Damn. Robin Williams.
It was a shock to hear he had committed suicide. I had known about his depression. It's a given that anyone with a drug and/or alcohol problem has a history of depression. At times I think half the world suffers from depression and other times I'm wondering about people who don't. What's wrong with them? Don't they know how hard life can be?
I'll repeat a story here (as I am wont to do) about the asshole psychiatrist. No, not that one. This was a real one.
Long story short, I was tending bar at the yuppie place downtown and, as I approached two customers at the end of the bar, I hear one say to the other: "If you want to kill yourself, do it. If you don't want to kill yourself, see me."
"So", sezs I, "what can I get you, besides a soul?"
The asshole then explained to me that he was a psychiatrist, as if that justified the lack of compassion. Maybe in his world it did. A lot of them get into the field to find out what is wrong with them from what I've heard. This guy might just have been a dick with a degree to prove it. Beyond my initial witty repartee I don't recall the ensuing conversation verbatim but, the gist of it was that I thought he was a dick and he thought he was a healthcare professional. It wasn't as contentious as you might think it should have been because I can be as deft with live-action trolls as I can be with the internet variety. This guy surely thought he had gotten the best of me. Not in this lifetime.
A lot of people without degrees lack that doctor's compassion for their fellow man and woman. We often hear of suicide as "the cowards way out" and I'm sure some assholes will say that about Robin Williams just as they say it about teenagers who take their lives after failing a test at school or something else seemingly innocuous.
A permanent solution to a temporary problem...
Obviously, it was not a temporary problem with Mr. Williams. He had probably struggled with depression most all his life. No amount of drugs or alcohol could drown that pain. Of course there was therapy, certainly with doctors more qualified than the asshole I served. And he was so fucking funny! How could someone be so funny and so sad? The tears of a clown...You just don't know. Be glad you don't.
But, be glad you asked. It doesn't matter how wealthy, famous or funny a person may be. If depression gets a hold of you, it will grip you tight regardless. For many, like Robin, it's a death grip. For most it's a constant struggle, every fucking day, not to be happy but to maintain. Be glad you asked. Don't ever get so smart that you justify losing your compassion for others.
Hang on to your life. Hang on to your soul. Not everyone can do both.
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
Friday, August 8, 2014
One of these things is not like the other
"They're all a bunch of crooks!"
"Two sides of the same coin!"
"I can't tell one party from the other anymore!"
Well, you're not paying attention, if you believe these things.
In a perfect world we should barely be able to tell the difference between the two parties. In a country like America, should two parties be so ridiculously disparate? If you answered "yes", why? Why should a major party in this country be stopping just short of calling for bloody revolution while still espousing this country as "THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!" ?
Why isn't Elizabeth Warren a republican? There's no one in the GOP even close to being like her. Or Bernie Sanders. He's an independent and an actual living, breathing socialist but he's aligned with the democrats. By the same token, could Louis Gohmert or Bobby Jindhal be democrats? Can you think of any GOP congressperson who could pass for a liberal or progressive democrat?
Fifty years ago you probably could. I saw recently where John Fugelsang described himself as "an Eisenhower republican" and, though he IS a comdeian, I don't think he was kidding. Ike was an old school republican, the kind they don't make anymore. He led the Allied Forces to victory in WWII and, upon completing his second term as President, warned us of the danger of the military industrial complex. Fifty years later we had VP Dick Cheney, Haliburton/KBR and the Iraq war. Ike probably wasn't a republican or a democrat, having been a General and all, but, it was the GOP that convinced him to run.
I'm no expert but, I read and pay attention and I don't think Ike would make the cut in Iowa as a GOP presidential candidate. His opponent in WWII, Hitler, would have a better chance. Yep, I went there. I didn't say that he'd win. He was no friend of Israel, ya know. He'd have to be now. You never hear today's republican's sing the praises of Eisenhower though. One reason might be that he taxed the wealthy and corporations at a rate of @90%. That was the time of Beaver Cleaver, a time that today's GOP claims to want to get back to, just not at such a tax rate. They think they can do it without taxing the wealthy. They can't. They're giving America the business when they say so, the Eddie Haskel's....
And as much as they love to love Reagan, he would not get the nomination either. Mind you, he's the guy that started all this divisive nonsense in the 80's. Did you know that, except for the eight times he raised taxes, Ronald Reagan never raised taxes? There are people who believe he never did raise taxes. They write this stuff down, folks. What Reagan was was an actor. He was very quotable. I think he had cutesy writers like Clint Eastwood did. With that Go ahead...Make my day... spiel they both used, they might have shared writers, maybe an agent.
But, I think Reagan was the last of the republicans whom democrats could accept when it came time to give the republicans their turn at running things. Technically it was GHW Bush (daddy) but people tired of him after one term. His boy- let's face it- was appointed by the Supreme Court and barely won his second term. They only talk about him to condemn democrats for talking about him.
A lot of experts say it could be 20 years before the GOP wins the White House. And that's if the party survives itself. Numerically there are more registered democrats than their are republicans. The way republicans won in the past was by running candidates that were acceptable to democrats or preferable to democratic candidates. There has to be some crossover voting from people with a sense of fair play. These people might have voted for GW Bush, for example, after eight wonderful years of Bill Clinton, thinking: "How bad could the Bush guy fuck things up?"
Well, now we know.
Once upon a time in America it might have been correct to say there was little or no difference between the two parties. That would be a good thing. Back then, they all had the welfare of all American people in their hearts and minds. Republicans backed unions when Ike was president. Not anymore. What was the difference between the two parties then? Actual fiscal conservatism maybe? Republicans had a sharper pencil? Fiscal conservatism now means taking the money that would go to feed and clothe poor people and giving it to people on Wall Street who already have money so they can make more and make America greater. But, to make matters worse they say don't give anybody anything when you can teach them through starvation to invent a better mouse trap if you're hungry.
Greatest country in the world but, we can't- we won't- take care of our own? Saying you are THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD is not being great- that is an advertising slogan. And saying you are the greatest while do nothing to make it so and so much to prove the opposite, is just insane.
The parties aren't the same. They are not even twin sons of different mothers. They're not even close, not anymore. That's too bad.
"Two sides of the same coin!"
"I can't tell one party from the other anymore!"
Well, you're not paying attention, if you believe these things.
In a perfect world we should barely be able to tell the difference between the two parties. In a country like America, should two parties be so ridiculously disparate? If you answered "yes", why? Why should a major party in this country be stopping just short of calling for bloody revolution while still espousing this country as "THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!" ?
Why isn't Elizabeth Warren a republican? There's no one in the GOP even close to being like her. Or Bernie Sanders. He's an independent and an actual living, breathing socialist but he's aligned with the democrats. By the same token, could Louis Gohmert or Bobby Jindhal be democrats? Can you think of any GOP congressperson who could pass for a liberal or progressive democrat?
Fifty years ago you probably could. I saw recently where John Fugelsang described himself as "an Eisenhower republican" and, though he IS a comdeian, I don't think he was kidding. Ike was an old school republican, the kind they don't make anymore. He led the Allied Forces to victory in WWII and, upon completing his second term as President, warned us of the danger of the military industrial complex. Fifty years later we had VP Dick Cheney, Haliburton/KBR and the Iraq war. Ike probably wasn't a republican or a democrat, having been a General and all, but, it was the GOP that convinced him to run.
I'm no expert but, I read and pay attention and I don't think Ike would make the cut in Iowa as a GOP presidential candidate. His opponent in WWII, Hitler, would have a better chance. Yep, I went there. I didn't say that he'd win. He was no friend of Israel, ya know. He'd have to be now. You never hear today's republican's sing the praises of Eisenhower though. One reason might be that he taxed the wealthy and corporations at a rate of @90%. That was the time of Beaver Cleaver, a time that today's GOP claims to want to get back to, just not at such a tax rate. They think they can do it without taxing the wealthy. They can't. They're giving America the business when they say so, the Eddie Haskel's....
And as much as they love to love Reagan, he would not get the nomination either. Mind you, he's the guy that started all this divisive nonsense in the 80's. Did you know that, except for the eight times he raised taxes, Ronald Reagan never raised taxes? There are people who believe he never did raise taxes. They write this stuff down, folks. What Reagan was was an actor. He was very quotable. I think he had cutesy writers like Clint Eastwood did. With that Go ahead...Make my day... spiel they both used, they might have shared writers, maybe an agent.
But, I think Reagan was the last of the republicans whom democrats could accept when it came time to give the republicans their turn at running things. Technically it was GHW Bush (daddy) but people tired of him after one term. His boy- let's face it- was appointed by the Supreme Court and barely won his second term. They only talk about him to condemn democrats for talking about him.
A lot of experts say it could be 20 years before the GOP wins the White House. And that's if the party survives itself. Numerically there are more registered democrats than their are republicans. The way republicans won in the past was by running candidates that were acceptable to democrats or preferable to democratic candidates. There has to be some crossover voting from people with a sense of fair play. These people might have voted for GW Bush, for example, after eight wonderful years of Bill Clinton, thinking: "How bad could the Bush guy fuck things up?"
Well, now we know.
Once upon a time in America it might have been correct to say there was little or no difference between the two parties. That would be a good thing. Back then, they all had the welfare of all American people in their hearts and minds. Republicans backed unions when Ike was president. Not anymore. What was the difference between the two parties then? Actual fiscal conservatism maybe? Republicans had a sharper pencil? Fiscal conservatism now means taking the money that would go to feed and clothe poor people and giving it to people on Wall Street who already have money so they can make more and make America greater. But, to make matters worse they say don't give anybody anything when you can teach them through starvation to invent a better mouse trap if you're hungry.
Greatest country in the world but, we can't- we won't- take care of our own? Saying you are THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD is not being great- that is an advertising slogan. And saying you are the greatest while do nothing to make it so and so much to prove the opposite, is just insane.
The parties aren't the same. They are not even twin sons of different mothers. They're not even close, not anymore. That's too bad.
Wednesday, August 6, 2014
Egotesticles
Wow. Topix is so dead even Sublime quit!
Well, he always quits so, I should hold the presses on that. Back in the day, yours truly personally pulled him off the Topix ledge at least twice. Then it was a matter of the female Dregs not paying him enough attention and now it's something to do with someone paying him too much attention. Something like that. The gist of it seemed to be that he was getting treated like his friends treat Ferrerman. Suddenly, Topix wasn't the fun and games he had condoned for so long. Worse, his dumb ass probably still had no idea that the calls were coming from his basement. Or, maybe he did and that's why he ran from the house in tears?
Topix is a lot like life. It's a lot like politics and it's a lot like the reality TV game shows, Big Brother and Survivor. I always said it was like Survivor island except without the beaches, chicks in bikinis or the million dollar prize. Wait- it's really not like Survivor island then, is it? Where do I get these analogies? How about "sixth grade"? It's like sixth grade. Is that better at describing how silly it is?
Along with Sublime running home in tears, I recently saw where two guys(?) were supposed to meet at recess, presumably to fight. Well, we can't be having troll on troll violence. We really can't when one person is quite likely both imaginary combatants. Stop beating yourself up, man!
That scenario happens fairly often, maybe even among 'real' people. Someone gets e-tough and another guy 'steps up'. It's usually pretty funny even though it's not meant to be, because everyone knows that it's not ever going to transpire. How tough do you have to be to be on the internet? Not at all that tough to be a troll. That's why there are so many combat war veterans who can't keep their stories straight. You don't have to be real tough and you don't have to get real close to the truth. And if you subtract one Sub, he can be replaced with one Sub Lite doing the same lame schtick. Well, a little watered down is all. Close enough for Topix. That's amusing in itself .
I get accused here of taking Topix "too seriously" and that's by people who post on Topix themselves and rush each day to my blog...to read more about Topix! They hate it when I instead post my award winning political opinions. Of course, I do that just to fuck with their heads. Or, so the Ferrerman would have you believe...
Well, he always quits so, I should hold the presses on that. Back in the day, yours truly personally pulled him off the Topix ledge at least twice. Then it was a matter of the female Dregs not paying him enough attention and now it's something to do with someone paying him too much attention. Something like that. The gist of it seemed to be that he was getting treated like his friends treat Ferrerman. Suddenly, Topix wasn't the fun and games he had condoned for so long. Worse, his dumb ass probably still had no idea that the calls were coming from his basement. Or, maybe he did and that's why he ran from the house in tears?
Topix is a lot like life. It's a lot like politics and it's a lot like the reality TV game shows, Big Brother and Survivor. I always said it was like Survivor island except without the beaches, chicks in bikinis or the million dollar prize. Wait- it's really not like Survivor island then, is it? Where do I get these analogies? How about "sixth grade"? It's like sixth grade. Is that better at describing how silly it is?
Along with Sublime running home in tears, I recently saw where two guys(?) were supposed to meet at recess, presumably to fight. Well, we can't be having troll on troll violence. We really can't when one person is quite likely both imaginary combatants. Stop beating yourself up, man!
That scenario happens fairly often, maybe even among 'real' people. Someone gets e-tough and another guy 'steps up'. It's usually pretty funny even though it's not meant to be, because everyone knows that it's not ever going to transpire. How tough do you have to be to be on the internet? Not at all that tough to be a troll. That's why there are so many combat war veterans who can't keep their stories straight. You don't have to be real tough and you don't have to get real close to the truth. And if you subtract one Sub, he can be replaced with one Sub Lite doing the same lame schtick. Well, a little watered down is all. Close enough for Topix. That's amusing in itself .
I get accused here of taking Topix "too seriously" and that's by people who post on Topix themselves and rush each day to my blog...to read more about Topix! They hate it when I instead post my award winning political opinions. Of course, I do that just to fuck with their heads. Or, so the Ferrerman would have you believe...
Thursday, July 31, 2014
They won't come back 'til it's over, over here
There is this: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/07/30/1317847/-Republicans-fight-to-keep-tax-breaks-for-companies-moving-jobs-overseas?detail=facebook
The republicans aren't even trying anymore. On Jon Stewart last night I saw Orrin Hatch flatly saying that corporations have a responsibility to their shareholders to make a profit. He might as well say that he, and certain other members of Congress, have a responsibility to the shareholders of the GOP- corporations- who have bought stock in Congress.
I've long since already heard dumbasses in the threads regurgitate the "responsibility to shareholders" line as if it were gospel or even Constitutional. It's been used to defend not raising the minimum and, of course, eliminating it as well. How can you meet the fiscal responsibility of shareholder profits if greedy employees demand wages?! I just wonder how soon before the thread trash starts in on how Obama is punishing success with our corporate taxes being the highest in the world. Oh- already? Sheesh, that was quick.
I think the corporate rate is 39%. I also think that no corporation actually pays that. We already know that many corporations pay ZERO in taxes and that some, like Exxon, actually pay nothing and get billions in cash from the Federal government. I think that any company actually paying 39% is (a) stupid and/or (2) too cheap to get halfway decent accountants. Maybe Walgreens was filing the 1040EZ?
During the Eisenhower years (the last great republican) the tax rate for the Richie Rich crowd was 90%. They had accountants in the fifties so, no, Uncle Sam did not get $9 out of every $10 that Scrooge McDuck or General Motors made. But, they got more than they are getting now and I bet that no one had lobbyists working to ensure they paid nothing, like we have today. And we the people reaped the rewards of that corporate responsibility to America. There was no internet at the time and no idiotic assholes with avatars to say the gubmint was "punishing success".
John Steinbeck noted that American's would never truly embrace socialism because each of us considers themselves to be a temporarily embarrassed millionaire. Or, like Lewis Black sums that up, we all believe we are going to win the lottery. To that end, we don't want harsh taxes to be there when we get there. We really think like that.
My God- how can these assholes feel sorry for rich people? Numerically, the 1% IS a minority but, who in their right mind could complain? You may not want to be black or gay but, you damn sure would change places with a rich guy. Even a gay, black rich guy.
Since the Reagan years, companies have been shipping jobs over seas for tax advantages but, primarily for cheap labor. With the current "inversion" trend with corporations like Walgreens, they don't have to physically move out of the country. There's nothing to be gained by building a Walgreens on every corner in Bangladesh. Do they even have corners in Bangladesh? Walgreens has simply bought themselves into a foreign country and out of a responsibility to ours. They make their money here, camped out on our intersections but pay no dollars for the upkeep of the roads leading to their stores. That's your job. Your dollars.
I think their endgame is to bring the corporations home. And bring the jobs home. All they have to do is make America more business friendly. No Unions. No minimum wage. No corporate taxes. I've said it before and here I say it again: There is NO reason we can't be the third world labor. Your corporate masters do not care. They do not know you or love you. You either exist to buy their products or to make them. That's it.
It's all over but the shouting for the American Dream. And the shouting- which is for the rich- will end as the middle class cuts it's own goddamn throat, silenced for forever.
The republicans aren't even trying anymore. On Jon Stewart last night I saw Orrin Hatch flatly saying that corporations have a responsibility to their shareholders to make a profit. He might as well say that he, and certain other members of Congress, have a responsibility to the shareholders of the GOP- corporations- who have bought stock in Congress.
I've long since already heard dumbasses in the threads regurgitate the "responsibility to shareholders" line as if it were gospel or even Constitutional. It's been used to defend not raising the minimum and, of course, eliminating it as well. How can you meet the fiscal responsibility of shareholder profits if greedy employees demand wages?! I just wonder how soon before the thread trash starts in on how Obama is punishing success with our corporate taxes being the highest in the world. Oh- already? Sheesh, that was quick.
I think the corporate rate is 39%. I also think that no corporation actually pays that. We already know that many corporations pay ZERO in taxes and that some, like Exxon, actually pay nothing and get billions in cash from the Federal government. I think that any company actually paying 39% is (a) stupid and/or (2) too cheap to get halfway decent accountants. Maybe Walgreens was filing the 1040EZ?
During the Eisenhower years (the last great republican) the tax rate for the Richie Rich crowd was 90%. They had accountants in the fifties so, no, Uncle Sam did not get $9 out of every $10 that Scrooge McDuck or General Motors made. But, they got more than they are getting now and I bet that no one had lobbyists working to ensure they paid nothing, like we have today. And we the people reaped the rewards of that corporate responsibility to America. There was no internet at the time and no idiotic assholes with avatars to say the gubmint was "punishing success".
John Steinbeck noted that American's would never truly embrace socialism because each of us considers themselves to be a temporarily embarrassed millionaire. Or, like Lewis Black sums that up, we all believe we are going to win the lottery. To that end, we don't want harsh taxes to be there when we get there. We really think like that.
My God- how can these assholes feel sorry for rich people? Numerically, the 1% IS a minority but, who in their right mind could complain? You may not want to be black or gay but, you damn sure would change places with a rich guy. Even a gay, black rich guy.
Since the Reagan years, companies have been shipping jobs over seas for tax advantages but, primarily for cheap labor. With the current "inversion" trend with corporations like Walgreens, they don't have to physically move out of the country. There's nothing to be gained by building a Walgreens on every corner in Bangladesh. Do they even have corners in Bangladesh? Walgreens has simply bought themselves into a foreign country and out of a responsibility to ours. They make their money here, camped out on our intersections but pay no dollars for the upkeep of the roads leading to their stores. That's your job. Your dollars.
I think their endgame is to bring the corporations home. And bring the jobs home. All they have to do is make America more business friendly. No Unions. No minimum wage. No corporate taxes. I've said it before and here I say it again: There is NO reason we can't be the third world labor. Your corporate masters do not care. They do not know you or love you. You either exist to buy their products or to make them. That's it.
It's all over but the shouting for the American Dream. And the shouting- which is for the rich- will end as the middle class cuts it's own goddamn throat, silenced for forever.
Tuesday, July 15, 2014
The Business of America
Ever hear the phrase: "It makes perfect sense..."? All things being equal, shouldn't things also make imperfect sense? Maybe even stupid sense? You know, sense that sounds good if you don't really listen or think too much about it. Stupid sense!
Leading up to the 2012 elections, Mitt Romney told a story about visiting a factory in China that- according to him- had a fence with guards around it to keep people from breaking IN to work the desirable 98 cents per hour jobs. Mitt wondered aloud how America could compete with that, in the global economy.
Mitt is an asshole but, he's not an idiot. I really doubt he thought the jobs were so great that the fence and guards were there to keep out job seekers whom he said would sneak in to work for free in hopes of earning a position. Mitt just thought that you were an idiot and/or he hoped that you would also be asshole enough to accept the practical logic of Americans (but not you) working for less for the betterment of all. People had been hearing for years that "unions (had gotten) too big for their britches" and that meant they were the culprits behind high prices. So, disband the unions and lower wages and the result will be a a stronger and more competitive America in the world markets. Right? It just makes sense.
Well, it makes stupid sense to stupid people. I swear- I don't think anyone hates Americans more than Americans themselves.
Do the math. How does tens of millions of Americans making next to nothing, make your life better? Isn't that what the other countries are for? There are people in the GOP advocating for the elimination of the minimum wage. Yep, while most are fighting for or against raising the minimum wage, some are advocating there be no minimum at all.
$7.25 is "too much"....but you can do BETTER if there is no minimum....
Huh? That doesn't even make stupid sense. How can they want you to make more when they think you are already making too much? Who falls for that?
I think that mostly the idiots who regurgitate that economic vomit fall for that. They are also ignorant and egotistical enough to believe that such an economic scheme wouldn't happen to them, just the lesser Americans. It's odd but, where rich people are concerned, they ask how you can say an income is "too much". Yet with unions, teachers, the working poor- everyone but the rich- they readily deem whether those folks make "too much". It's like the axiom about alcoholics and drinks: "One is too many and a thousand is not enough." So, excess is success and the poor should just never get started. Now, that is some stupid sense.
There is no reason that the United States of America shouldn't be the third world labor source for the world. In fact, for *our* corporate leaders, it makes perfect sense. All we have to do is work cheaper than competing nations. How will Australia, for example, with their $16 an hour minimum compete against our NO minimum?
Don't give me American patriotism as a reason that this could never happen here. Profits trump patriotism every day. They always will. We will be in FEMA work camps and believe with all our hearts that " 'Merican work camps are THE GREATEST IN THE WORLD!!!!"
Tell me why else the greatest country in the world would kill unions and wages, neuter the EPA and conspire to sell off federal land if not for profit? It's nothing personal, America. It's just business. It's what we do, just usually to others. Now it's our turn-again- to be exploited.
Leading up to the 2012 elections, Mitt Romney told a story about visiting a factory in China that- according to him- had a fence with guards around it to keep people from breaking IN to work the desirable 98 cents per hour jobs. Mitt wondered aloud how America could compete with that, in the global economy.
Mitt is an asshole but, he's not an idiot. I really doubt he thought the jobs were so great that the fence and guards were there to keep out job seekers whom he said would sneak in to work for free in hopes of earning a position. Mitt just thought that you were an idiot and/or he hoped that you would also be asshole enough to accept the practical logic of Americans (but not you) working for less for the betterment of all. People had been hearing for years that "unions (had gotten) too big for their britches" and that meant they were the culprits behind high prices. So, disband the unions and lower wages and the result will be a a stronger and more competitive America in the world markets. Right? It just makes sense.
Well, it makes stupid sense to stupid people. I swear- I don't think anyone hates Americans more than Americans themselves.
Do the math. How does tens of millions of Americans making next to nothing, make your life better? Isn't that what the other countries are for? There are people in the GOP advocating for the elimination of the minimum wage. Yep, while most are fighting for or against raising the minimum wage, some are advocating there be no minimum at all.
$7.25 is "too much"....but you can do BETTER if there is no minimum....
Huh? That doesn't even make stupid sense. How can they want you to make more when they think you are already making too much? Who falls for that?
I think that mostly the idiots who regurgitate that economic vomit fall for that. They are also ignorant and egotistical enough to believe that such an economic scheme wouldn't happen to them, just the lesser Americans. It's odd but, where rich people are concerned, they ask how you can say an income is "too much". Yet with unions, teachers, the working poor- everyone but the rich- they readily deem whether those folks make "too much". It's like the axiom about alcoholics and drinks: "One is too many and a thousand is not enough." So, excess is success and the poor should just never get started. Now, that is some stupid sense.
There is no reason that the United States of America shouldn't be the third world labor source for the world. In fact, for *our* corporate leaders, it makes perfect sense. All we have to do is work cheaper than competing nations. How will Australia, for example, with their $16 an hour minimum compete against our NO minimum?
Don't give me American patriotism as a reason that this could never happen here. Profits trump patriotism every day. They always will. We will be in FEMA work camps and believe with all our hearts that " 'Merican work camps are THE GREATEST IN THE WORLD!!!!"
Tell me why else the greatest country in the world would kill unions and wages, neuter the EPA and conspire to sell off federal land if not for profit? It's nothing personal, America. It's just business. It's what we do, just usually to others. Now it's our turn-again- to be exploited.
Sunday, July 13, 2014
First, do no harm.
I watched a nice piece of video by Lawrence O'Donnell from his show "The Last Word", from the night he returned after recuperating from a car accident in the Virgin Islands. It was about 18 minutes long and he covered a lot more ground than I will cover here so, I'm too lazy to link it. No real need. You may like to google it though.
One of the things he talked about was the respect he had for the nurses who had been such a huge help to his recovery. He spoke about their dedication to helping people and saving lives and how, aside from making a living doing what they love, they wanted nothing beyond a "thank you" for doing just that. It's just what they do. They save lives. They do it without demanding everyone bow and scrape before them.
It got me to thinking how awesome that was. On any given night, anywhere in the world, untold numbers of nurses (and doctors, of course) are going about the business of saving human lives. That is cool. I mean- what do you do? Not to pick on you but, I bet you're like me and rarely, if ever, save lives. It's not that you or I suck. It's just that, as far as life =-saving goes, the best we can do is not kill people. That's a good thing but, in life's ledger, you're not adding, you're just not subtracting.
While I watched Lawrence talk about that, I thought of how useless politicians are. On the humanity scale they shouldn't even be on the same chart with nurses. If ever you start to feeling like your life is stagnate, wasted or lamentable, think about John Boehner. He is the Speaker Of The House and a career politician. He is in a position to actually DO good for an entire country, and the fuckwad chooses instead to sue the President Of The United States! You could be that useless fuck! Yeah, I know- he makes millions each year doing the bidding of the shareholders of America while he shirks his responsibility to the citizens who elected him. If that is your idea of success, you are no better than him. If it's not, you are!
Don't you feel better already? I know I do!
One of the things he talked about was the respect he had for the nurses who had been such a huge help to his recovery. He spoke about their dedication to helping people and saving lives and how, aside from making a living doing what they love, they wanted nothing beyond a "thank you" for doing just that. It's just what they do. They save lives. They do it without demanding everyone bow and scrape before them.
It got me to thinking how awesome that was. On any given night, anywhere in the world, untold numbers of nurses (and doctors, of course) are going about the business of saving human lives. That is cool. I mean- what do you do? Not to pick on you but, I bet you're like me and rarely, if ever, save lives. It's not that you or I suck. It's just that, as far as life =-saving goes, the best we can do is not kill people. That's a good thing but, in life's ledger, you're not adding, you're just not subtracting.
While I watched Lawrence talk about that, I thought of how useless politicians are. On the humanity scale they shouldn't even be on the same chart with nurses. If ever you start to feeling like your life is stagnate, wasted or lamentable, think about John Boehner. He is the Speaker Of The House and a career politician. He is in a position to actually DO good for an entire country, and the fuckwad chooses instead to sue the President Of The United States! You could be that useless fuck! Yeah, I know- he makes millions each year doing the bidding of the shareholders of America while he shirks his responsibility to the citizens who elected him. If that is your idea of success, you are no better than him. If it's not, you are!
Don't you feel better already? I know I do!
Mr. Obama...build up that wall!!!!!
Goodness, how times have changed! It seems like just yesterday Ronnie Reagan was telling Mr. Gorbachev to "...tear down that wall..." thus, ending communism as the world had come to know it. As if it were that easy. Now, the party of Reagan wants a wall built on the southern border of this country! Walls used to be bad. Now they are good? What the Hell happened?
I think maybe one party has construction contracts? Maybe Haliburton is in the wall business now that the wars have pretty much played out?
The current crisis is children from Central America crossing the border hoping to find humanitarian aid in the United States and finding republicans' instead. They are not exactly cheery, Walmart greeters.
The border is no more a crisis today because of these children, than it was five or twenty years ago. In fact, I think building a wall is less important now than it was twenty years ago. We have better border security now than then and we have better methods for controlling immigration both legal and illegal. But first, we have to understand why (mostly) Mexicans' came here in the first place. The answer is, money and a better way of life. See: "Why did all other people's emigrate to the US?" The story of Mexican immigration is not much different from Italians or Irish. Mexicans are just closer. No ships or planes were necessary.
Mexican migrants have been crossing legally for as long as we've had immigration laws. For decades they have picked fruit and other crops- the jobs that most Americans' didn't want to do. Though the work didn't pay well, it paid better than was available in Mexico. For generations, Mexican workers have gone back and forth between home and America and no one really cared. It was how the lettuce got picked. And from my personal experience in the bar and restaurant business it was how tables got cleared and dishes got washed. Beginning in the 80's when Reagan was president and tearing down walls was the thing to do, illegals started coming over in greater numbers. Both parties including the republicans noted that the illegals "(were) doing the jobs that Americans' didn't want to do..."
For the most part, that is bullshit, political rhetoric. Is there any other kind? In the case of construction, for example, illegals were willing to work for far less pay than Americans.It didn't take long for companies all over the country to replace American workers with untrained but eager and cheap illegals. This helped expedite the erosion of unions and across the board hindered the pay of tens of millions more Americans. Well, did you think they were going to stop at the Trade Unionists? Why stop there?
So, now many of the same folks who welcomed illegals with arms open at arms length the past few decades, no longer want them around. Illegals served their purpose. Unions are well in decline, wages are stagnated for millions and while some are calling for an increase in the minimum, many in the GOP are calling for ending the minimum. They are doing that with straight faces, I might add.
So- a wall? Now? I don't know that it's personal. Seems more like business. I bet some very influential people would profit from the walls construction, just like they've profited from the actions that caused the wall to be...necessary... to be deemed as necessary....
I think maybe one party has construction contracts? Maybe Haliburton is in the wall business now that the wars have pretty much played out?
The current crisis is children from Central America crossing the border hoping to find humanitarian aid in the United States and finding republicans' instead. They are not exactly cheery, Walmart greeters.
The border is no more a crisis today because of these children, than it was five or twenty years ago. In fact, I think building a wall is less important now than it was twenty years ago. We have better border security now than then and we have better methods for controlling immigration both legal and illegal. But first, we have to understand why (mostly) Mexicans' came here in the first place. The answer is, money and a better way of life. See: "Why did all other people's emigrate to the US?" The story of Mexican immigration is not much different from Italians or Irish. Mexicans are just closer. No ships or planes were necessary.
Mexican migrants have been crossing legally for as long as we've had immigration laws. For decades they have picked fruit and other crops- the jobs that most Americans' didn't want to do. Though the work didn't pay well, it paid better than was available in Mexico. For generations, Mexican workers have gone back and forth between home and America and no one really cared. It was how the lettuce got picked. And from my personal experience in the bar and restaurant business it was how tables got cleared and dishes got washed. Beginning in the 80's when Reagan was president and tearing down walls was the thing to do, illegals started coming over in greater numbers. Both parties including the republicans noted that the illegals "(were) doing the jobs that Americans' didn't want to do..."
For the most part, that is bullshit, political rhetoric. Is there any other kind? In the case of construction, for example, illegals were willing to work for far less pay than Americans.It didn't take long for companies all over the country to replace American workers with untrained but eager and cheap illegals. This helped expedite the erosion of unions and across the board hindered the pay of tens of millions more Americans. Well, did you think they were going to stop at the Trade Unionists? Why stop there?
So, now many of the same folks who welcomed illegals with arms open at arms length the past few decades, no longer want them around. Illegals served their purpose. Unions are well in decline, wages are stagnated for millions and while some are calling for an increase in the minimum, many in the GOP are calling for ending the minimum. They are doing that with straight faces, I might add.
So- a wall? Now? I don't know that it's personal. Seems more like business. I bet some very influential people would profit from the walls construction, just like they've profited from the actions that caused the wall to be...necessary... to be deemed as necessary....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)