i was watching the two-part series on the Discovery Channel, JFK: 3 Shots That Changed America, earlier this evening, and at the beginning i struck by something that i saw in vintage film that was being shown.
the footage was of JFK & Jackie getting ready to board Air Force One in Fort Worth for the short flight to Dallas. The date was November 22, 1963.
in the crowd of mostly well wishers and people that were excited to see the President and First Lady was a man in a fedora and trench coat. he was holding a large sign that said:
JFK Hates Democracy
this film was shot approximately 2-3 hours before Mr. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas.
this was 1963. a time when the country was portrayed as having a mission to repel the evils of communism and socialism, and here, standing in the crowd, was a man spewing the same type of hate we are seeing in this country now with President Obama.
it was eerie. it was unbelievable to me when i first saw it on the television. i was 17 at the time and i never saw this kind of thing back then.
the one thing different between 1963 and today is that the monsters who are spreading this hate today are more virulent and actually calling for the impeach and assassination of a President of the United States out loud ans supported and egged on by people who claim to be patriots and members of the media.
"The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves and then we shall save our country.
"Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this congress and this administration will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance or insignificance can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass will light us down in honor or dishonor to the latest generation. We, even we here, hold the power and bear the responsibility...."
in this time of crisis with all the forces denigrating and questioning and bombarding us from within, the rest of the world is declaring itself to be back in our corner with the Nobel Peace prize award. they see hope where there has been none for the last several years.
the self-ascribed patriots who live in this country are attacking the very core of its basis and doing it under the guise of their love of country. they are doing everything in their power to derail progress and hope. they avidly state that they want Obama to fail. they openly declare he should be impeached for unknown offenses. they have prediction sites for people to guess when he will be assassinated.
these people hate their country and they are being lead by self-aggrandizing demagogues using the freedom of speech of which they truly believe only they should have. they lie; they cheat; they twist words; and they border on the traitorous with their accusations that others are the turncoats.
they have hijacked the progress of this country. they have worked against the will and promise of the founders of it. they bastardize the words of the founders and ignore their true meaning. worse, they do it in a self-righteous misreading of the worship they portray, their own personal version of judeo-christian dogma at the expense of the true intent of the scripture they spout so often and to the detriment of others with different beliefs.
the quotes that open this post describe more than adequately and with great precision the state we find ourselves in today. the person saying them accurately identifies the force behind the attacks and the situation of the United States and what is happening right now.
sadly, they also give more credence to the George Santayana quote that is always in the right corner of this blog - “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
also, they make the old French adage "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" even truer - the more things change, the more they stay the same....
who originally spoke these words? i would bet certain elements reading them would say Barack Obama, because they would want to use them to discredit him even more.
Remember when grandparents and great-grandparents stated that they only had an 8th grade education? Well, check this out. Could any of us have passed the 8th grade in 1895?
This is the eighth-grade final exam from 1895 in Salina, Kansas, USA. It was taken from the original document on file at the Smokey Valley Genealogical Society and Library in Salina, and reprinted by the Salina Journal.
8th Grade Final Exam: Salina , KS - 1895
Grammar (Time, one hour)
1. Give nine rules for the use of capital letters. 2. Name the parts of speech and define those that have no modifications. 3. Define verse, stanza and paragraph 4. What are the principal parts of a verb? Give principal parts of "lie,""play," and "run.." 5. Define case; illustrate each case. 6 What is punctuation? Give rules for principal marks of punctuation. 7 - 10. Write a composition of about 150 words and show therein that you understand the practical use of the rules of grammar.
Arithmetic (Time, 1 hour 15 minutes)
1. Name and define the Fundamental Rules of Arithmetic. 2. A wagon box is 2 ft . deep, 10 feet long, and 3 ft wide. How many bushels of wheat will it hold? 3. If a load of wheat weighs 3,942 lbs., what is it worth at 50cts/bushel, deducting 1,050 lbs . for tare? 4. District No. 33 has a valuation of $35,000. What is the necessary levy to carry on a school seven months at $50 per month, and have $104 for incidentals? 5. Find the cost of 6,720 lbs . coal at $6.00 per ton. 6. Find the interest of $512.60 for 8 months and 18 days at 7 percent. 7. What is the cost of 40 boards 12 inches wide and 16 ft . long at $20 per metre? 8. Find bank discount on $300 for 90 days (no grace) at 10 percent. 9. What is the cost of a square farm at $15 per acre, the distance of which is 640 rods? 10. Write a Bank Check, a Promissory Note, and a Receipt.
U.S. History (Time, 45 minutes)
1. Give the epochs into which U.S. History is divided 2. Give an account of the discovery of America by Columbus . 3. Relate the causes and results of the Revolutionary War. 4. Show the territorial growth of the United States . 5. Tell what you can of the history of Kansas ... 6 Describe three of the most prominent battles of the Rebellion. 7. Who were the following: Morse, Whitney, Fulton, Bell, Lincoln , Penn, and Howe? 8. Name events connected with the following dates: 1607, 1620, 1800, 1849, 1865.
Orthography (Time, one hour) [Do we even know what this is??]
1. What is meant by the following: alphabet, phonetic, orthography, etymology, syllabication 2. What are elementary sounds? How classified? 3. What are the following, and give examples of each: trigraph, subvocals, diphthong, cognate letters, linguals 4. Give four substitutes for caret 'u.' (HUH?) 5. Give two rules for spelling words with final 'e.' Name two exceptions under each rule. 6. Give two uses of silent letters in spelling. Illustrate each. 7. Define the following prefixes and use in connection with a word: bi, dis, mis, pre, semi, post, non, inter, mono, sup. 8. Mark diacritically and divide into syllables the following, and name the sign that indicates the sound: card, ball, mercy, sir, odd, cell, rise, blood, fare, last. 9. Use the following correctly in sentences: cite, site, sight, fane, fain, feign, vane , vain, vein, raze, raise, rays. 10. Write 10 words frequently mispronounced and indicate pronunciation by use of diacritical marks and by syllabication.
Geography (Time, one hour)
1. What is climate? Upon what does climate depend? 2. How do you account for the extremes of climate in Kansas ? 3. Of what use are rivers? Of what use is the ocean? 4. Describe the mountains of North America . 5. Name and describe the following: Monrovia , Odessa , Denver , Manitoba , Hecla , Yukon , St. Helena, Juan Fernandez, Aspinwall and Orinoco . 6. Name and locate the principal trade centers of the U.S. 7. Name all the republics of Europe and give the capital of each. 8. Why is the Atlantic Coast colder than the Pacific in the same latitude? 9. Describe the process by which the water of the ocean returns to the sources of rivers. 10. Describe the movements of the earth. Give the inclination of the earth.
Notice that the exam took FIVE HOURS to complete.
Gives the saying "he only had an 8th grade education" a whole new meaning, doesn't it?
Also shows you how poor our education system has become and, NO! I don't have the answersto all of the questions.
oh, i'll be a smarty pants. i knew what orthography is, but only because i taught reading and had to take classes on it, though it hasn't been known as orthography for decades. same with the grammar part but, again, it's because i taught it.
the math part would have thrown me for a loop. i hated math. the first year i taught, with a background in Reading Instruction, they gave me half of the 6th grade math classes to teach!
christians consider themselves under attack today. they believe that they are the ones against whom persecution is aimed. they think that the secularism in the world is crushing them out of existence.
well, they forget how they used persecution throughout their history right from the beginning to foist their beliefs on everyone else.
"Christians resisted persecution well--both the ordinary spasmodic kind and the infrequent broader campaign--because their communities were many-headed, did not have substantial real property, and lived so fully intermingled with Roman society that they could not simply be carved out and attacked. A century after Galerius, when Christian emperors set out to--we might as well use the word--persecute 'pagan' communities and practices, they were far more devastatingly effective. They halted the supply of state funds for traditional practices, crippling much of what had been long familiar. Then they seized buildings and banned ritual in them, sweeping the landscape nearly clean of the old ways. What survived--and much did--was personal, small-scale, or highly localized. Over a relatively short time, the new bludgeoned the old into submission and eventually supplanted it. That's what real persecution could do, unafraid to use violence but not needing to use very much of it. But Christianity never faced anything like what it would later visit on the traditional cults."
they were the real experts at persecution. we see this all the way down to the present day. there is no hesitancy on the part of christianists in trying to bat the world into submission to their way.
sadly, they set the example. we see in the world of Islam the same type of fringe groups, eg. Al Quaeda, who adopted this christian view to their own imagined advantages.
below is a reposting of the one i did last year. it is still relevant and probably always will be as long as the country has fringe groups that believe that they own the only right to foist their beliefs on everyone else. they forget that we were instituted as a nation of immigrants who were searching for a place to live as they believed was right for themselves.
on Hardball tonight Christopher Hitchens was on with a religious who smiled for the entire time as Hitch made logical point after logical point based on fact not innuendo and not unquestioning faith that is highly overrated. when Hitch said that Benjamin Franklin was an atheist [well documented] i thought the man was going into apoplexy. when the point was made that the Puritans came to the Americas do be free to worship and believe as they wanted not enter another land that said they could only do it one way, the man twisted it to say that it was proof that we have a christian nation.
One of the cornerstones of the U.S. Constitution insisted by the Founding Fathers was Freedom of Religion. They were aware that the New World was made up of many peoples from many lands who had a myriad of beliefs. Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, et al lived in an empire that had little tolerance for other beliefs and religions with a state sanctioned religion - The Church of England. The Church of England was founded purely for political expediency - Henry VIII's hunger for an heir.
Over the course of history, there have been many examples of theocratic governments and it is obvious that they all had one thing in common - repression of anyone or any belief that did not fit into their world view. Most often this repression was violent.
Today, we see perfect examples of theocracy's rule in the Muslim world by extremists who have highjacked the religion of Mohammed to meet their own thirst for power and control. Countless citizens are maimed, murdered, exiled and tortured simply because they do not believe as others think they should.
The guarantee of the Constitution by Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
was written into the document to prevent the abuses so often foisted by theocratic governments.
Sadly, in the U.S. today we have been bombarded by rhetoric and innuendo by certain political forces that believe we should be subjected to a form of christianist sharia. They believe, wrongly, that the country was founded on christianist principles when the Founding Fathers overwhelming in personal writings warned of christianist inequities. In fact, most all of them viewed themselves simply as deists - "the belief that the existence and nature of God comes from reason and personal experience."
Inherent in "freedom of religion" is the idea "freedom from religion. There are people who, through the use of reason and personal experience, have come to the conclusion that there is no god. This is as unique a conviction as choosing a denomination or sect with which to identify for others. During this current presidential campaign it has been invoked time after time that the one type of person who could never be elected president would be an atheist or agnostic, and nearly 100% of people believe it.
The logo at the beginning of this post was created for a blogswarm addressing the support of Freedom of Religion. The purpose of this tactic is to make as many people aware of a certain issue as possible, to bring focus on a problem or possible injustice, and to foster understanding and acceptance.
I find it interesting that the group initiating Blog Against Theocracy 2008 chose Easter weekend for this action, a time of rebirth and reaffirmation. It is appropriate to remind people that their right and freedom to believe as they choose is written into law, that it is under attack at all times, and that there is always a demagogue right around the corner believing they have the answer to everything - no questions allowed.
You can find out more about the blogswarm by clicking Here
has long held a special place in the hearts and minds of not just the United States but most of the world. We celebrate the anniversary of the birth of Abraham Lincoln, probably the greatest president and leader the world has ever had.
He was, to all available knowledge and research, a humble, intelligent and special person. He was a risk taker and made tough decisions even if they were not what he would consider part of his psyche or ethic. He made them based on what was best; not what was politically correct or catering to small minded people.
Today is the 200th anniversary of his birth, a special occasion. In Illinois it is always a holiday for government and schools.
In spite of the checkered political history of the state, it was his home and maybe that is unconsciously why people are reacting to the recent embarrassments and shenanigans. I don't really know.
-----------------------
It is also a personally important day. Today would have been my mother's 89th birthday. She was born on the same date as Abraham Lincoln. She died 12 years ago, but you never really stop feeling a hole when you loose someone, especially a parent. One of the things that I do, and it is not something I broadcast, is visit the cemetery. Not just on her birthday but also the anniversary of her death. Actually, I do it for all of my close relatives. This habit is something she ingrained in me and I accept it. I would have to take her to the cemetery for all of these occasions.
One more thing - my grandparents didn't get to name her. Since she was born on February 12th, the doctor named her. Her first name was Lincoln.
It's a pretty name for a lady. I have also met men who have it as a first name.
I remember one story she told me when I was younger. She said, "Thank God I wasn't born a boy! I'm afraid the doctor would have named me Abraham!"
Of course that really wasn't the end of it. When she was baptized in the Roman Catholic Church, they wouldn't use the name Lincoln because it wasn't a saint's name. When the priest got to the part where he had to say her name, he said, "Catherine". My grandparents were furious; he never mentioned it to them before hand.
I can just hear my grandmother. She spoke very little English but swore in Italian like an old truck driver and added the English curse words at every chance. [she knew those!] They had to remind her often when I was around because I understood everything. I didn't totally speak English until I was four.
yes..., i did inherit her mouth, but i'm cautious most of the time, since i worked with kids for 37 years. though they taught me a few words my grandmother didn't know...
my friends tease me because i hardly ever go to see a movie at the theatre. i usually wait to see in on cable or DVD.
the problem i have is i always end up with the people who jabber on the cellphone during the movie or some other rude thing.
when i went to see the Bourne Ultimatum, there was a couple who had brought there 2-3 year old with them. first it was inappropriate for her to be there because of the type of movie and second they let her crawl around on the floor under the seats! obviously, they had not gone to any parenting classes. BUT giving her a flashlight was the last straw for me, as well as others. before i could get up, someone had already made it to an usher or manager who was right there telling them to either control her or leave. like i said, it was inappropriate for her to be at this film anyway.
so you can see why i don't like going to the theatre. it's just my luck.
i do, however, go to see movies with special effects that would be much better seen on the wide screen than the small. this sent me this Friday to see The Day the Earth Stood Still, that plus a curiosity to compare if with the classic original.
neither the updated story nor the special effects disappointed me. i loved it.
the special effects in the first 10-15 minutes are some of the most spectacular i've ever seen. they were so because they were both subtle and understated. they didn't stop there, but continued through the entire film. in addition, the story updating was believable for today's world, and contrary to others, i think that Keanu Reeves played Klaatu the only way possible, and the robot would scare the s*** out of me.
if you want pure escapist fare, i recommend it. if you're a sci-fi aficionado, don't miss it.
as a piece of history, it is believable; as a reflection of what it is to fight for yourself, it is insightful; as a piece of art, it is incredible; and as a journey of a man and a movement, it is beyond important.
could i identify with all of it? absolutely, positively yes.
did i emotionally loose it at any point? yes, but i won't tell the part unless you've seen the movie. i did get a little teary-eyed at the end, but it was so well done and so dramatically understated to make a point, that it brought the entire project full-circle.
i went with straight friends. they were totally impressed. Sharon said that Sean Penn's performance was one of the most realistic and the best she's ever seen, and she can see 4-5 movies a week, if she can. my other friends said it was one of the best movies they've ever seen also.
i have to tell you that i hesitate referring to them as friends. we have known each other for 40 years and we are more family than friend. we go on vacations together; we celebrate holidays together; and we do lots and lots of things together. the one thing that we are is totally supportive and loving of each other.
since we are friends/family we have a relationship that is such that we talk just about everything. well, sex is probably the one thing we don't talk about, but it's because it's nobody's business. well, i can't really say we never talk about it, but it's not something that is, like, tabletalk during a card game.
my orientation is never discussed either. it is my choice and they understand that. my sexuality is only a part, and a very small part, of who i am. it does not define me; though it adds to my definition.
though the argument in Milk is "let everyone know you're gay because when they know one of us, they know us all" is powerful, but it also tells the story of how we are all alike, and that is the point of demanding and what underscores everyone deserving equal rights. the other thing that is unique about the movie is that it is a love story with a wonderful telling of Harvey and Scott's relationship. a relationship that was just like everyone else's - straight or gay.
if i came away from the movie with anything, it is that everything i've believed, everything for which i have stood, everything that i have done, i have done as a human being. i left the theatre with everything reinforced, everything intact, and everything having more importance.
i have posted my cynicism about this election in a number of different ways. i live in the Chicago area and i believe that it is a foregone conclusion that Illinois will go to Obama, but i'm not sure of the rest of the country. i think that the numbers, the polls, the predictions, etc. are most confusing for a lot of people.
while the media is working on the presumption that Senator Obama will be the President-Elect on Wednesday, i have seen too many unusual things happen with the U.S. electorate. basically, they are fickle and influenced by fear and innuendo most of all.
though many pundits and newspeople are saying that John McCain has run not just a loose campaign but one with a scattergun effect, especially over the last week or so. i have found, working in both the public and private sectors and also in the service industry that peoples memories are short and tend to remember the last thing they hear.
as an example in this election, the word socialism has been bandied about by Palin and the Republicans. unfortunately, to most U.S. voters it is a dirty word, in spite of the fact that we have had socialized medicine for the elderly with Medicare and the Tsar and his minions just socialized the credit, banking and other industries with their baleouts.
when these people use the word socialism they are implying the word communism. at the same time, Palin used the word Marxism in reference to Senator Obama last week. in the belief that the U.S. electorate is actually a stupid body of people, the Mcpains are counting on the confusion of the three to instill or at least implant fear in the minds of people - especially the elderly who remember the witchhunt of Joe McCarthy, the Cold War with the USSR, the battle for Southeast Asia in Vietnam, and many other things that brought fear into the minds of U.S. citizens.
it's a vicious circle that has been perfected by the Republicans, especially, and been used as a master-plan to retain control and prevent the inclusion of new and, possibly, more modern and useful ideas and actions. it's been done for centuries, as i've written in previous posts.
now, back to how i'm upsetting my friends.
i have this very distinct sense that this historical error may actually occur. on Wednesday, November 3, 1948, the Chicago Tribune actually printed this banner headlined front page -
my personal fear and why i'm upsetting my friends? that not just the Tribune but other papers, websites and media will have this headline on Wednesday, November 5, 2008
McCain Defeats Obama
and i can't seem to shake it.
more than this, i can only imagine what the immediate repercussions could be around the country and, of course the long term effects of a Mcpain administration and the possibility of the seconddumbest person to hold high office in the U.S. - Tsar George being the first. and, no, i am not talking about John McCain.
i wish for, what to me, would be reigniting of the hopes, dreams and goals of the movements in the 1960's. the Age of Aquarius is not just a short period of history; it is a period of about 2,150 years. by accounts it began around 1844. it's an age of promise for growth and progress, in spite of, or rather because of, the upheavals of the revolutions, world wars, depressions, nuclear discoveries, etc. that put a new sense of humanity into play.
i am not a true believer in astrology but i am a student of history and its cyclical nature. in most cases the cycles begin and end because humankind comes to the realization that the lot they are now part of is no longer working.
of course, on the opposite side are the groups of humankind who fear change and allow themselves to be played by the old guard. this play has been going on for 60 years now. i want it to stop, but i fear that i will not get to see it myself, but i know that...
Keith Olbermann apologizes for another special comment so soon after the last one. He states that he does not want it to become a regular spot on Countdown but senses that in this, the last two weeks of the 2008 election, it might become more frequent. So, he apologizes.
Last night's comment brought up an old bone of contention for me. The special comment first:
I have mentioned in passing with different posts that I was, to an extent, involved with anti-Vietnam war activities, feelings and protests. This is not something with which I am sorry. Rather, it is something in which I have pride.
At the time, the tenor of the country was if you were anti-war, you were anti-American. I couldn't be more opposed to that line of thinking. I believe the opposite.
At the time, the country was involved in what some, and I include myself, was an illegal war. It was not in the best interest of the country; it was a purely ideological conflict. It was a holdover from the McCarthy era. The fear of Communism was great; U.S. politicians feared that it would dominate the world; patriots believed that the U.S. was in danger of an assault by Communism, i.e. the USSR. Of course, history finally proved that there was nothing to fear and Communism fell.
I am using the word Communism with a big C because it is not the same as the social and economic communism philosophized by Karl Marx and his associates. The big C Communism was a form of government created and fostered by Lenin, Stalin, and other Soviet Union leaders as a form of big brother government that controlled all aspects of the country - thought, behaviour, beliefs, etc. If we were fighting against this in Vietnam, I think there is a case for the conflict.
I question if a small country in Southeast Asia was the place to make the stand though. A country that historically was always in conflict with the West because of imperialistic takeover and control. A French colony that France finally saw as a losing proposition and got out.
I also am reminded of what President Eisenhower warned against in his farewell address: the military-industrial complex.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
The last eight years has shown the rise of misplaced power. I'm sure that it would not please Mr. Eisenhower if he knew the extent to which his predictions have materialized. Sadly, it was President Eisenhower and his administration that increased the aid to Vietnam under the pretext of the belief at the time that if Vietnam falls, so falls the rest of Southeast Asia.
I mention these things as a little background to my thought process about anti-America.
At the time, in listening to the Vietnam anti-war leaders and the prevailing thought against the conflict, I don't believe that we believed that we were being anti-America. Just the opposite.
My take is that I, along with others, believed that we were being tremendously pro-America. We were questioning, in legal ways to the great extent, the efficacy of the government's actions and exercising what the Constitution guaranteed as a right to disagree with the government.
I discount those that acted violently. They were in the minority and actually worked against the non-violent stance of the majority of anti-war protesters and actions. The purpose of the movement was based primarily on belief in non-violence being the means and best way of action. I have always thought that groups that called for and committed acts of violence were actually counterproductive to the anti-war movement.
Now, knowing that this will ruffle feathers of patriots with narrow mindedness and who believe that there is only one right way to be pro-American, I have to restate that I believed that Daniel & Philip Berrigan, Steven Spiro, and, as it was brought out during the last presidential election, John Kerry considered themselves pro-America because they were working for what they believed to be a just cause that would strengthen the country.
I am as proud of these people as I am proud of Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Harry Truman, Keith Olbermann, and many others who work to make the U.S. greater and more inclusive of all thoughts as is guaranteed by the First Amendment. Something that self-identified patriots, and I include Mrs. Palin in this group, would control by using it themselves to speak their distaste for dialogue and inclusion.
During the 1800's using actual human bodies for training doctors in anatomy classes was illegal and against the current ethical and religious standards.
Medical schools hid that they were actually using human cadavers and the only way they could obtain them was through grave robbers who followed funerals to the cemetery to know where to dig.
However, they really didn't dig up an entire casket. What they did was dig a hole above the tombstone down to the coffin, broke off the end, and pulled the body out.
To transport the body to the medical school, they often placed it in barrels of whisky that would not only preserve the body but look like they were transporting alcohol.
After delivering the body, the grave robbers would then sell the whisky to the medical students, some of whom were actually engaged in grave robbing themselves....
So you can see that though this is really disgusting, it is etymologically possible that is where the term rot gut came from.
Of course another possible way the term came about is what whisky can do to your innards.
after decades of the U.S. bailing out the rest of the world, wouldn't it be fair that the rest of the world come together and help out in this financial crisis? sort of like a Marshall Plan in reverse?
The attendant spotted you immediately as you pulled into the station and inquired, "Can I help you?
"Yes, I will have 7 gallons of regular gas for $1.05 and the free gift tumbler (glass*) you show on the sign plus the green trading stamps."
The attendant unscrewed the gas cap and put 7 gallons of gas into the fuel tank. He checked the oil and showed the customer the dip stick. If oil was needed, he removed the cap on the engine and poured the oil into the motor.
Next, he checked the radiator for anti-freeze, followed by a check of the tires and the spare for the proper amount of air pressure.
He wasn't finished. There remained the washing of the windows.
Finally, he collected the $1.05 plus 15¢ for the quart of oil, hurried into the station for change, returned with the change, gift tumbler, green stamps and a polite "Thank You."
Now, at the low current price of $3.77/gallon, you get to pump the gas yourself, wash your own windows, check you own oil, monitor the air pressure yourself, and as far as getting anything free, the only thing that seems free is the receipt!
and we wonder why the oil companies are making the highest profit margin of any industry!
i found this little story in a free publication that is sent to my father, who has been dead for 17 years now, called the "Keenager". it's a monthly sent out by Catholic Charities. and i don't have the faintest idea why my father would be getting something from them. my mother was Catholic but my father was high Anglican! (Episcopalians to those of you who are thoroughly vetted as Americans.) i guess i should cancel it, but these stories and some of the jokes are funny. i guess i am getting old...
*i had to put glass in parentheses with this note because I wasn't sure if younger people would know that a tumbler is more than a guy doing somersaults at the circus or gymnastics meet. i contemplated doing the same for green stamps and dip stick but decided they can do some investigating on their own.
I have had a political crush on Donna Brazile for a long time. She is forward thinking, open and honest in what she reports and comments. She is not afraid to say things as they are and this is an example of how race cannot be part of the 2008 election.
The video below is from a panel discussion the New Yorker Magazine held last Saturday, October 4, 2008, moderated by Jeffrey Toobin. It is the part with Ms. Brazile pointedly saying that the election has to get down to the issues and she puts things into a real perspective making it as obvious as she can that this election is one of the most important in U.S. history.
It frightens me that we could go backwards as she implies explicitly and not just on race.
An idea that has been rolling around in my head for the last couple of weeks is a comparison of the McCain campaign to the all out-fight the Catholic church waged in the Middle Ages against the Guttenberg Printing Press. The church wanted to keep people ignorant so that they could keep control of their thoughts, their lives, and their money - complete enslavement.
The church fought to keep the invention of Gutenberg's printing press under wraps, because if people could easily get printed material, more would want to learn how to read. If people know how to read, their minds can be open to new ideas that others have and form their own ideas as well. The church realized that knowledge was dangerous to their control.
Sadly, this still goes on in some places in the world, e.g. the Taliban in Afghanistan, and other groups, even in this country, struggle to control what people think by feeding on their fears, by trying to stifle the media through intimidation and innuendo, and by pushing fundamentalism on the country.
i'm sure Jefferson, Madison, Adams et. al. are somewhere shaking their heads at what they are seeing...
i frequently, no always, refer to the current president as Tsar George. there are reasons for this.
while working on my B.A. i majored in History. my main focus was on constitutional history, but since i was also taking Russian Language classes, i took a number of classes dealing with Russian history. one of my Russian teachers actually was a member of the Romanov family and had gone into exile; so she had fascinating stories. i was entranced by the years leading up to the Russian Revolution of 1917 and it's precursor in 1905. in my opinion the entire fault can be laid at the feet of the Romanov's.
there is a quote about Tzar Nicholas II that explains my feelings on the point:
In reality, he was a weak and indecisive man dominated by his wife and isolated from the socio-economic problems of his own country.
though no one can attest to Barbara Bush being dominating, the rest of the quote hits home about the last eight years.
the only thing i see Tsar George being decisive about in the last eight years was going to Iraq. there is another parallel between George II and Nicholas II in this:
The Russians had no contingency plans for a partial mobilization, and on 31 July 1914 Nicholas took the fateful step of confirming the order for a general mobilization. Nicholas was strongly counselled against mobilization of the Russian forces but chose to ignore such advice.
sound familiar?
so, hopefully, you can see why i have referred to Mr. Bush as Tsar George Bushanov. not because of the autocracy he tries to enforce but because as George Santayana said, "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." [i even have it at the top right of this website...]
you may also be able to tell my connecting Dick Rasputin as Tzar George's sidekick. you can read about Grigori Rasputin and see the parallel's.
One of the cornerstones of the U.S. Constitution insisted by the Founding Fathers was Freedom of Religion. They were aware that the New World was made up of many peoples from many lands who had a myriad of beliefs. Jefferson, Franklin, Adams, et al lived in an empire that had little tolerance for other beliefs and religions with a state sanctioned religion - The Church of England. The Church of England was founded purely for political expediency - Henry VIII's hunger for an heir.
Over the course of history, there have been many examples of theocratic governments and it is obvious that they all had one thing in common - repression of anyone or any belief that did not fit into their world view. Most often this repression was violent.
Today, we see perfect examples of theocracy's rule in the Muslim world by extremists who have highjacked the religion of Mohammed to meet their own thirst for power and control. Countless citizens are maimed, murdered, exiled and tortured simply because they do not believe as others think they should.
The guarantee of the Constitution by Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
was written into the document to prevent the abuses so often foisted by theocratic governments.
Sadly, in the U.S. today we have been bombarded by rhetoric and innuendo by certain political forces that believe we should be subjected to a form of christianist sharia. They believe, wrongly, that the country was founded on christianist principles when the Founding Fathers overwhelming in personal writings warned of christianist inequities. In fact, most all of them viewed themselves simply as deists - "the belief that the existence and nature of God comes from reason and personal experience."
Inherent in "freedom of religion" is the idea "freedom from religion. There are people who, through the use of reason and personal experience, have come to the conclusion that there is no god. This is as unique a conviction as choosing a denomination or sect with which to identify for others. During this current presidential campaign it has been invoked time after time that the one type of person who could never be elected president would be an atheist or agnostic, and nearly 100% of people believe it.
The logo at the beginning of this post was created for a blogswarm addressing the support of Freedom of Religion. The purpose of this tactic is to make as many people aware of a certain issue as possible, to bring focus on a problem or possible injustice, and to foster understanding and acceptance.
I find it interesting that the group initiating Blog Against Theocracy 2008 chose Easter weekend for this action, a time of rebirth and reaffirmation. It is appropriate to remind people that their right and freedom to believe as they choose is written into law, that it is under attack at all times, and that there is always a demagogue right around the corner believing they have the answer to everything - no questions allowed.
You can find out more about the blogswarm by clicking Here
We've been hearing news story after news story and weather report after weather report about the amount of snow the country is having this winter. Milwaukee seems to be leading the totals this year when it is usually Buffalo, New York.
With all the talk of weather change, we have forgotten exactly what winter is about. Chicago for the last several years has had very mild winters. However, we've had a lot of snow this past week and the temperature outside right now is -2° with windchills of up to [or should I say down to?] -26°.
This is more like the winters I grew up with. As a reminder, here is a picture from 1967 and the snowstorm/blizzard on January 26th. We had 23 inches of snow in 12 hours with 6-12 foot drifts!
Lake Shore Drive, the major lakefront roadway No one was going anywhere.
Over the next couple of weeks there was more snow and, in typical Chicago fashion, the temperatures plummeted. It seems, for as long as I can remember, that everytime there is a major snowfall in Chicago the thermometer drops and we have a period of extremely cold weather.
I remember the storm in 1967. I was at university and hardly ever came home. I did that weekend for a friend's wedding. She had the wedding [it ended in divorce; I wonder if there's a connection?] I also made it back, driving, to school on Sunday. I don't remember how. The buses were stranded in the middle of the major streets. It took weeks for people to dig out in some cases.
Weather is always a topic of conversation with people. Usually one of the first things we talk about when we meet. We're the same here in Chicago. We have one other saying about weather that is really pretty accurate:
If you don't like the weather, wait 15 minutes. It'll change.
I'm not sure how widely known Maxwell Street is in other parts of the country, but in Chicago people still talk about it. It was an institution, especially during the Great Depression, where most people could afford to buy the things they needed. The market was notorious for not just sales but the shenanigans that went on with them. It was filled with characters such as street-hookers, scam artists, immigrants, fair-minded merchants, pickpockets, and an entire gamut of society that would make a great movie.
I remember hearing about Maxwell Street from my family when I was growing up. Most stories were really funny. They needed, as did most people in Chicago at the time, to shop for necessities to survive, as well as amusement, I'm sure.
Like the time Aunt Sarah was walking through Maxwell Street to purchase something. One of the hawkers approached her and quite assertively tried to sell her underwear. Her response was, "I don't wear underwear." This was probably back in the 1930's. You can imagine she not only had a mouth on her but wasn't afraid to use it. I loved her for that as well as much else.
My grandmother, Nu Zina, told the story of going there to buy a pair of shoes for one of my uncles or my grandfather. She picked them out; the salesperson wrapped them in the finest newspaper; and she took them home. When she got home they were both left-foot shoes. I can hear her swearing and cursing in her Italian dialect of Gok in my head right now.
She went back to Maxwell Street and lambasted the man. Of course, she really didn't speak English, so one of my aunts or uncles went with her - probably Aunt Sarah. He relented and gave her another pair.
When she got home she unwrapped the shoes and the epithets spewed forth from her mouth so loud and fast that the whole neighborhood knew what had happened. This time, he gave her two right-footed shoes.
My grandfather had to go back this time. He was afraid she'd kill the guy. He got a right and a left shoe this time. He probably told the guy that, though my Nana was only about 4'9", she'd kick his ass right into Lake Michigan from where he stood on Maxwell Street - a mile away from the lake.
There are many notorious reasons and stories why Maxwell Street is so famous. There is one with which a lot of people around the country would be familiar - Chicago-style Blues.
made even more famous by Jake and Elwood -
These are the types of memories that give Thanksgiving meaning...
Bush argued the current debate over the Iraq war and the administration's anti-terror methods harkens back to debates decades ago over resisting action when Soviet founder Vladimir Lenin first talked about launching a communist revolution, when Adolf Hitler began moves to establish an "Aryan superstate" in Germany, and in the early days of the Cold War when some advocated accommodation of the Soviet Unio
Yes, there is the question, "Well, what if I'm wrong?" in the back of your head when it comes to being opposed to the actions of the Bush/Cheney administration. It's playing directly into the tactics of fear that this administration has used over and over to garner "pseudo" support for an action that has gone terribly wrong.
George Santayana's quote on history is the first thing on the top right column of this blog. What kind of learning is necessary? Why is there always an "axis of evil"? Why has the Bush/Cheney administration said that there is no room to talk with Iran and, in fact, turned down Iran for direct, non-conditional talks in the past?
I used to think that maybe a nuclear war would be what it takes to make people come to their senses at the senselessness of this sort of conflict. One thing that I forgot to take into consideration is the lack of sense in people like Bush, Cheney and Ahmadinejad. It's interesting that all three are "lame ducks". Of course, the scary thing is that we have until 2009 before these lamesters are out of office. While, ironically, bin Laden goes on his merry little way.
What's the difference between reading the pulse on the mind of a nation/world or a finger on the button of destruction?
