit or warped by delusions of polıtıcally correct equality you WİLL be offended by such materıal. Welcome to Reality.

First half of manuscript done...finally!

Just finished editing the manuscript of my next book. Finally. Oh how good it feels to be through this part!
Such is my desk....


A new smile on the face of establishment. (A Repeat)

At the local library several weeks back I bought a handful of books to read for fun. Being abroad makes me even more eager for reading ANYTHING that's in English. One of them was a political science text book The Irony of Democracy: An Uncommon Introduction to American Politics (fourth edition) by Thom. R Dye & L Harmon Zeigler. With an uncommon title like that I was hooked to see what lay behind the cover. It was published in 1978. Keep that in mind. The 10th Chapter (The Presidency in Crisis), in particular, however struck me as being very much about the "now." 

Jimmy Carter figured prominently in the then-new edition and I was awed by what the authors laid out in the section "Jimmy Carter: A New Smile on the Face of the Establishment".

"James Earl Carter, Jr., is a political "outsider" who was catapulted in less than two years from a Plains, Georgia, peanut farmer to president f the United States. At first glance, Carter's meteoric rise from rustic obscurity to the nation's most powerful office would seem to demolish the elitist notion that leaders are selected from upper-class backgrounds or from the ranks of seasoned officeholders. But a closer examination of elite concerns in 1976--especially concern over declining public confidence in established elites themselves--together with Carter's reassuring, smiling, "we're -okay" style of politics--provides a better understanding of how and when an "outsider" will be selected for national leadership."

In that section of the book the authors proceed to argue that in 1976 established elites were very concerned with the public's noticeable declining trust in all things political; said elites undertook a makeover of the leadership structure by replacing old, "experienced" faces with fresh ones; that the makeover was purely cosmetic "and would include no fundamental changes in policies, programs, or values." 

Starting to sound familiar?

"The national news media paid little attention to Carter's December 1974 (Obama February 2007) announcement of his presidential candidacy...observers everywhere expected that established leaders----Hubert H Humphrey or Edward M Kennedy (Hilary Clinton & John Edwards)----would win the presidency in 1976 (2008)...However Carter knew the first two primaries were in New Hampshire and Florida (Iowa & New Hampshire). The first was a small state (Iowa) where he had two years to engage in  face-to-face campaigning. These two early primary victories brought Carter recognition that he needed (Obama took first in Iowa, second in New Hampshire). Would either of the heavy weights, Humphrey or Kennedy (Al Gore),  enter the race and take the prize away from Carter. Carter avoided specifics on issues, and campaigned on charm, decency, and brotherly love...described himself as 'a farmer, an engineer, a businessman, a planner, a scientist, a governor, and a Christian' (biracial, community organizer, scholar, outsider, Christian)...His choice of Walter Mondale (Joe Biden) as vice presidential running mate assured liberals that he was not a southern populist (elitist naive northern populist)...he emphasizes his humble beginnings. Carter brought a new down-home image into national politics [but] stuck closely to established liberal remedies for society's problems: social programs for the poor and aged; civil rights commitments for blacks (homosexuals); jobs for the unemployed; federal aid for cities (bailout monies); tax 'reform' (health care reform)....
Jimmy Carter's rapid rise to national leadership, and his welcome into top elite circles, represents still another tactic available to an embattled elite----replace the old faces associated with past defeats and humiliations with smiling new faces promising honesty, compassion, and good times (Yes We Can! 2008)."

Now, does this political analysis sound thirty years old to you? 
So while the Camelot comparisons were lost on no one, perhaps we should actually be comparing President Obama to the unglamorous Carter.

100+ Chinese miners rescued !

Glory be! After being trapped underground for over a week rescuers have so far today pulled up more than 110 miners within hours.

Roman Catholicism is a big sham


Roman Catholic Church has never been about Christianity insofar as charity, peace, humility and humanity are concerned. It's been a front from Day One. An insular govt in a puny region which has successfully garnered fearful followers worldwide...and the respect of world leaders owing to the Vatican's supposed 'importance' in the world. 
Its history of sodomites is less and less "okay" or conjectured hearsay. They are factual sins brought into the light
It was the ancient Roman Empire who detested Jesus Christ and, thanks to the jealousy of rabbis, were able to snare him on trumped up charges which led to his immaculate crucifixion. So the Jews were not alone in killing Jesus. Then Rome has the hubris----or is it chutzpah?----to change its stronghold from territorial (empire) to supernatural (religion), making itself into a Church and deify the very bastard they so grandly executed. Mama mia! Fidel Castro took a page right from their playbook. He is probably the only dictator whose image is conspicuously absent in lieu of his fallen comrade Che Guevara whose image is ubiquitous.

The Roman Catholic Church is Satan's whore. Always has been. Every studious Protestant knows this. Now the Church's culture of secrecy and cover-up is catching up with it. Its history of sodomites is less and less "okay" or conjectured hearsay. They are factual sins brought into the light. In the news this week is written testimony that a nasty bugger was among them and was allowed to remain among them by no less authority than the man who would become Pope Benedict XVI. (This probably doesn't make him the worst pope though. Not for me, at least. A quick read of some other pontiffs ranks him almost as harmless as a patsy.)
One bad apple in the cart for very long does not stand apart
When a religious tribunal deems one of its own members satanic, as did the Arizona Diocese in the 1990s, yet maintains that bad apple in the cart, then there is something very, very wrong with that organization. One bad apple in the cart for very long does not stand apart. Rev Michael Teta was at last called to the carpet for his twenty year string of molestation and deemed by the tribunal to perpetrate "almost a satanic quality in his mode of acting toward young men and boys." Yet it would be over another decade before Rev Teta was formally defrocked.

When a god-fearing church needs formal or written permission to kick out a satanic congregant, then that church is fucked up. By the way, where's the U.N. now?? 

Christianity might be a good thing if anyone ever tried it.

--Geo. Bernard Shaw
But bonds of blood are truly slight...when they are not reinforced by affection.

Memoirs of Hadrian (Marguerite Yourcenar)
Now the trouble about trying to make yourself stupider than you really are is that you very often succeed.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...