The Angry Liberal White Guy

Words to think about…or not.


T. Lloyd Reilly

I am a writer and former school teacher who wrote my first story when I was ten years…old fifty three years ago. I have lived what some would consider more than one lifetime and have gained a wide range of knowledge and life experience which I wish to share through generous application of the written word. To see the extent of my portfolio got to:

Unctuous Umbrage

“Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.” Isaac Asimov

There is a terrible tragedy occurring where it comes to mass shootings, and the struggle to regulate the issuance, sale, or ownership of guns. We have a founding document that mentions the right to bear arms and a population too ignorant, uncaring, selfish, or bigoted to take the time to read the document and see what the factual meaning of that amendment might just be. Yes, there is a right to bear arms in America, and it is also a right to own guns. The function of the Second Amendment was originally written to guarantee, and should nevertheless assure the defense of our country. At the time of its issuance and ratification, the Constitution of the United States of America had just recently defeated the military forces of the “Sun doesn’t set…” country/empire through the well-directed use of regional militia’s. The disarray that was the Continental Army at the time created the situation where the only path to success was through copious use of citizen soldiers fighting in their home regions.

Today “militia” denotes something completely different. This term, in 2015, conjures up visions of groups of bearded guys with American Flags waving over their “compounds” while they drink beer and shoot illegally obtained automatic weapons. Some of them are jokes, some of them are dangerous, and all of them are anything but “well regulated.” Their proliferation in America can be traced to the ineffectiveness and inane governance of the U.S. and state governments it pertains to protecting our citizenry.

Additionally, the misconstruing being perpetrated on the American public by these “they are going to take away our guns” cretins has allowed the development of a culture of fear where it comes to the issue of gun ownership. A famous saying of the gun lobby/idiot states “The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”

This is nothing but inane gibberish. There is no evidence that “good guys with guns” have consistently prevented evildoers from doing the dastardly deeds being committed on nearly a daily basis. The FBI keeps records on shootings and has never reported on random armed citizen gunmen/women being an effective deterrent of anything criminally based. There are many incidences of armed citizens stopping shooting on the internet and there is always going to be controversy about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of arming people to solve a problem such as mass shootings but a few facts might help.

Untrained civilians often end up shooting the wrong person. The foremost authority in our country, the FBI, clearly states and instructs that people with guns should be better trained then what is required by most concealed gun carry courses given prior to the issuance of said permit. Many, if not most, mass shootings occur in places that do not permit the carrying of guns on their premises (schools, human services agencies, churches, etc.) and thereby are not subject to being defended by anyone other then the police or, in some cases, the security personnel of the facility. Brandishing a gun in a movie theater in response to an active or allegedly active gunman is paramount to yelling “fire” in a dark room filled with people who are already not able to see well.

All of these issues are not realistically addressed by people being able to open fire at will on real or perceived threat. The true issue is the proliferation of these events in the first place and how that can be prevented. Twenty people in a movie theater being able to pull a gun and start shooting is not a citizen’s right to bear arms, it is the recipe for a massacre. The amount of disturbed people who are able to get their hands on weapons of the assault family of guns is the issue and it is incomprehensible that there is no way to prevent or reduce this.

It is not a function of anyone “coming to get my gun” as much as it is why are you so convinced that you are the best person to prevent a shooting unless you have had police or armed forces training? Wayne La Pierre does not have your well-being at heart, and the denial of your constitutional rights is not in jeopardy if you submit to a background check that will prove you a reasonable law abiding citizen instead of a mentally ill zealot with psychotic predispositions. Wayne LaPierre wants to keep his 1,000,000 a year salary and will falsify and confuse the issue with sound bites and abstract aphorisms all day long.

A moment, if you please, about the other side of the coin which is the victims of these shootings that might deny us our right to bear arms just because they occurred. The children in the schools, or the teachers who throw themselves in the path of bullets fired. The families of those who die in these atrocities and have to live with the loss of treasured love ones. What about the general public who now is too afraid of even walking out of their houses for fear of being shot and killed by someone who is upset, unbalanced, unhinged, and unreasonably unsettled but exercising their right to bear arms?

It is the fault of the news media, the misrepresentations of people like Wayne LaPierre, and the misinterpretation of our society’s founding document that has created this horror. It is not a launching pad for some bleeding heart liberal agenda. It is the battered and bloody bodies of shot or dead citizens of the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave. It is the denial of this society to deal with an attack on our land because they are afraid that if something reasonable is done then they will lose the right to take another human life whenever the bloody hell they please!


Tumultuous Temerity

“You know, sometimes, when they say you’re ahead of your time, it’s just a polite way of saying you have a real bad sense of timing.” George McGovern

Taking a look at the state of events, actions, and atrocities occurring in the world today it is an apparent necessity that people should not rest lightly on their corpulent derriere’s and perform some basic deeds of daring do. Discussions around dinner tables and conversations while at coffee abound and, perhaps, many solutions are gleaned on the state of the union/state/country/continent/world/cosmos that never see the light of fruition. This begs the question: why?

Perchance this is a function of ego and esteem. “I am nobody so why cause trouble?” Maybe it is simply sloth. Apathy comes to mind. Languor and its ensuing lethargy might be the cause. Do we suffer at the hands of governmental inactivity? Does the dormancy of ideas grow in the face of torpidity? Inertia and indolence appear twins in the collective consciousness of the average citizen. Do we just not care past the identification phase of the question?

Not if one spends any time watching Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, or an Americans average local nightly news. There is action abounding. It is not a land, this news media, of laziness, listlessness, or lassitude, but of impudence, impertinence, or absolute audacity. There are certainly events that require reporting and must be known. The issue is the manner in which these items get narrated. It is not enough to simply inform the public because…a modest re-counting of facts does not allow for the agenda an individual news agency has seen fit to attach to the business of the news.

We are forever at the mercy of opinions and punditry absent ideals of veracity, validity, authenticity, candor, or reliability. We gather opinions, views, and standpoints by what we see and hear without the first thought of consequence, or corollary. The news is bereft of truth and corpulent with falsehood, and fiction. It is akin to the outrageously irrelevant statistics a baseball announcer will spout while waiting for the next batter to come to the plate in a baseball game. “And this hit sets a record for singles hit on a Tuesday after the All Star Break in cities ending in the letter S.”

Now that the identification phase of this piece has been attained, the question to be asked is: what do I do about this Horse Hockey? Well, quite simply, it is to reach back into your primal, racial memories and remember that America is populated by some 300 odd million souls who have the right to announce, articulate and amend things based upon the collective decision of its citizenry. The answer is to get off its collectively corpulent derriere’s and make a difference by expounding on the ideas and ideals gleaned at those discussions around dinner tables and conversations while at coffee.

“They must often change, who would be constant in happiness or wisdom.” Confucius

The length to which a point, posture, or politician must be changed is directly proportionate to the amount of dissatisfaction or harm that is being perpetrated on the American people. Recent debate has arisen on the incidence of voter fraud or the perception of such an outrage and occurrence on the second Tuesday of every eleventh month. There seems to be a differing response to this situation. Some would say that it is a critical event while others do not. The truth of this issue is that it is not prevalent in our elections and is not the problem purported by those who tend to endorse RIGHT leaning ideologies. The actual percentage of manifestation has been termed as infinitesimal at best.

What does that speak to by way of veracity and validity in politics? Is it that there are certain citizens who other citizens wish to be absent or denied a place at the polls on that same second Tuesday? Is it that there are no longer well placed individuals in power that can influence or decide the result of an election as in days gone by? Like how a candidate can win the popular vote and not become President due to judicial interference as in the 2000 election in a state whose governor is the sibling of the ultimate winner?

This appears a simple and seldom used example of the point to be made about voter fraud. The current promoters of the so-called voter fraud scandal give the impression that individual cases, regardless of diminutive deceptiveness are a National worry while systematized smoke filled back room deals that result in administrations as corrupt and criminal as in the years 2000-2008 are quite all right.

What is the answer to those who hold discussions around dinner tables and conversations while at coffee. Might be to recognize how they have been lied to and take the action of participating in more discussions around dinner tables and conversations while at coffee and take the results of those conversations to the polls. Perhaps the exercise of reducing those corpulent derrieres by education and engagement in the affairs of the world might help to reduce the risk that major issues we, as a species, face such as political punditry and outright perjuries through the use of fabrications and falsehoods will not be given credence. Would it not be a kinder and gentler world to live in if the electorate were more concerned with veracity than viciousness?

The world we live in that requires participation and energy and not apathy and lethargy. We cannot accept the crimes and corruptions of the news media or the political punditry that infects our very livelihood. We must take the action. Be what is promised us in America. We must be citizens and caretakers of our own destiny.

“…O people, the Lord has told you what is good, and this is what he requires of you: to do what is right, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.” Micah 6:8

Salacious Statesmanship

“The difference between death and taxes is death doesn’t get worse every time Congress meets.”  Will Rogers

There is a phenomenon occurring in modern society that mirrors the discontent of days gone by.  Cultural memories abound of kinder, easier times where the doors to your house went unlocked, and the neighbor kid was always welcome at the dinner table.  The phenomenon presented is the urging of certain factions within the population to push forward values and principles that sound relevant but have little in the way of real time serviceable significance in the Twenty First Century.  The issues of freedom of choice and the equality of James Madison’s guiding words dim in the harsh reality that we, as a nation, are ill informed and hypocritically driven to speak or act on the misinformation given us.

Much of the confusion derives origin in the individuals we accept as leaders and the apathy towards those who do not lead as we believe they should.  The cry of family values and the attack of such have brought much disparity and depression.  There is a cry for a reinvigoration of “Christian values” which some contend is the nature of our national character.  That same rectitude has decided that we would be better served by following the teaching of the Bible as a replacement for the ideals put forth within our Constitution.  In all of that fervor is the convenient misremembering of the fact that the country and the guiding lessons given us within the Bill of Rights, specifically call for the complete separation of church and state.

This zeal for the reemergence of puritanical practices were the cause of the intense exodus that originally instigated people to bolt from their hearth and homes to a find different, less intolerant, way of life in the New World.  To be fair, not all people came to America for religious reasons, but many did and their struggle is being cheapened through the convenient and intentional misinterpretation of values that, by law, have no place in a modern dialogue on societal issues.  Those who are most guilty are the very people who are chosen to act in a totally different manner.  Many of our politicians have pulled the religion card to engage in deprecation, denunciation, and denigration of those within our society who do not live the norm as it best serves the cause of reelecting the duplicitous denizens of government.

The continual denial of the rights of people to make their own decisions on their lives by way of marriage, or health issues is repulsive at least and criminal at best.  The active condemnation of those who are vigorously attempting to maintain the freedoms we are supposed to be guaranteed is a fight that should not be fought.  Why must the conservative faction in this country continually denounce and disparage the duly (twice) elected President of the United States?  What is the advantage to the average citizen of a legislature that hurls away billions of dollars of revenue to give tax cuts for the richest members of society while rebuking any effort by the administration to come to the aid of the middle and lower income citizens of our country?  Could the advantage be founded solely in the personal contributions of those selfsame wealthy individuals to the reelection war chests of like-minded legislators?  Would not that be bribery, which is illegal?  Amazingly, this form of graft is not illegal because it has been renamed “contributions” and voted into law.  Go figure.

Now some of the blame must be assigned to the everyday man.  We allow these wolves in sheep’s clothing to continue raping and pillaging society because we have convinced ourselves that we are doing everything we can.  We watch the news on CNN or Fox, or read about it on some uber-liberal website and think that we have done our jobs as citizens.  This is not so.

The fact is that most citizens suffer for a malady where it comes to our responsibilities in this democracy.  That malady is called narcotizing dysfunction.  The expression denotes a common consequence of overindulgence with mass media.

The theory posits the idea that when news of an issue besieges the public, people become dispirited with it, replacing engagement on the issue for just simply grasping the apparent nuances of the problem.  It might be suggested that the enormity and amount of communications Americans receive may produce only a cursory concern for the difficulties of humanity.  The significance of taking actual action is abandoned, while shallowness shrouds the true culprit, indifference.  The result of this is a population that is civically unconcerned and unmoving.

The hidden devastation comes from a point of self-deception.  The simple act of having knowledge of a subject and can, at some level, engage in discourse about the action or event might give rise to the belief that something is actually being done to alleviate the negative consequences of the issue.  Unfortunately, having been being informed and grown affected is not a substitute for the achievement of a resolution.  Even worse is the impression that one can have a clear conscience about anything of import by simply discussing it.

In the end there is a responsibility suggested that the knowing is not as important as the doing.  Many politicians, on both sides of the aisle, prey on this pandemic of ennui by spouting religious rhetoric, or yammer against such things as simple charity or human decency.  They put the blame on the blameless while ignoring the true culprit…ignorance and deceit.  They deceive the population by focusing on unsubstantiated destructive behaviors within our society while discounting the real time needs within our society.  Democracy is a system of action, and not a soap box for pretentious prattle that can never truly addresses the wants and needs of the citizenry.

Quite simply, we do not have to accept anything but honest and compassionate actions from our leaders.  We simply need to exercise our inalienable rights to change our world for the better.  We need to be citizens instead of being an audience and vote.

“It’s not enough that we do our best; sometimes, we have to do what’s required” Winston Churchill

Repu…gnant Rancor

The man who never alters his opinion is like standing water, and breeds reptiles of the mind.”  William Blake

With the “aversion” of the default the government has been threatening America with for the last several weeks it might be sagacious to peer in the looking-glass that is government and bellow at the top of ones lungs in dissent.  There has been a revolution approaching in this country for some time and it is stalled by the actions of a few, and the indolence of the majority. 

That an all-encompassing change in the system of government is apparent in the fact that the congress and the president have staged either a multi-act comedy/tragedy theatrical production, or flagrantly committed a crime.  There is a reasonable expectation, based on history that an unreasonable amount of debate will ensue over any issue brought before government for consideration in the lawmaking realm.  This expectancy has grown over the last twenty years to the point that it is totally believable that lawmaking is inexorably tied to the whims of the extremely wealthy, or the Nielsen ratings war waged by the news media.

And it will never get any better…without help

While a defeatist attitude does not lend itself to the spirit of America, with its lofty ideals and flag-waving rhetoric, there is little empirical evidence to dispel the idea of an impending total system failure.  It seems almost treasonous or ill advised at the least.  Unless, one actually reads the Bill of Rights or Declaration of Independence.

Until, that is, one actually reads the law of the land.  In the law of the land, there is relief.  Unfortunately, what has actually occurred over the last five years has culminated in a government not of the people, but of the criminal.  Perhaps, it might be sounder stratagems to allow the organized crime element in America take over.  In those criminal organizations, rules are rule, and every member knows when the answer is no, and the consequences for ignoring directives derived from the rules of said enterprises.

Oh if it were but true of our government today.

We have a system that supposedly sanctions our duly elected officials to exercise some deviation from specific desires of a political paradigm if it would be for the greater good.  We live in a country that is said to hold the rule of majority as sacred, yet we continually bow, and scrape to the ranting’s of the minority.  A minority whose membership ignores legal mandates on their actions in order to further agendas that have been either purchased by the top 1%, or driven by radical right wing misconceptions of what this country should be, all the while displaying a total disregard for the needs of the majority. 

But we’re America!

So say the culprits holding our society hostage.  Yes, it has been held hostage but not in the last couple of weeks.  We have allowed the lofty ideal that is America, to be hijacked by those who wish to pick and choose what laws to follow justifying the behavior by voting to exempt themselves from compliance to edicts that prevent them from acting in their own interest and against that which the people of the United States have elected them for.

And it has been happening for as long as anyone reading this piece can remember.

The need for revolution just might be legitimate.  That has been proven this last week with the proliferation of rallies and protests in Washington these last days.  The “polls” that everyone in government seems to listen to instead of the citizenry has aided in averting the latest “Emergency.”  Quite simply, they discovered they might not get re-elected and continue to reap the rewards of access to podiums with television cameras aimed at them, and rich people stuffing their back pockets with money, which is, thanks to the Supreme Court, totally lawful.

It makes little difference where a person’s political horizons are pointed.  It makes no difference what someone believes unless they have had a chance to gain access to accurate information in the place of that which the news media regurgitates.  Why has it come to be a reality that there are so many former political worker-bees getting rich flopping around all over our television screens like fish in a bucket waiting to be cleaned?  Each with competing opinions that never really address the problems we face.

Why has the health and well-being of America been relegated to those who look at government as a game and not as a call to service?

There is an all-out war being waged by this minority that is targeting those who need our government the most.  “We have to curtail spending” is the battle cry and the curtailing all seems aimed at social services and education.  The education part is easy to understand.  An ignorant electorate will elect based on contrived chaos, and resounding rhetoric absent validity.  What did the elderly do to them that they hate the aged so?

Are entitlement programs really the pariah of society?  Might the over two trillion dollars spent waging wars with the Moslem world have been better used to educate our children, care for the elderly, aid those incapable of aiding themselves.  Why do we not see the gaunt faces of American children with not enough to eat on the television instead of simply allowing the congress to viciously cut spending for SNAP?

So many questions without answers…

Perhaps it is time to really “take back our country.”  Instead of grandiloquence why doesn’t somebody try to intelligently address what needs change?  The taking up of arms was justified in 1776, or at least the country thought.  Today is it not evident that there is too much desire for arms and not enough for reason and intelligence. 

The revolution possibly needed is not one that requires firearms, but one which might necessitate a burning in the hearts of those who actually should wield the instrument of true change…we the people.

The Quixotic Quagmire of Querulousness

“Beauty is in the eye of the beholder—and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye.” Miss Piggy

There is a tradition in this great country of its citizens coming together and voicing their opinions in the cause of some issue or subject which has created situations that are seemed to be detrimental to the population. It is an inherent tradition reaching back to the Founding Fathers beginning with the courageous and costly decision to publish and deliver the Declaration of Independence. In one brief moment of unity our country both created itself while metaphorically throwing down the gauntlet before the largest empire in the world. It has served the American public to protest in many cases, and it has humiliated that same public when words and actions of derision fail to secure the desired result.

In the real time that is 2013 we have recently viewed both the success and failure once again of grass roots protest paradigms. Certainly the “Yes We Can” movement has succeeded and enjoyed this success through two terms for the President. The Tea Party is an example of, arguably, dismal failure and the sadness of that failure has created much pain and near treasonous disparity in the government and the public. The original ideals of the Tea Party sounded and seemed noble and probably would have been…if the movement had not been suborned into the submission that big money demands of all. A system of carefully crafted rhetoric making accusations, mostly out of context, has brought many to the belief in the insidious message of the 1%. Even sadder is the reality that many listen and adhere to the rhetoric without question. We need only to go as far as the Twelve Step paradigm to realize the enormous frailty of this kind of thinking currently rampant in many;

“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation.” – Herbert Spencer

It is our right to have access to the information needed to make decisions about how our country is run. Unfortunately, it is also our right to be provided with an equal and sometime excessive amount of disinformation. So where does that leave us?

Our efforts at protest have always been a mishmash of loud verbal demonstrations and violent disputes. Few are vastly successful such as the Civil Rights March on Washington that the “I have a dream” message of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Others sadly do little to solve any difficulties. We allowed overbearing and overtly Un-American laws to be enacted and have suffered the consequences. We allowed for the implementation of the Patriot Act as a defense against the monsters that perpetrated the 911 attacks without taking into account that that same law we thought would protect us has heralded in the denial of constitutional rights. We have accepted the horror of the heinous while permitting the desecration of Democracy.

One example of a failed protest that could have been something of benefit was the Occupy Wall Street movement born on September 17, 2011, in Zuccotti Park, located in New York City’s Wall Street financial district. Patterned after other protests around the globe such as British student protests of 2010, 2009-2010 Iranian election protests, and the Arab Spring protests and, more closely related, protests in Greece and Spain. These predecessors have in common with the Occupy movement a dependence on social media and electronic messaging, along with the conviction that financial institutions, corporations, and the political elite have been unscrupulous in their comportment youth and the middle class. A stand against the financial folly perpetrated by the administration of the larger institutions responsible for the management of the American public’s monies and reserves. The government had gone through the debacle of the bailout in order to lessen the blow to the economy that might be created with the fall of some of these corporations. They also called for a constitutional amendment addressing corruption in government.

They championed such things as a decrease in the pressure corporations exert on politics, rational dispersal of income, more and better jobs, fiscal reform by banks, the forgiveness of student loan debt, or other relief for indebted students, along with mitigation of the foreclosure crisis.

Three hundred people showed up in answer to a call for 20,000 and the incident had little or no lasting effect. Over the next several months 700 people were arrested and thousands of dollars expended with the only real benefit being the addition to the Politically Correct Dictionary of the Universe terms such as “the 1%” and the 99%.” While these supplements to the English language have become flashcard rhetoric targeted at the social media and its main avenues of dissemination such as Facebook, Twitter, and the myriad of sites in that genre, lasting realization of stated goals and aspirations have been than desired. Not to worry, the movement did achieved one dubious goal. PRNews noted “The results, obviously, have been spectacular. There’s hardly a newspaper, Internet or broadcast media outlet that hasn’t covered OWS.”

Do we really wish to be a society educated, shepherded, or defined by what we read on some website? Does modern technology define our beliefs? Are we truly a country of “unalienable rights” as given us by the words of our founding document? Does the electronic mini-verse genuinely allow us life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? If so, than perhaps our protests need to fail. If all we can get out of diligent discernment to the principles of a true democracy is a sound bite, or a Viral Video, then perhaps it is not the protests that have failed, but the American people. We are in the dire need of open dissent and thoughtful debate. We must reinstate that which has been yielded through ignorance.

Paradoxical Papacy

“The paradoxical – and tragic – situation of man is that his conscience is weakest when he needs it most.”  Erich Fromm

The recent selection of a new pope has many in the world feeling a renewed sense of what the essence of Christianity as defined by the “One true, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic church.”  A simple man, at least on the face of things, Francis has broken with tradition and performed a number of acts that have the College of Cardinals with the distinct feeling that, perhaps, the ballots were miscounted.

He has been a man of modest means, electing to eschew the trappings of splendor and pomposity the world has previously ascribed to the reigning successor of St. Peter.  In his home country he took public transportation to work, lived in a small apartment, and cooked for himself.  In the Vatican, he has left the papal apartment empty and placed himself in a rather austere residence that he shares with other members of the clergy in Rome.  Ha moved from a single room to a suite to allow more room for the meetings and such that are a part of a Pontiff’s everyday routine.

Coming from South America it is easy to see the how and why of these actions by the first pope who is not a European since the year 741 AD can be found attractive to the majority of the Catholic world.  The majority of the Catholic world comes from a either a place of poverty and servitude, or a place with a common lineage with the new pope.

Perhaps it is the harbinger of a resurgence of the true principles of the man the religion is based upon.  Or is it…

There is a universal condemnation by the Catholic Church, which Pope Francis vehemently supports, of either gay marriage or gay relations.

There is a strong stance that contraception is a sin, under any circumstance.

Abortion also is grouped with these issues and receives comprehensive clerical challenge and condemnation.

None of the judgments hostile to these issues hold any justifications from Jesus.  For a religion that bases itself on a document that has never been proven to be accurate of even divine, and who employs thousands of theologians, they are seemingly dimwitted about what Jesus has directed.

There might be much differing opinions about this idea which is certainly grist for the mill on the belief and existence of a deity, but this is not the place for it.  There is no relevance in arguing on the existence of God as it is not a denial of God, but a true interpretation of His/Her will where it comes to Gayness, contraception, or abortion.  In the world of the “One true, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic church” there is no one who has an open view of the problem.  How can a priest or church official counsel about contraception when they are, by oath, denied the act that is central to the idea of the prevention or propagation of the world’s population.  The same can be used as an argument about abortion.  While there is conflict throughout the world as to the definition life and when it becomes life, it is difficult to believe that the bible as a spiritual guide for life which is suspect in authorship and meaning, can possibly delineate the moment in time when a human becomes sentient.

As to the shunning of gay issues, it seems quite hypocritical for any church to fight against an activity that they have been condoning for centuries.  The systematic protection and dismissal of pedophilia in the Catholic Church absolutely must deny them the right to have any say on the subject of homosexuality.  They never addressed the problem, which they were aware of, until the church started to lose lawsuits and experience parishes and dioceses going bankrupt.  The story of Jesus attacking the moneylenders comes to mind.

Yet still their church and its new pope condemn these actions and those fighting for equality, compassion, and mercy.  They are not wrong, in their minds, and this is where the hypocrisy and indignation against them has its roots.  Where is the word of God in that idea?  Where is, Matthew 8:7, “So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”?

It is unfeasible to think that because the Pontiff has demonstrated some of the actions of his maker, that he will, in fact, be any different than those who, in the past, spread hate and revulsion throughout the world based on the teachings of a messiah that never said a single word telling them to act this way in his name.  Therein emanates the paradox announced in the title of this essay.  The inconsistency, absurdity, irony, contradiction, illogicality, and oxymoronic behavior of the administration of the largest church in the world must be made evident.  There is talk in theological seminars of the idea of an intelligent designer to the world.  Well if there is, would that designer entrust his beliefs to those who would destroy the very essence of what was to be accomplished?  The church believes that the bible is factual, and uses it to deny humanity at every turn.  What if it is really just a fiction?  If it is, then perhaps fiction is where the truth can be found;

“From the Crusades to the Inquisition, to American Politics-the name Jesus had been hijacked as an ally in all kinds of power struggles.  Since the beginning of time, the ignorant have always screamed the loudest, herding the unsuspecting masses and forcing them to do their bidding.  They defended their worldly desires by citing Scripture they did not understand.  They celebrated their intolerance as proof of their convictions.  Now, after all these years, mankind had finally managed to utterly erode everything that had once been so beautiful about Jesus.”

Dan Brown in “The Lost Symbol.”

Ontological Obtusity

“If God would concede me His omnipotence for 24 hours, you would see how many changes I would make in the world. But if He gave me His wisdom too, I would leave things as they are. J.M.L. Monsabre

In this day and age there appears to be a universal conspiracy to attach culpability for the actions of mankind to a specific deed done by some deity deemed to exist by large segments of modern society.  Whenever an inexplicable event occurs there is always discussion bandied about where the deity is exalted for he/she/it’s omnipotence, or, questions of why the deity did not step in to intervene for the good of mankind.  Practically, this phenomenon evolves into two paradigms: there is no God, or God is good.

Discussions about or on the existence of a deity have been comprehensively investigated throughout the intellectual, religious or atheistic factions of the world.  Large religious institutions seem enamored of proving their point in spite of being the recipients of mass membership.  Here is one example from the Catholic Church:

“Saint Anselm’s Ontological Argument

(1) God is that than which no greater can be conceived.

(2) If God is that than which no greater can be conceived then there is nothing greater than God that can be imagined.


(3) There is nothing greater than God that can be imagined.

(4) If God does not exist then there is something greater than God that can be imagined.


(5) God exists.”

On the opposite side of the ontological coins are atheists.  Here is one argument offered as proof of their principles:

The Anti-creation Argument (D1, D6):

(a)    If X creates Y, then X must exist temporally prior to Y.
(b) But nothing could possibly exist temporally prior to time itself (for that would involve existing at a time when there was no time, which is a contradiction).
(c) Thus, it is impossible for time to have been created.
(d) Time is an essential component of the universe.
(e) Therefore, it is impossible for the universe to have been created.
(f) It follows that God, as defined by D1 and D6, cannot exist

As with any discussion and argument offered on ontological queries there is ambiguity and perplexity dished out in healthy portions.  It is most disconcerting to begin such a noble quest as attesting to or refuting the veracity of a being that has (if he/she/it even exists) made a near industry out of being physically absent.

Both factions seem pretty confident in maintaining their archetypes by creating as many proselyte’s as possible.  There are differing proofs, as shown, but there is a question that supports the non-belief.  How can there be a loving God when there is do much pain and misery in the world?  One large faction maintains, in defense that the behavior of mankind has brought the horrific circumstances we suffer through as a direct result of negating the conviction that a deity does, in fact, exist.  Credence for this manner of thinking is usually cited from ancient tomes written in languages that are no longer spoken, written, or even…exist.

One issue with either side of the conversation on existence of or denial of a deity must certainly be the tenets each side adheres to and hoe those canons are or will be relevant in today’s society.  The largest religion, Christianity ( has at its foundation a set of rules popularly referred to as the Ten Commandments.  Sent down from on high and given to Moses in the form of two stone tablets for dispersal to the masses.  Originally there were three tablets.  What did God exclude once he got a look at the way people acted?  Perhaps it was an amendment tablet that went something like this:

“Thou shalt always be honest and faithful to the provider of thy nookie.

Thou shalt try real hard not to kill anyone, unless of course they pray to a different invisible man than you.

Two is all you need; Moses could have carried them down the hill in his fuckin’ pocket. I wouldn’t mind those folks in Alabama posting them on the courthouse wall, as long as they provided one additional commandment:

Thou shalt keep thy religion to thyself.”

Albeit these were offered to us in modern time by a stand-up comic, doesn’t it seem, perhaps, a little more useful in the world of school massacres, antidepressants, Teas Party Traitors, and multiracial politicians who are the target of hate and scorn?

On the other side of the coin there is this to be said for nonbelievers. What exactly do atheist hold sacred?  Check this out:

An Atheist’s World View: 15 Principles of Atheism

I. The Material World

A. Fundamental Principle of Atheism: There are no spiritual forces in the universe (1)

B. Atheists do not worship the devil. (2)

C. Life is physical matter in a biological configuration (3)

D. There are deep properties of matter (4)

E. Death is real (5)

II. Determining Truth

A. There are no good illusions: Atheism requires courage (6)

B. Principle of Rationality: Truth is determined by logic and evidence (7)

C. A mystery is not a miracle (8)

III. Ethics

A. Ethics derives from human nature and social discourse (9)

B. Religion does not promote ethical behavior. (10)

C. Atheists cannot avoid responsibility for their actions. (11)

D. Atheism promotes a respect for nature and humanity. (12)

E. Atheism promotes social action for a better world (13)

IV. Being an Atheist

A. Atheism is a powerful liberating experience (14)

B. Atheism is fun. (15)


So it is easy to say that the issue of belief is a complex and convoluted issue.  While delving into but two of the belief systems, for the sake of expediency, the entire issue has not been truly addressed.  Perhaps it might be best to try what the famous philosopher, Fr. Tom Jackson once cited in his musings.  Quite simply, why don’t we all believe in the “The-Church-Of-What’s-Happening-Now?”


Nihilistic Narcissism

“All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.” Friedrich Nietzsche

At a time when much of life is subject to scrutiny, as life in America is right now, might it not be germane to look exactly what is being reported and what is being perpetrated.  As the second Tuesday following the first Monday in November approaches we are in the grips of a dilemma of massive proportions.  Who do we choose to be the next Leader of the free world?  The field is small and the choices demonstratively different in both character and commitment.

The main nominees are well known and certainly engaged in noble battle for the right to lead the country.  Well, perhaps “Noble” is a poor word.  Anyone who checks the serious and discerning political pages available might just as well look on the rack at the supermarket designated for tabloid periodicals.  This begs the question:  What in the name of all that is holy and American is going on.

We have been besieged with reports of actions and beliefs in the candidates as deciphered by “journalists” who appear to be more in the business of generating scandal then reporting the news.  We already have a system that is supposedly based on equality. Contrary to this ideal the media does its best “little engine that could” imitation by slogging through and publishing the quagmire of gossip, innuendo, irrational insinuation, and downright fraudulence in an attempt to make it anything but equal.

The largest area in their attempt at inequality is in the total lack of true reporting on who it is we get to vote for.  There are currently four candidates qualified to be on the ballot based on their ability to be approved/disapproved by the Electoral College.  The Green Party and the Libertarian party have the potential to become president.  Does anyone know who they are?

Does anyone know about the rest of the field that have candidates ready to be placed on the ballot?  Did you know that the comedienne/actress Roseanne Bar is running for president?  Where has the discussion and debate on the views of this candidate gone?

The search for effective or, rather, the yearning for a functional government that will take the issues facing the world is a personal problem as well as one for the masses.  The information being disseminated in this election year is a quagmire of falseness, innuendo, and outright contempt.  There is no truth to be ascertained, so why not throw caution to the wind and simply toss a coin to make this decision.

The political system of this, the once greatest nation in the world, has deserted the citizenry and must be reported as being totally ineffectual, and incompetent.  Is not the committed stance of one party to “Deny” the serving president four more years to allow for the possibility of bringing order back to our country?  In the face of an ongoing war, economic difficulties, and denial of basic rights, is this subversion not wrong?  Some would say that the doggedly determined stance of the GOP is at best criminal, and at worst treasonous.

It is criminal in that the blind allegiance to the disruption of the administration is in direct contravention to the sworn duties of the legislative branch of the government.  Congress has the chief duty of making federal laws, and that has grown near impossible due to the grievous disunity of the body to do what the people of this country have elected them to do.  Specifically the crimes are: fraud, theft, perjury, and incitement to riot.

The treason comes from actively seeking the downfall of a serving president in war time.  This would have never happened in WWII, or Korea, or Vietnam.  Yes, there have been protests for all wars.  Legal, organized protests as allowed by law.  Where is the law that allows for a systematic campaign to topple a government?  The hatred for this president and the attacks in the press and on the floor of the congress and senate can definitely be seen as seditious.  Sedition during war time is an offense punishable by death.

Much of the derision in today’s society can also be attributed to a sentiment against other religions, especially Islam, but none with the power, financial and moralistically, then the Fundamental Christian.  They cite the Constitution and platitudes from the founding fathers as justification for the denial of actual Christian values with little regard to whether they are accurate, or even what the founding fathers meant.  There cries for autonomy and uprightness have been sought before, by others seeking to cash in on Jesus to fulfill their agenda:

“As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice.” – Adolf Hitler

The method of business conducted by the heralds of moralistic reasoning coupled with the denial of contradictory viewpoints as evil and satanic, make the situation worse.  They endorse, finance, and lend their name to ideals with little or no regard for the actual meaning of that which they claim as sacred.  They have no qualms on reporting their beliefs, even if they have to make them up as they go.

“In a time of universal deceit – telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
George Orwell

Is it not time to take back the power in order to pave a road to the truth?  As stated earlier, these issues we are struggling with are much deeper than who is president.  The current president has many successes in spite of the walls placed in front of him.  The opposition has plenty more inventions based on deception, denigration, and defamation to cloud the sky and murk up the waters.  Perhaps it is time to take action and indeed start a rebellion by denying dishonesty and duplicity in order to replace it with Truth, Justice, and the American way.

Liebster Blog Award

I have been nominated for Liebster Blog Award  by – Raani York,  Thank you so much Raani!

What is the Liebster Blog Award?

The Liebster Blog Award is given to up and coming bloggers who have less than 200 followers. “Liebster” is German for “favorite”. This award is the “favorite blog award” then.

The rules for this one state that you answer the 11 questions asked of you by the Blogger who gave you this award. These would be Raani’s questions for me.

  1. What genre do you usually write in?

Fiction – no specific genre but I have been spending time in the horror, and science fiction world.

  1. What genre do you prefer reading?

Historical fiction – preferably Celtic and Medieval

  1. What is your favorite book and why?

“Pillars of the Earth” by Ken Follet.  The story just speaks to me and resonates in my life

  1. What music do you like?

Rock and Roll

  1. Jeans or linen pants?


  1. Cake or chips?


  1. When you go for dinner do you like dessert?

Not usually

  1. Are you a burger fan?


  1. Soda or water?

Iced Tea

  1. What’s the best thing you ever ate?

My Aunt Nancy’s Lasagna

  1. What was your favorite stuffed animal as a kid?


I do not read many blogs due to a strong focus on fiction writing, but here are a few I reviewed and found worthy of this award:

Ariele Sieling –

Chawnaw Hershel Kahn –

Al Lohn –

Joe Foley –

Rodney Dominique –  –

Toni Hoy –


Linda Rondeau –

Kristin Nolin –

Amaryllis Turman –

Here are my ten questions for these bloggers:

  1. What was the first thing you wrote?
  2. Published or unpublished?
  3. What is your favorite book?
  4. Who is your favorite author?
  5. What genre do you prefer?
  6. What is your favorite writer’s middle name?
  7. E-publishing or conventional?
  8. Writing medium (pen, computer, etc.)
  9. Title of my last post.
  10. Title of your last post.
  11. What is the name of the first blog you ever read?

Again, Thanks for this honor Raani!





Blog at

Up ↑