Eight of them stood on stage in the hope of being their party's nominee for president. For more than an hour they attacked President Obama's failures, especially his inability to re-kindle a vibrant economy and add jobs to a bleak employment scene. The punditocracy fell in love with Rep. Michele Bachman and made note of the fact no one on the stage offered counterproposals to the Obama strategy. The analysis was self-serving, in the case of Bachman (remember the corporate media need a horserace with controversy to make money), and wrong in their summary of the candidates positions.
Every person on the stage that night in New Hampshire proposed to "roll back", "eliminate", "end", "repeal", and otherwise stop government regulation of everything. It was a consistent mantra from the extreme regressive side, (Bachman, Paul, Gingrich, Santorum, Cain) to the less regressive side, (Romney and Pawlenty). The root of all problems in this nation is government regulation according to the future standard bearers of this major political party. (A recent survey criticized American students for their lack of knowledge of American history. Given what occurred on that stage, America's students have an overabundance of role models to choose among.)
We turn on the "Wayback Machine" to see what we can discover. In the 1930's, President Roosevelt established a series of firewalls between Wall Street and Main Street. He created the Federal Reserve, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Securities and Exchange Commission, Comptroller of the Currency and the Glass-Steagle Act separating commercial banking from the speculative operations we have become so familiar with. From 1940 on, regressives slowly chipped away at all of this regulation culminating in the repeal of Glass-Steagle in 1999. The result allowed banks to take depositors savings and speculate and gamble with them. The SEC had been neutered by the revolving door between Wall Street and Washington. The Fed was run by a Republican appointee, Alan Greenspan, who loved the anarchist Ayn Rand and did not have a problem with the Bush Administration cutting trillions in taxes while spending billions on military adventure. He hated regulation and he left Goldman Sachs, Lehman Bros., J.P. Morgan et. al. to their own devices. You know how this all turns out.
President Bush pushed a $750 billion bailout of Wall Street (with no oversight as to how the money was spent so these same banks didn't have to lend it to main street). President Obama passed an $800 billion stimulus package, which was too small; but which put the banks all back on their feet. We are reaping the whirlwind of the rolling back of federal regulations and we continue to suffer for years to come.
The Wayback Machine is working to perfection and now we can watch President Reagan de-regulating the savings and loan industry. Ah, I remember how that worked out. Taxpayers spent over $500 million to bail them out too. (Do you remember the Bush involvement in Silverado Savings and Loan?)
It is impossible to find a single example of de-regulation where the average gum-chewing consumer has benefitted. The opposite is usually the case. President Clinton de-regulated radio and television in 1996. Over 50,000 jobs were lost. The regressive onslaught of talk radio would never have happened without de-regulation. Limbaugh, Hannity, the Weiner would all be local radio hosts none of whom would be number one in almost any major market. Their competition was eliminated not defeated. California de-regulated energy. The resulting rolling blackouts, loss of billions of dollars and electricity bills ranging from $200-$1000 a month were common and we are still paying the highest rates for electricity in the nation many years later. Lack of regulation has made our food less safe and allowed drug companies to test and monitor drugs which killed people who used them. There is no reason to beat a dead horse, you probably could come up with numerous other examples including how well P.G.& E. was regulated concerning its thousands of miles of gas pipelines.
Capitalism is a simple system. The capitalist wants to invest his or her money and receive a profit in return. Anything which reduces that profit is anathema. Therefore, true free market capitalists long for the Gilded Age. It was the time around 1890-1910, when the federal government was weak, corporate America ruled, the gap between the rich and poor was enormous, the middle class small, no income tax existed and regulations were a communist or socialist plot. The capitalist class opposed unions, minimum wages, collective bargaining and anything which raised their labor costs. They fought any attempt to make the workplace safe and made sure they could dump a cocktail of toxic sludge into any available river or stream. The U. S. Chamber of Commerce, the most evil organization in America today, fought against child labor laws and laws expanding job opportunities. They and their cronies were not called robber barons for nothing. More recently they waged an epic battle to prevent regulators from making autos safer, food safer, drugs safer and to protect the status quo as much as possible.
The true capitalist pines for a product that requires no employees and returns pure profit. Regulations are obstacles to overcome or subvert. Look at how the Bush administration put representatives, of the very industries being regulated, in charge of the regulatory agencies. Watch as the chamber and its allies attempt to weaken regulations governing the financial services industry. Corporate America will always fight any attempt to force it to pay better wages, under safer conditions, without ruining the land. (Have you seen what mountain-top coal mining does to an area?) After the gathering in New Hampshire, it appears they have won at least half the battle. What I don't understand is why Americans would go along with such dreams.
The middle class of this nation exists as a result of actions taken by the government over the last 100 years. Whether it was the right to organize workers, demand better wages, have access to higher education, use an interstate transit system which dramatically reduced the cost of moving product to market or research funded by government grants, the end result was the rise of a robust and solid middle class. Today, as the gap between the rich and poor widens and the middle class shrinks, and there is a direct relation to the weakening and elimination of regulations and laws that forced the capitalists to share more of their profit with average Americans. Yet, those 8 people on that stage in New Hampshire think they can be elected president by asking working Americans to cut their own throats, and past experience says they might be right.
I don't claim to understand how middle class Americans can vote for a party whose most recent leader reminded his supporters how he represents,"...the haves and the have-mores." How do you vote against you own enlightened self-interest? The 8 people on that stage believe you will do precisely that and have to hope you do not have access to a Wayback Machine so you can see what this country was like and will be again if they have their way.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Thursday, June 16, 2011
THINGS THAT GO BUMP IN THE NIGHT...
It is not lost on me; my rising to anyone's defense, particularly a Democratic progressive, on a sex-related issue could be the kiss of death. It is like Bernie Madoff recommending a financial advisor. Still, I could not let the firestorm over the actions of Congressman Anthony Weiner pass without comment. The reaction to Weiner is disproportionate and reflects a disquiet or fear that is pervasive in our culture.
According to published reports, Congressman Weiner sent pictures of himself to women online in various stages of undress and arousal. We also know he flirted and engaged in sexually themed text messages. We know most of this activity took place while he was single, but some after he recently married. The women involved were all adults. It is safe to assume some of them sent Weiner pictures and engaged in sexy repartee with him in return. Weiner never physically met any of these women. These were all virtual exchanges.
The Republicans have naturally called on Weiner to resign as have most Democrats including the President. The Republicans are just hypocrites. The Democrats are craven. They are mad at Weiner for stepping all over their attacks on Republicans for the disastrous Ryan plan to end Medicare as we know it. Weiner has taken them off message and for this he must go. The same Democrats who defended Bill Clinton, whose transgressions were real not virtual, are screaming for Weiner's scalp. It is not a chapter for profiles in courage.
Weiner should not resign. He should finish out his term and stand for re-election. If his constituents are disgusted with him, they can then turn him out. There is a bigger picture here which is much more interesting. For 2 weeks, there has been a media frenzy. (thus the Democrats anger at Weiner) You couldn't turn on the news without hearing about this scandal. Ask yourself what go more coverage, Weiner or the massacres happening in Syria right now? What dominated the news cycle...Weiner's sexting and tons of Weiner jokes or the fact millions of Americans are out of work, losing their homes and the economy might double dip, China is near war over the South China Sea, the nation faces possible default if the debt ceiling is not raised and speculators have driven the price of oil into the stratosphere? Now ask yourselves why this is happening?
Weiner did nothing illegal and if you want to pick nits about him being married during this activity, isn't that between him and his wife? I seem to remember a series of stories from the L.A, Times about Arnold Schwarzenegger. He was accused by at least 6 women of grabbing them, pinching them, touching their genitals and overall predatory school-boy, locker room behavior. His wife countered the stories did not show what a good father and husband he was and came to his defense. Many of you voted for him. Weiner's actions pale in comparison, yet the Times was attacked for publishing the stories...for trying to influence an election. for printing salacious rumors and innuendo and the media coverage was brief and didn't even make it to the tabloids. The calls for him not to run were few and far between. Why?
I don’t know how congressional Republicans look at themselves in the mirror. Recently, Newt Gingrich stood on a stage in New Hampshire running for President. This is a man who dumped his first wife while she was in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery. He dumped his second wife while having an affair with wife number 3 all while leading the attempt to impeach President Clinton for immoral actions. Really? Weiner's behavior is worse than that? Sen. John Ensign of Nevada had an affair with a member of his staff, bought off her husband, broke federal law and did not resign nor did the Republican leadership call for him to do so in any forceful way. He stepped down only because the Senate Ethics Committee was about to refer his case to the Justice Department. Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana has been re-elected despite paying for high priced hookers and despite being poster boy for hypocrite of 2008. He is anti gay marriage, pro birth, regressive evangelical Christian who wears his family values on his sleeve, wants new laws to make divorce more difficult and yet broke the law and engaged in prostitution, actions which were barely mentioned in the media and on the campaign trail. It is not a cliché to say the list is endless.
We live in a culture where everything has been sexualized and we are not comfortable with the freedom associated with this evolution. Catholic University just announced it is returning to single sex dorms because the coed dorms led to too much "hooking up". Their next step will be chastity belts. In some ways, the more open and tolerant we are, the more Puritan some people become. Someone has to stand up and say that the emperor has no clothes and acknowledge something is amiss in our society and it scares the hell out of us.
I can tell you for a fact, millions of Americans go online every night and pretend to be someone else, or assume different personalities and engage in every fantasy, fetish, and fabrication known to man. There is an illusion of anonymity, which creates the sense you can say or do anything because no one will ever find out and it’s all virtual or make believe anyway. You will never meet the person at the other end. Ironically, Weiner wasn't acting anonymously. The women he engaged asked to follow him via his Twitter account. He was more transparent than 90% of all other denizens of the cyber world.
Before he was married, Weiner doesn't have anything to apologize for and since he was married, he and his wife have to figure this whole issue out between them. One piece of advice to him and everyone: If what you are doing online you wouldn't do with someone looking over your shoulder, it has the potential to come back and bite you in the butt.
Weiner says he is taking a leave of absence for "treatment". What on earth is he going to get treatment about? He isn't a serial philanderer like Tiger Woods. He didn't do anything illegal. He showed terrible judgment and he lied about what he had done. He was embarrassed when his activities were discovered. So, is this the new standard now? Anyone who makes these mistakes must resign? Would there be anyone left in Washington or any marriages or relationships left to defend under this new code of ethics?
Maybe this is all a symptom of a fear gripping some Americans. Sex is everywhere. Traditional cultural milestones are going the way of the dodo. Marriage is losing popularity and if people choose to get married, divorce is seen as a convenient way out. People are choosing virtual fantasy and sex over the real thing. The Internet is this black hole of temptation and opportunity where people can put on any identity, be a physical Adonis or Venus, engage in any experiment, communicate anonymously without any attendant commitment or attachment. We seem to be so frightened of what we know is going on...so intimidated by the freedom this represents in millions of homes every day, we think righteous indignation and outrage will somehow bring it under control before the next generation succumbs.
Could it be Weiner is the collective symbol of our own hearts of darkness? (There, but for the grace of God go I.) Perhaps if the powers that be come down hard on the Weiners of the world, the genie can be put back in the bottle. Maybe we wonder what would happen if our darker selves and our less-than-angelic behavior were to surface? Is attacking Weiner the equivalent of a cry to "Stop us before we do this again?"
Funny isn't it? That's what the Puritans thought when they burned witches, banned books, pinned on scarlet letters and tried to control people's private thoughts and deeds. How did that work out?
According to published reports, Congressman Weiner sent pictures of himself to women online in various stages of undress and arousal. We also know he flirted and engaged in sexually themed text messages. We know most of this activity took place while he was single, but some after he recently married. The women involved were all adults. It is safe to assume some of them sent Weiner pictures and engaged in sexy repartee with him in return. Weiner never physically met any of these women. These were all virtual exchanges.
The Republicans have naturally called on Weiner to resign as have most Democrats including the President. The Republicans are just hypocrites. The Democrats are craven. They are mad at Weiner for stepping all over their attacks on Republicans for the disastrous Ryan plan to end Medicare as we know it. Weiner has taken them off message and for this he must go. The same Democrats who defended Bill Clinton, whose transgressions were real not virtual, are screaming for Weiner's scalp. It is not a chapter for profiles in courage.
Weiner should not resign. He should finish out his term and stand for re-election. If his constituents are disgusted with him, they can then turn him out. There is a bigger picture here which is much more interesting. For 2 weeks, there has been a media frenzy. (thus the Democrats anger at Weiner) You couldn't turn on the news without hearing about this scandal. Ask yourself what go more coverage, Weiner or the massacres happening in Syria right now? What dominated the news cycle...Weiner's sexting and tons of Weiner jokes or the fact millions of Americans are out of work, losing their homes and the economy might double dip, China is near war over the South China Sea, the nation faces possible default if the debt ceiling is not raised and speculators have driven the price of oil into the stratosphere? Now ask yourselves why this is happening?
Weiner did nothing illegal and if you want to pick nits about him being married during this activity, isn't that between him and his wife? I seem to remember a series of stories from the L.A, Times about Arnold Schwarzenegger. He was accused by at least 6 women of grabbing them, pinching them, touching their genitals and overall predatory school-boy, locker room behavior. His wife countered the stories did not show what a good father and husband he was and came to his defense. Many of you voted for him. Weiner's actions pale in comparison, yet the Times was attacked for publishing the stories...for trying to influence an election. for printing salacious rumors and innuendo and the media coverage was brief and didn't even make it to the tabloids. The calls for him not to run were few and far between. Why?
I don’t know how congressional Republicans look at themselves in the mirror. Recently, Newt Gingrich stood on a stage in New Hampshire running for President. This is a man who dumped his first wife while she was in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery. He dumped his second wife while having an affair with wife number 3 all while leading the attempt to impeach President Clinton for immoral actions. Really? Weiner's behavior is worse than that? Sen. John Ensign of Nevada had an affair with a member of his staff, bought off her husband, broke federal law and did not resign nor did the Republican leadership call for him to do so in any forceful way. He stepped down only because the Senate Ethics Committee was about to refer his case to the Justice Department. Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana has been re-elected despite paying for high priced hookers and despite being poster boy for hypocrite of 2008. He is anti gay marriage, pro birth, regressive evangelical Christian who wears his family values on his sleeve, wants new laws to make divorce more difficult and yet broke the law and engaged in prostitution, actions which were barely mentioned in the media and on the campaign trail. It is not a cliché to say the list is endless.
We live in a culture where everything has been sexualized and we are not comfortable with the freedom associated with this evolution. Catholic University just announced it is returning to single sex dorms because the coed dorms led to too much "hooking up". Their next step will be chastity belts. In some ways, the more open and tolerant we are, the more Puritan some people become. Someone has to stand up and say that the emperor has no clothes and acknowledge something is amiss in our society and it scares the hell out of us.
I can tell you for a fact, millions of Americans go online every night and pretend to be someone else, or assume different personalities and engage in every fantasy, fetish, and fabrication known to man. There is an illusion of anonymity, which creates the sense you can say or do anything because no one will ever find out and it’s all virtual or make believe anyway. You will never meet the person at the other end. Ironically, Weiner wasn't acting anonymously. The women he engaged asked to follow him via his Twitter account. He was more transparent than 90% of all other denizens of the cyber world.
Before he was married, Weiner doesn't have anything to apologize for and since he was married, he and his wife have to figure this whole issue out between them. One piece of advice to him and everyone: If what you are doing online you wouldn't do with someone looking over your shoulder, it has the potential to come back and bite you in the butt.
Weiner says he is taking a leave of absence for "treatment". What on earth is he going to get treatment about? He isn't a serial philanderer like Tiger Woods. He didn't do anything illegal. He showed terrible judgment and he lied about what he had done. He was embarrassed when his activities were discovered. So, is this the new standard now? Anyone who makes these mistakes must resign? Would there be anyone left in Washington or any marriages or relationships left to defend under this new code of ethics?
Maybe this is all a symptom of a fear gripping some Americans. Sex is everywhere. Traditional cultural milestones are going the way of the dodo. Marriage is losing popularity and if people choose to get married, divorce is seen as a convenient way out. People are choosing virtual fantasy and sex over the real thing. The Internet is this black hole of temptation and opportunity where people can put on any identity, be a physical Adonis or Venus, engage in any experiment, communicate anonymously without any attendant commitment or attachment. We seem to be so frightened of what we know is going on...so intimidated by the freedom this represents in millions of homes every day, we think righteous indignation and outrage will somehow bring it under control before the next generation succumbs.
Could it be Weiner is the collective symbol of our own hearts of darkness? (There, but for the grace of God go I.) Perhaps if the powers that be come down hard on the Weiners of the world, the genie can be put back in the bottle. Maybe we wonder what would happen if our darker selves and our less-than-angelic behavior were to surface? Is attacking Weiner the equivalent of a cry to "Stop us before we do this again?"
Funny isn't it? That's what the Puritans thought when they burned witches, banned books, pinned on scarlet letters and tried to control people's private thoughts and deeds. How did that work out?
Monday, June 13, 2011
JEOPARDY 2
Answer: The elites in Washington and the lame-stream media tried to shove their views down the throats of average, God-fearing Americans in order to destroy the right of the citizenry to do whatever they want with their own personal property.
QUESTION: What did Sarah Palin say when asked to explain the Civil War?
Answer: Yes, we did have other leaks and yes, we can't find any records we ever tested the pipes, but it isn't like anyone thought the problem was dangerous.
QUESTION: How did PG&E react to news they had gas pipe leaks in the area near San Bruno and they didn’t tell anyone?
Answer: We demanded longer sentences, refused to build more facilities, provided sub-standard medical and mental health care, and built a system resembling a Soviet gulag...picky, picky, picky.
QUESTION: How did California officials respond to the Supreme Court saying the prison system violates the 8th amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment?
Answer: Paul Ryan is a Democratic party stealth weapon designed to insure the re-election of President Obama by making it look like Republicans want to end Medicare as we know it and throw the elderly to the wolves.
QUESTION: What did the chair of the Republican National Committee say after the GOP lost a special congressional election in upstate New York in a district which has always voted Republican?
Answer: You need a good pair of garden sheers.
QUESTION: What did Hillary Clinton say to Rep. Anthony Weiner's wife when asked for advice about his sexting activities?
Answer: W.W.J.D.
QUESTION: How did the Archbishop of San Francisco respond to voters putting a proposition on the ballot outlawing circumcision?
Answer: It's going very well. I'm here because it's so difficult to deal with the constant demand for autographs and pictures from my devoted fans and followers.
QUESTION: What did Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi say from his underground bunker about how the war is progressing?
Answer: I am a man of humble beginnings, an army brat, who pulled himself up by his bootstraps and I am the perfect person to identify with the struggles and difficulties facing average Americans in this terrible economy (plus my third wife loves bling).
QUESTION: What is Newt Gingrich's new campaign pitch after it was revealed he had a $500,000 tab at Tiffany’s?
Answer: Yes, they are last in health care spending, second to last in education spending, execute more people than any other state, are anti-choice, bring guns to church and don't want Martin Luther King or Caesar Chavez in their history books, but the business community loves them and we could learn a lot from them here in California.
QUESTION: What is the sound of Gavin Newsom selling out by praising the way Texas treats its corporations?
Answer: We brought it on ourselves. Yes, we were greedy, rapacious and didn't care about the consequences. Yes, we played both sides so we made money even if the economy tanked. Yes, we were all too big to fail, and yes, our largest shareholder is now the American taxpayer...Your point is?
QUESTION: What did a spokesman for GMAC say when asked about reports the company is engaging in bait and switch and other illegal tactics to kick Americans out of their homes and have taxpayers pay them to foreclose?
QUESTION: What did Sarah Palin say when asked to explain the Civil War?
Answer: Yes, we did have other leaks and yes, we can't find any records we ever tested the pipes, but it isn't like anyone thought the problem was dangerous.
QUESTION: How did PG&E react to news they had gas pipe leaks in the area near San Bruno and they didn’t tell anyone?
Answer: We demanded longer sentences, refused to build more facilities, provided sub-standard medical and mental health care, and built a system resembling a Soviet gulag...picky, picky, picky.
QUESTION: How did California officials respond to the Supreme Court saying the prison system violates the 8th amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment?
Answer: Paul Ryan is a Democratic party stealth weapon designed to insure the re-election of President Obama by making it look like Republicans want to end Medicare as we know it and throw the elderly to the wolves.
QUESTION: What did the chair of the Republican National Committee say after the GOP lost a special congressional election in upstate New York in a district which has always voted Republican?
Answer: You need a good pair of garden sheers.
QUESTION: What did Hillary Clinton say to Rep. Anthony Weiner's wife when asked for advice about his sexting activities?
Answer: W.W.J.D.
QUESTION: How did the Archbishop of San Francisco respond to voters putting a proposition on the ballot outlawing circumcision?
Answer: It's going very well. I'm here because it's so difficult to deal with the constant demand for autographs and pictures from my devoted fans and followers.
QUESTION: What did Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi say from his underground bunker about how the war is progressing?
Answer: I am a man of humble beginnings, an army brat, who pulled himself up by his bootstraps and I am the perfect person to identify with the struggles and difficulties facing average Americans in this terrible economy (plus my third wife loves bling).
QUESTION: What is Newt Gingrich's new campaign pitch after it was revealed he had a $500,000 tab at Tiffany’s?
Answer: Yes, they are last in health care spending, second to last in education spending, execute more people than any other state, are anti-choice, bring guns to church and don't want Martin Luther King or Caesar Chavez in their history books, but the business community loves them and we could learn a lot from them here in California.
QUESTION: What is the sound of Gavin Newsom selling out by praising the way Texas treats its corporations?
Answer: We brought it on ourselves. Yes, we were greedy, rapacious and didn't care about the consequences. Yes, we played both sides so we made money even if the economy tanked. Yes, we were all too big to fail, and yes, our largest shareholder is now the American taxpayer...Your point is?
QUESTION: What did a spokesman for GMAC say when asked about reports the company is engaging in bait and switch and other illegal tactics to kick Americans out of their homes and have taxpayers pay them to foreclose?
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Whitened Sepulchers
For 22 years, no institution gave me more material and subject matter to talk about than the Roman Catholic Church. They are still a gift, which keeps on giving. While I'm sure they believed my voice was silenced, and they didn’t have to worry about hearing from me ever again, I'm sorry to upset their plans or their psyches.
In Christian scripture, one of the best ways to incur Jesus' wrath was to be guilty of hypocrisy. In a confrontation with the Pharisees, Jesus pointed out their hypocrisy and called them "whitened sepulchers"...pretty on the outside but dead on the inside. A number of news items crossed my bunk recently, which cried out for comment and outrage; and I am only too glad to accommodate.
The National Catholic Bishops commissioned a study by John Jay University Law School investigating the cause or causes of the sex abuse scandals, which have plagued the Church for so many years. On the plus side, the study concluded neither celibacy nor homosexuality were causes of the scandal. The report pointed out as more and more gay priests were ordained, the incidents of abuse actually dropped. However, their main conclusion amounts to blaming the 60's for the actions of abusive priests. The report points out most of the priests engaged in abuse were educated in seminaries in the 40's and 50's and were not prepared for the world they encountered as the 60's hit full throttle. The change in sexual mores, the liberation of cultural standards, moral relativism, changing gender roles and an anti-authority ethos overwhelmed these priests and left them with few moral guideposts to depend upon. Most had gone into the seminary after the 8th grade at age 13 and were developmentally stilted and emotionally walled off and when you combined their naïveté with the free sex, no rules, sex...drugs...rock and roll milieu of the 60's, the resultant abuse grew. You can choose to accept their conclusions or not, but the bishop's money was well spent. The report at no time speaks to the real reason the scandal grew out of control. There is no mention of the role Catholic bishops played in covering up and hiding the actions of a few priests. We now know bishops paid hush money and threatened and intimidated parents and demanded non-disclosure agreements in return for monetary settlements. We now know they moved priests around from parish to parish and we now know they were more concerned with the Church's reputation than they were with the victims. Yes there would have been some sexual abuse in the 60's for the reasons stated. What is totally ignored is an examination of how the damage would have been limited and stopped if the bishops had not acted as they did. Where the hypocrisy rises to new levels is Pope Benedict XVI trying to quickly canonize his predecessor, Pope John Paul II, even though he turned a blind eye to almost every report and every accusation of abuse directed at priests throughout the world.
The Bishops of Wales and England are calling on Catholics in those nations to refrain from eating meet on Fridays all year round. As I grew up, we were not allowed to eat meat on Fridays. This was said to be a small sacrifice to honor the day on which Jesus was crucified. The reality is this prohibition was started in Italy as a way to bolster the fishing economy of the country. The practice was abandoned after the Second Vatican Council and is now only followed during the 40 days of Lent. The Welsh and English bishops are concerned with the drop in membership numbers of the Church and in particular the decreasing numbers of young people joining or remaining in the church. They point to studies, which show, as churches become less demanding of their members, membership drops off. They also point to the fact dietary restrictions are one way to set ones group off from others. Kosher rules distinguish Jews from other religions and these bishops want some practices reinstated to distinguish Catholics from Protestants. The Pope is adding his touch by making it acceptable to have Latin Masses throughout the church. The Latin Mass fell into disfavor after Vatican II because the priest stood with his back to the people, the language was foreign and the people were spectators. The Pope thinks returning to such practices will re-invigorate his church. If the Pope and bishops wish to know why there are fewer young people than ever going to church, perhaps they might look at the fact the average age of a Catholic priest in America and Europe is over 60. The average age of new priests is almost 40. There is no ministry leadership in the church, which has any idea how to appeal to or to cope with the world of my children and their generation. Young females have to participate in a church, which treats women as second-class citizens, and the Church's message to young people has little relevance to the world in which they are immersed. Rather than open the ministry to women, encourage a married clergy and speak in a voice relevant to the times, the leadership is rolling out meatless Fridays and unintelligible religious services.
Finally, House Speaker John Boehner has been invited to give the commencement address at the Catholic University of America. His invitation was approved by bishops and cardinals who sit on the board of trustees of the university. In protest to his invitation, more than 75 faculty members of CU and other Catholic universities have written a letter to Mr. Boehner accusing him of shepherding a budget bill through the house, which will hurt the poor, the elderly and the most vulnerable of American society. They remind Mr. Boehner, his budget fails to uphold basic Catholic teachings. "Mr. Speaker, your voting record is at variance with one of the church's most ancient moral teachings," the letter goes on to say "...from the apostles to the present, the magisterial (teaching) of the Church has insisted those in power are morally obliged to preference the needs of the poor. They go on to say his record on this principle is one of the worst in Congress and they call his practices "anti-life". Now here is where the sepulcher gets a good white washing. A spokesman for CU defends the decision to invite Boehner by saying there are diverse viewpoints within the Catholic Church over these issues. I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning. It smells like cafeteria Catholicism.
Former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, Senator John Kerry, Senator Ted Kennedy and many other Catholic politicians have been attacked, as has President Obama, for being invited to speak at Catholic universities because they support a woman's right to choose. Regressive Catholics call them anti-life. Some bishops have even called for them to be denied communion because they disagree with the Church on this issue. Apparently, there is no allowance for diverse viewpoints here. Catholic politicians voted to go to war in Iraq, despite the National Conference of Catholic Bishops declaring it an immoral war. What did the Church say about their vote to authorize the use of force and the resulting deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis undoubtedly including pregnant women? Were any of them denied communion or opportunities to speak at Catholic schools or institutions? The Church is opposed to the death penalty, but it has never excoriated a single Catholic politician who supports execution. Pope John Paul II said unregulated free market capitalism is immoral and yet regressive Catholic members of Congress and the Senate have worked for 40 years to deregulate our financial industry and the resulting depression didn't elicit a single word of criticism from Rome. The gospel of Matthew says if you want salvation you must feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick, and visit those in prison. Whatever you do or don't do to the least of your brothers and sisters you do or don't do to God. In your lifetime, have you ever seen or heard of criticism of a sitting Catholic politician for supporting policies, which make the rich richer and the poor poorer? So, if you oppose abortion you are pro-life in the eyes of the Catholic Church and there is no allowance for divergent viewpoints. However, if you pass budgets which hurt the poor and vulnerable...if you vote for wars which kills hundreds of thousands, if you support execution, the building of vast stores of nuclear weapons and work to bust unions and drive down wages while passing tax cuts for the most wealthy, you are a Catholic in good standing because there are divergent viewpoints on the moral importance of these matters. Boehner, with the worst pro-life voting record in the House, is welcomed at by the bishops and cardinals running Catholic University; but Ted Kennedy is anathema.
I'm tired of the hypocrisy of the leadership of the Catholic Church. They sit back silently as more and more regressives, including people like Newt Gingrich (oh he of three wives), join the church because they feel at home and feel comfortable with its theology and policies. I'm tired of a church, which has strayed so far officially from the vision of its founder; and I understand perfectly why numbers are down. Young people spot hypocrisy faster than most and they just can’t stand it anymore. I watch as church leaders become the new Pharisees living as whitened sepulchers supporting a pro-birth movement while the quality of life of the nation's neediest and most vulnerable is eroding under the practices of people like Boehner and you don't hear a word of protest from them.
In Christian scripture, one of the best ways to incur Jesus' wrath was to be guilty of hypocrisy. In a confrontation with the Pharisees, Jesus pointed out their hypocrisy and called them "whitened sepulchers"...pretty on the outside but dead on the inside. A number of news items crossed my bunk recently, which cried out for comment and outrage; and I am only too glad to accommodate.
The National Catholic Bishops commissioned a study by John Jay University Law School investigating the cause or causes of the sex abuse scandals, which have plagued the Church for so many years. On the plus side, the study concluded neither celibacy nor homosexuality were causes of the scandal. The report pointed out as more and more gay priests were ordained, the incidents of abuse actually dropped. However, their main conclusion amounts to blaming the 60's for the actions of abusive priests. The report points out most of the priests engaged in abuse were educated in seminaries in the 40's and 50's and were not prepared for the world they encountered as the 60's hit full throttle. The change in sexual mores, the liberation of cultural standards, moral relativism, changing gender roles and an anti-authority ethos overwhelmed these priests and left them with few moral guideposts to depend upon. Most had gone into the seminary after the 8th grade at age 13 and were developmentally stilted and emotionally walled off and when you combined their naïveté with the free sex, no rules, sex...drugs...rock and roll milieu of the 60's, the resultant abuse grew. You can choose to accept their conclusions or not, but the bishop's money was well spent. The report at no time speaks to the real reason the scandal grew out of control. There is no mention of the role Catholic bishops played in covering up and hiding the actions of a few priests. We now know bishops paid hush money and threatened and intimidated parents and demanded non-disclosure agreements in return for monetary settlements. We now know they moved priests around from parish to parish and we now know they were more concerned with the Church's reputation than they were with the victims. Yes there would have been some sexual abuse in the 60's for the reasons stated. What is totally ignored is an examination of how the damage would have been limited and stopped if the bishops had not acted as they did. Where the hypocrisy rises to new levels is Pope Benedict XVI trying to quickly canonize his predecessor, Pope John Paul II, even though he turned a blind eye to almost every report and every accusation of abuse directed at priests throughout the world.
The Bishops of Wales and England are calling on Catholics in those nations to refrain from eating meet on Fridays all year round. As I grew up, we were not allowed to eat meat on Fridays. This was said to be a small sacrifice to honor the day on which Jesus was crucified. The reality is this prohibition was started in Italy as a way to bolster the fishing economy of the country. The practice was abandoned after the Second Vatican Council and is now only followed during the 40 days of Lent. The Welsh and English bishops are concerned with the drop in membership numbers of the Church and in particular the decreasing numbers of young people joining or remaining in the church. They point to studies, which show, as churches become less demanding of their members, membership drops off. They also point to the fact dietary restrictions are one way to set ones group off from others. Kosher rules distinguish Jews from other religions and these bishops want some practices reinstated to distinguish Catholics from Protestants. The Pope is adding his touch by making it acceptable to have Latin Masses throughout the church. The Latin Mass fell into disfavor after Vatican II because the priest stood with his back to the people, the language was foreign and the people were spectators. The Pope thinks returning to such practices will re-invigorate his church. If the Pope and bishops wish to know why there are fewer young people than ever going to church, perhaps they might look at the fact the average age of a Catholic priest in America and Europe is over 60. The average age of new priests is almost 40. There is no ministry leadership in the church, which has any idea how to appeal to or to cope with the world of my children and their generation. Young females have to participate in a church, which treats women as second-class citizens, and the Church's message to young people has little relevance to the world in which they are immersed. Rather than open the ministry to women, encourage a married clergy and speak in a voice relevant to the times, the leadership is rolling out meatless Fridays and unintelligible religious services.
Finally, House Speaker John Boehner has been invited to give the commencement address at the Catholic University of America. His invitation was approved by bishops and cardinals who sit on the board of trustees of the university. In protest to his invitation, more than 75 faculty members of CU and other Catholic universities have written a letter to Mr. Boehner accusing him of shepherding a budget bill through the house, which will hurt the poor, the elderly and the most vulnerable of American society. They remind Mr. Boehner, his budget fails to uphold basic Catholic teachings. "Mr. Speaker, your voting record is at variance with one of the church's most ancient moral teachings," the letter goes on to say "...from the apostles to the present, the magisterial (teaching) of the Church has insisted those in power are morally obliged to preference the needs of the poor. They go on to say his record on this principle is one of the worst in Congress and they call his practices "anti-life". Now here is where the sepulcher gets a good white washing. A spokesman for CU defends the decision to invite Boehner by saying there are diverse viewpoints within the Catholic Church over these issues. I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning. It smells like cafeteria Catholicism.
Former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, Senator John Kerry, Senator Ted Kennedy and many other Catholic politicians have been attacked, as has President Obama, for being invited to speak at Catholic universities because they support a woman's right to choose. Regressive Catholics call them anti-life. Some bishops have even called for them to be denied communion because they disagree with the Church on this issue. Apparently, there is no allowance for diverse viewpoints here. Catholic politicians voted to go to war in Iraq, despite the National Conference of Catholic Bishops declaring it an immoral war. What did the Church say about their vote to authorize the use of force and the resulting deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis undoubtedly including pregnant women? Were any of them denied communion or opportunities to speak at Catholic schools or institutions? The Church is opposed to the death penalty, but it has never excoriated a single Catholic politician who supports execution. Pope John Paul II said unregulated free market capitalism is immoral and yet regressive Catholic members of Congress and the Senate have worked for 40 years to deregulate our financial industry and the resulting depression didn't elicit a single word of criticism from Rome. The gospel of Matthew says if you want salvation you must feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick, and visit those in prison. Whatever you do or don't do to the least of your brothers and sisters you do or don't do to God. In your lifetime, have you ever seen or heard of criticism of a sitting Catholic politician for supporting policies, which make the rich richer and the poor poorer? So, if you oppose abortion you are pro-life in the eyes of the Catholic Church and there is no allowance for divergent viewpoints. However, if you pass budgets which hurt the poor and vulnerable...if you vote for wars which kills hundreds of thousands, if you support execution, the building of vast stores of nuclear weapons and work to bust unions and drive down wages while passing tax cuts for the most wealthy, you are a Catholic in good standing because there are divergent viewpoints on the moral importance of these matters. Boehner, with the worst pro-life voting record in the House, is welcomed at by the bishops and cardinals running Catholic University; but Ted Kennedy is anathema.
I'm tired of the hypocrisy of the leadership of the Catholic Church. They sit back silently as more and more regressives, including people like Newt Gingrich (oh he of three wives), join the church because they feel at home and feel comfortable with its theology and policies. I'm tired of a church, which has strayed so far officially from the vision of its founder; and I understand perfectly why numbers are down. Young people spot hypocrisy faster than most and they just can’t stand it anymore. I watch as church leaders become the new Pharisees living as whitened sepulchers supporting a pro-birth movement while the quality of life of the nation's neediest and most vulnerable is eroding under the practices of people like Boehner and you don't hear a word of protest from them.
THE EMPEROR'S NEW GLOW-IN-THE-DARK CLOTHING
ITEM: The Japanese government announced it has abandoned its goal of getting 50% of the nation's power needs from nuclear energy. The prime minister said they would seek to increase alternative energy sources such as wind, solar and hydroelectric energy.
ITEM: As American nuclear power plants come up for re-licensing, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has been accused of being too cozy with the nuclear power industry. Too many industry insiders have been appointed to the commission over the years and its regulatory policies are considered lax.
ITEM: The Japanese Nuclear Industrial and Safety Agency says the Fukushima Daiichi reactor was damaged much worse than originally thought and a meltdown of fuel rods occurred. Tepco Electric Power Co. admits one of the plants six reactors suffered substantial meltdown on DAY ONE. All three nuclear reactors are leaking radioactive material.
ITEM: A commission on what to do with nuclear waster wants to build steel and concrete buildings above ground to store the waste admitting the plan to bury nuclear waste is a political non-starter.
ITEM: Nuclear fuel began melting much sooner than had been previously thought in the damaged Japanese reactors. Much of the chaos and many of the most serious mistakes were made by engineers BEFORE the tsunami struck.
ITEM: An engineer at a Minnesota nuclear plant warned the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that crucial emergency vents, designed to relieve pressure at crippled Japanese nuclear plants, were seriously flawed and could fail in an earthquake. His warning came 5 years before the meltdown in Japan and the NRC rejected his warning and did nothing. The same vents are used in American nuclear reactors.
ITEM: A review of emergency plans in American nuclear plants found them out of date and many poorly designed to deal with multiple crises as occurred in Japan.
You can't turn on the program of Dr. Bill Wattenberg without hearing glowing tributes and passionate defense of the nuclear energy industry. He is not alone. President Obama and some environmentalists have also included increased nuclear plants into their mixture of energy policy in the future. Construction on at least three new plants is currently underway right now in this country. It is so alluring. It's relatively cheap, does not contribute to global warming and is so much prettier and safer for workers than ugly coal mines.
Unfortunately, when the lights come on and everyone sobers up, the picture is much less attractive. We now know the agency in the Dept. of the Interior whose job it was to regulate deep water oil drilling was a joke. It allowed the oil industry to write regulations. Federal employees were winded and dined by oil and construction companies and the result was the Gulf Oil spill. The Securities and Exchange Commission was a fox guarding the henhouse. Because so many of its commissioners and regulators moved back and forth between Wall Street and Washington, the SEC was a walking conflict of interest. It was soft on Wall Street and ignored people like Bernie Madoff even after being warned. In fact, we now know the entire financial regulatory industry failed to protect our interests resulting in the financial meltdown of 2008 the effects of which we are still feeling. The Food and Drug Administration allows pharmaceutical companies to pay for and run their own tests for new drugs. The Agriculture Department does not inspect a tenth of all meat and poultry and egg processing operations. A recent Federal Communications Commission member, who voted in favor of the merger of Comcast and NBC, quickly resigned and went to work for Comcast. Now, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is accused of the same problem. The commission is too cozy with the industry it regulates. It overlooks serious problems when re-licensing old nuclear facilities. It doesn't rigorously review emergency protocols. There is a revolving door between the commission and the industry. This agency tasked with ensuring the safety of nuclear plant design, approving emergency procedures, and forcing the industry to produce a safe product no matter what the cost, is just as corrupt and inept as almost all other federal regulatory agencies. That should make anyone living near Diablo Canyon or San Onofre sleep better at night.
The ultimate reason why nuclear power must be abandoned is the problem of waste. For years the answer was to bury it in Nevada. President Obama has abandoned this plan when it was discovered the deep caves leaked, and the political will to force it down Nevadans throats didn't exist. Now, a commission is proposing building aboveground waste containment buildings. Why not just hang out a large neon sign saying "TERRORISTS ATTACK HERE"? What city or state would want nuclear waste repositories anywhere near them? What would happen if one of these buildings got hit by a 9.0 earthquake or a 200 mph force 5 tornado? Oh, they would be built to withstand such possibilities right? Who would oversee this process to ensure it was done right? The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Congress, of course. There is no solution about what to do with nuclear waste. Right now it is stored in pools alongside operating nuclear plants. How safe is that?
It is time to admit the truth. Nuclear power plants and nuclear power have to be abandoned as answers to our energy needs. They are not safe and the nuclear power industry will always be trying to build them as cheaply as possible. They will water down regulations and spend millions to lobby Congress to prevent strict oversight. They will fight anything viewed as too stringent or onerous and the federal regulatory process will allow them to continue unabated. They will act like typical American corporations. There is no solution about what to do with nuclear waste. It is only a matter of time before someone with bad intentions gets their hands on some or an accident or natural disaster causes an environmental nightmare.
In Joplin, Missouri, residents say despite being hit by the biggest tornado in 60 years, and losing a third of their city, they will rebuild. There is a debate about whether anyone will be allowed to live within 12 miles of the Fukushima Daiichi plant EVER again.
ITEM: As American nuclear power plants come up for re-licensing, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has been accused of being too cozy with the nuclear power industry. Too many industry insiders have been appointed to the commission over the years and its regulatory policies are considered lax.
ITEM: The Japanese Nuclear Industrial and Safety Agency says the Fukushima Daiichi reactor was damaged much worse than originally thought and a meltdown of fuel rods occurred. Tepco Electric Power Co. admits one of the plants six reactors suffered substantial meltdown on DAY ONE. All three nuclear reactors are leaking radioactive material.
ITEM: A commission on what to do with nuclear waster wants to build steel and concrete buildings above ground to store the waste admitting the plan to bury nuclear waste is a political non-starter.
ITEM: Nuclear fuel began melting much sooner than had been previously thought in the damaged Japanese reactors. Much of the chaos and many of the most serious mistakes were made by engineers BEFORE the tsunami struck.
ITEM: An engineer at a Minnesota nuclear plant warned the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that crucial emergency vents, designed to relieve pressure at crippled Japanese nuclear plants, were seriously flawed and could fail in an earthquake. His warning came 5 years before the meltdown in Japan and the NRC rejected his warning and did nothing. The same vents are used in American nuclear reactors.
ITEM: A review of emergency plans in American nuclear plants found them out of date and many poorly designed to deal with multiple crises as occurred in Japan.
You can't turn on the program of Dr. Bill Wattenberg without hearing glowing tributes and passionate defense of the nuclear energy industry. He is not alone. President Obama and some environmentalists have also included increased nuclear plants into their mixture of energy policy in the future. Construction on at least three new plants is currently underway right now in this country. It is so alluring. It's relatively cheap, does not contribute to global warming and is so much prettier and safer for workers than ugly coal mines.
Unfortunately, when the lights come on and everyone sobers up, the picture is much less attractive. We now know the agency in the Dept. of the Interior whose job it was to regulate deep water oil drilling was a joke. It allowed the oil industry to write regulations. Federal employees were winded and dined by oil and construction companies and the result was the Gulf Oil spill. The Securities and Exchange Commission was a fox guarding the henhouse. Because so many of its commissioners and regulators moved back and forth between Wall Street and Washington, the SEC was a walking conflict of interest. It was soft on Wall Street and ignored people like Bernie Madoff even after being warned. In fact, we now know the entire financial regulatory industry failed to protect our interests resulting in the financial meltdown of 2008 the effects of which we are still feeling. The Food and Drug Administration allows pharmaceutical companies to pay for and run their own tests for new drugs. The Agriculture Department does not inspect a tenth of all meat and poultry and egg processing operations. A recent Federal Communications Commission member, who voted in favor of the merger of Comcast and NBC, quickly resigned and went to work for Comcast. Now, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is accused of the same problem. The commission is too cozy with the industry it regulates. It overlooks serious problems when re-licensing old nuclear facilities. It doesn't rigorously review emergency protocols. There is a revolving door between the commission and the industry. This agency tasked with ensuring the safety of nuclear plant design, approving emergency procedures, and forcing the industry to produce a safe product no matter what the cost, is just as corrupt and inept as almost all other federal regulatory agencies. That should make anyone living near Diablo Canyon or San Onofre sleep better at night.
The ultimate reason why nuclear power must be abandoned is the problem of waste. For years the answer was to bury it in Nevada. President Obama has abandoned this plan when it was discovered the deep caves leaked, and the political will to force it down Nevadans throats didn't exist. Now, a commission is proposing building aboveground waste containment buildings. Why not just hang out a large neon sign saying "TERRORISTS ATTACK HERE"? What city or state would want nuclear waste repositories anywhere near them? What would happen if one of these buildings got hit by a 9.0 earthquake or a 200 mph force 5 tornado? Oh, they would be built to withstand such possibilities right? Who would oversee this process to ensure it was done right? The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Congress, of course. There is no solution about what to do with nuclear waste. Right now it is stored in pools alongside operating nuclear plants. How safe is that?
It is time to admit the truth. Nuclear power plants and nuclear power have to be abandoned as answers to our energy needs. They are not safe and the nuclear power industry will always be trying to build them as cheaply as possible. They will water down regulations and spend millions to lobby Congress to prevent strict oversight. They will fight anything viewed as too stringent or onerous and the federal regulatory process will allow them to continue unabated. They will act like typical American corporations. There is no solution about what to do with nuclear waste. It is only a matter of time before someone with bad intentions gets their hands on some or an accident or natural disaster causes an environmental nightmare.
In Joplin, Missouri, residents say despite being hit by the biggest tornado in 60 years, and losing a third of their city, they will rebuild. There is a debate about whether anyone will be allowed to live within 12 miles of the Fukushima Daiichi plant EVER again.
THE RAPTURE RAP...
If you are reading this, one of two truths are in play. Either the world did not end on May 21st, or the rapture occurred, but you didn't make the cut. Welcome to 7 years of pestilence in which reading my musings and observations may be considered the first few rings of hell.
Where I live, everyone is a guest of the federal government. As such, there are plenty of subjects, which rise to the level of conversation. It is no small matter to be sitting at lunch or dinner and have an entire table debating and discussing the possible end of the world and all associated matters. What is it about this concept of the world ending which causes so many to talk for so long about so little?
In Christian scripture, discussion about the end times comes under the title of the "perusia". We are not plowing new territory here in 2011. After the resurrection, early Christian communities were obsessed with the "end times" and the second coming of Jesus. They believed the world would end next week. St. Paul says not to marry, spend time in prayer and don’t get distracted by worldly things or you will miss it. There was urgency to the spreading of the "good news" as no one knew when Jesus would return and they wanted to save as many as they could. Eventually, after the apostles and disciples die, the world goes on and these religious communities had to reset their expectations.
There have been plenty of examples of "prophets” announcing they know when the end times will occur and calling for their followers to prepare. People sold all their worldly possessions, fled to the mountains and waited, only to be disappointed time after time. Despite a 2000-year track record of failure, these apostles of doom and Armageddon are still able to attract followers. How is that possible?
Death scares the hell out of us that's how. Americans spend billions of dollars each year trying to forestall the inevitable. 90% of health care costs are incurred in the last 10% of people's lives. Death is the great equalizer and no one can avoid it. Those who preach the end of the world are selling certainty in a sea of doubt and fear. You don't have to wonder. You don't have to worry. You know exactly when it's going to happen. The uncertainty, and the anxiety and angst which co-exist with it, is what really sets people off. Knowing when death will appear can be very appealing to some.
An additional wrinkle is added when you proclaim to know when the end will happen and you announce there will be a privileged few who will be taken directly to heaven to bask in God's glory. The "rapture" is a way to propagate an exclusive club where members go directly to paradise, do not pass Go and don't have to worry about collecting $200. Being part of the rapture is the ultimate cosmic razz berry, taking aim not only at death, but also at the secondary fear about what will happen to you after you die. The rapture is a supernatural velvet rope. If your name is on the list, open the pearly gates. If not, you get left behind to suffer everything from war and pestilence to the rising of the anti-Christ who will torment human kind for eons to come (sort of like an being required to watch a never ending loop of Jersey Shore). Most traditional raptures say 144,000 souls will be saved. Talk about exclusive.
In the last couple of weeks, you may have joked with friends about the end of the world, seen billboards proclaiming its arrival, watched CNN parse and chew on the subject and, if you are honest, gave the slightest of serious thought to what if its true. Why? Death is always on our minds.
There is nothing in scripture to support a physical ending of the world. There are plenty of references to Jesus' return, the end time and lots of spooky stuff in the Book of Revelation, but none of it is about existence ending. If you think about it, why would God continue to create only to bring all life to an abrupt and untimely end? She would have no motive. If you believe God created each of us on purpose and to love and be loved in return; a sudden world ending makes no sense. If you imagine a loving God who creates for tens of thousands of years, billions of souls, only to save 144,000 you have a better imagination than me; and besides, your God is not one I would want to have anything to do with anyway.
There are hints in Christian and Hebrew scripture about what the "end of the world" could mean. Perhaps no clearer insight comes from Jesus and His Sermon on the Mount. As you listen, you first conclude He must have been on some serious drugs that day. Peacemakers are not blessed and the meek won't inherit anything. No one can look at this world and say the poor will be blessed and rewarded and being persecuted for righteousness just gets you killed. These are the harsh realities of the world. Yet, Jesus persisted. He imagined a world where peacemakers are blessed because we are all committed to peace. The meek will be blessed because we will all be meek of heart towards each other. The poor will inherit the kingdom because when you let go of "stuff” you can live and care for each other...even the least of your brothers and sisters. The "end of the world", in Jesus' view, is the end of the world as we know it...replaced by a world where the rich and poor and peacemakers et. al. reign supreme.
All of this talk about the world ending is fun because death doesn't scare me anymore. It did. I was obsessed with it most of my life. I ruined my 50th year of life because I was devastated to realize most of my life was over and I would die. However, after you lose everything, get your ego crushed, get embarrassed and humiliated in front of the world, have friends abandon you, wake up to all the ways you have blown it and know all the pain you have caused those you love and who love you, the only thing left to do is spend time in reflection until you have that epiphany and realize what is really of value in your life. What could death have in store for me that is worse than my own fine choices to screw up my time in this world?
In the gospel of John, Jesus says, "...I come to bring you life and life to its fullest." He isn't concerned about what comes next. His kingdom is now. His values are about now. His wisdom is about living a full life now. If, like me, you were lost or had your priorities messed up...if you bought the message He who dies with the most "stuff" wins...if all you can imagine is the pleasure and perks you enjoy and hope to acquire more...then death has to be a very frightening specter hanging over your shoulder. However, if you can forgive when you are hurt, love without reservation or condition...if you can pursue a full and abundant life...if you are grateful everyday for all you have been given and realize all life is a gift...if you are meek of heart, committed to peace and willing to witness to what is right...your life will be full and loving and warm and death will not be something to fear.
So, to those of you who were lucky enough to be in raptured, congratulations. The rest of us will muddle along, trying to improve the world, love our family and friends, reach out to our enemies and hope for a full life. I leave it up to you to decide which group is for you. I've made up my mind.
Where I live, everyone is a guest of the federal government. As such, there are plenty of subjects, which rise to the level of conversation. It is no small matter to be sitting at lunch or dinner and have an entire table debating and discussing the possible end of the world and all associated matters. What is it about this concept of the world ending which causes so many to talk for so long about so little?
In Christian scripture, discussion about the end times comes under the title of the "perusia". We are not plowing new territory here in 2011. After the resurrection, early Christian communities were obsessed with the "end times" and the second coming of Jesus. They believed the world would end next week. St. Paul says not to marry, spend time in prayer and don’t get distracted by worldly things or you will miss it. There was urgency to the spreading of the "good news" as no one knew when Jesus would return and they wanted to save as many as they could. Eventually, after the apostles and disciples die, the world goes on and these religious communities had to reset their expectations.
There have been plenty of examples of "prophets” announcing they know when the end times will occur and calling for their followers to prepare. People sold all their worldly possessions, fled to the mountains and waited, only to be disappointed time after time. Despite a 2000-year track record of failure, these apostles of doom and Armageddon are still able to attract followers. How is that possible?
Death scares the hell out of us that's how. Americans spend billions of dollars each year trying to forestall the inevitable. 90% of health care costs are incurred in the last 10% of people's lives. Death is the great equalizer and no one can avoid it. Those who preach the end of the world are selling certainty in a sea of doubt and fear. You don't have to wonder. You don't have to worry. You know exactly when it's going to happen. The uncertainty, and the anxiety and angst which co-exist with it, is what really sets people off. Knowing when death will appear can be very appealing to some.
An additional wrinkle is added when you proclaim to know when the end will happen and you announce there will be a privileged few who will be taken directly to heaven to bask in God's glory. The "rapture" is a way to propagate an exclusive club where members go directly to paradise, do not pass Go and don't have to worry about collecting $200. Being part of the rapture is the ultimate cosmic razz berry, taking aim not only at death, but also at the secondary fear about what will happen to you after you die. The rapture is a supernatural velvet rope. If your name is on the list, open the pearly gates. If not, you get left behind to suffer everything from war and pestilence to the rising of the anti-Christ who will torment human kind for eons to come (sort of like an being required to watch a never ending loop of Jersey Shore). Most traditional raptures say 144,000 souls will be saved. Talk about exclusive.
In the last couple of weeks, you may have joked with friends about the end of the world, seen billboards proclaiming its arrival, watched CNN parse and chew on the subject and, if you are honest, gave the slightest of serious thought to what if its true. Why? Death is always on our minds.
There is nothing in scripture to support a physical ending of the world. There are plenty of references to Jesus' return, the end time and lots of spooky stuff in the Book of Revelation, but none of it is about existence ending. If you think about it, why would God continue to create only to bring all life to an abrupt and untimely end? She would have no motive. If you believe God created each of us on purpose and to love and be loved in return; a sudden world ending makes no sense. If you imagine a loving God who creates for tens of thousands of years, billions of souls, only to save 144,000 you have a better imagination than me; and besides, your God is not one I would want to have anything to do with anyway.
There are hints in Christian and Hebrew scripture about what the "end of the world" could mean. Perhaps no clearer insight comes from Jesus and His Sermon on the Mount. As you listen, you first conclude He must have been on some serious drugs that day. Peacemakers are not blessed and the meek won't inherit anything. No one can look at this world and say the poor will be blessed and rewarded and being persecuted for righteousness just gets you killed. These are the harsh realities of the world. Yet, Jesus persisted. He imagined a world where peacemakers are blessed because we are all committed to peace. The meek will be blessed because we will all be meek of heart towards each other. The poor will inherit the kingdom because when you let go of "stuff” you can live and care for each other...even the least of your brothers and sisters. The "end of the world", in Jesus' view, is the end of the world as we know it...replaced by a world where the rich and poor and peacemakers et. al. reign supreme.
All of this talk about the world ending is fun because death doesn't scare me anymore. It did. I was obsessed with it most of my life. I ruined my 50th year of life because I was devastated to realize most of my life was over and I would die. However, after you lose everything, get your ego crushed, get embarrassed and humiliated in front of the world, have friends abandon you, wake up to all the ways you have blown it and know all the pain you have caused those you love and who love you, the only thing left to do is spend time in reflection until you have that epiphany and realize what is really of value in your life. What could death have in store for me that is worse than my own fine choices to screw up my time in this world?
In the gospel of John, Jesus says, "...I come to bring you life and life to its fullest." He isn't concerned about what comes next. His kingdom is now. His values are about now. His wisdom is about living a full life now. If, like me, you were lost or had your priorities messed up...if you bought the message He who dies with the most "stuff" wins...if all you can imagine is the pleasure and perks you enjoy and hope to acquire more...then death has to be a very frightening specter hanging over your shoulder. However, if you can forgive when you are hurt, love without reservation or condition...if you can pursue a full and abundant life...if you are grateful everyday for all you have been given and realize all life is a gift...if you are meek of heart, committed to peace and willing to witness to what is right...your life will be full and loving and warm and death will not be something to fear.
So, to those of you who were lucky enough to be in raptured, congratulations. The rest of us will muddle along, trying to improve the world, love our family and friends, reach out to our enemies and hope for a full life. I leave it up to you to decide which group is for you. I've made up my mind.
Friday, May 27, 2011
WAG THE DOG
As Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed a joint meeting of Congress, Israel was finishing plans to add 1,600 new homes in East Jerusalem. As the prime minister lectured President Obama about a proposal to start peace talks with the Palestinians based on pre-1967 borders, new settlements are starting and others expanding in the West Bank. As the United States gives billions of tax dollars to Israel, Jewish donors here in this country are threatening to withhold funds for the President's re-election campaign if he doesn't soften his stance towards Israel. As the song goes, with friends like these.....
Since the war in 1967, a war that Israel did not start, the Israelis have occupied the West Bank and built thousands of illegal settlements. This was not an accident. Israel knew the only way they could hold on to this territory was to populate it and make it a de-facto part of their nation. When Netanyahu says the pre-1967 borders are indefensible, what he doesn't say is this has been part of the plan from the beginning. Other than the Israelis, no one in the international community believes the settlements are legal. Even American presidents have agreed with that characterization. They are a deliberate design to annex the West Bank and have it subsumed by Israel. The billions of dollars America has given to Israel were used to offset the expense of building these settlements and to find the Israeli military to enforce their continued existence.
Israel is in a tough spot. As the revolutions of the Arab Spring continue, they face new leadership in Tunis, Egypt, Yemen, and possibly Bahrain, Libya and elsewhere, who are not interested in maintaining the status quo. Egypt brokered a deal between the PLO and Hamas on the governing of the West Bank and Gaza. They say they will open the border with Gaza to allow trade and commerce to resume. Israel faces a demographic time bomb and within a few years could have a Jewish minority ruling over an Arab majority in a new form of apartheid. In September, the United Nations will vote on whether to recognize Palestine as an independent nation. Unless the United States vetoes the proposal, it is expected to pass. (Some think Obama's recent speech calling for a return to the pre-1967 borders as a starting point was an intended to assuage European nations and give them a reason to vote against the UN resolution) Yet, in front of Congress, Netanyahu raised every boogey man and threat scenarios to create a picture of a besieged Israel threatened with destruction daring American politicians to waver in their support and face electoral doom.
According to Netanyahu, Israel must maintain the strongest military in the region, built on American tax dollars and using weapons given to them for virtually nothing, while the Palestinians must be de-militarized. Israel must keep the land annexed in the West Bank while Palestinians live within the claustrophobic boundaries Israel allows. Israel must maintain control of the air; while Palestine asks permission to have their own airport and Israel must be free to cross into Palestine at any time for security reasons as it builds a wall to prevent Palestinians from encroaching on Israeli territory. This asymmetry is the basis for any peace talks so far as Israel is concerned. Therefore, no peace talks can resume and Palestine will be recognized as an independent state and Israel's security will be weakened and imperiled.
On the other side, this is what must happen. The Palestinian authority must recognize Israel's right to exist and that means convincing Hamas to agree as well. There cannot be negotiations if one party doesn't acknowledge the legitimacy of the other. Palestinians displaced by the wars on Israel will not be able to return. That ship has sailed. Palestinians must halt rocket and other attacks on Israel and show they can control the security in their land. Jerusalem has to become an international city under the auspices of the U.N. open to all faiths and not the private refuge of Jews, Muslims or Christians.
In his speech to Congress, Netanyahu had the chutzpah to threaten American politicians who support the rights of the Palestinians. They are selling Israel out and are soft on terrorism. He drew a political line in the sand daring any member of Congress to cross it. Any wavering on supporting Israel is appeasement and will lead to Israel's destruction. Any talk of negotiations is code for weakening Israel and you do so at your own political peril.
President Obama has staked out a clear position. Peace talks start with the pre-1967 borders as a basis of discussion. Land swaps will be part of any talks, but at the end of the day, settlements will have to go and the buffer, which is the West Bank, must change. The President and American taxpayers need to tell Mr. Netanyahu if he disagrees fine, but he does so sacrificing all American foreign and military aid. Obama has to let American Jewish donors know he will not be intimidated nor will he sacrifice American national security to protect an Israel not interested in peace.
We now reach the crux of the problem for the president. America's national security and its ability to fight terrorism hinge on a settlement between Israel and Palestine. Right now Israel is the tail wagging the American dog. American support for dictators in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and other nations in the region was based on maintaining the status quo with Israel. Our national security is compromised as long as this current standoff continues. Over 5,000 Americans died and hundreds of thousands wounded in Iraq because President Bush's national security team, Cheney...Wolfowitz...Pearl...Feith...Rumsfeld...Libby..Hadley...Bolton et. al. were signatories and supporters of the Project for a New American Century which had as its centerpiece policy invading Iraq to eliminate Saddam Hussein because he was a threat to Israel.
I have no illusions any American politician will threaten to cut off aid to Israel. President Obama will court Jewish donors and will soften if not abandon any real attempts to pressure Israel. The status quo will remain. However, the U.N. will vote to recognize Palestine. (What will the US do?) New leadership in many Arab nations will be less supportive of the current situation. The Arab population in the occupied territories will continue to grow and our national security will continue under threat. A two-state solution is the only answer. There must be a solution guaranteeing Israel's security and recognizing the rights of the Palestinians. However this cannot happen as long as Netanyahu leads Israel and American politicians are scared to take him on.
Since the war in 1967, a war that Israel did not start, the Israelis have occupied the West Bank and built thousands of illegal settlements. This was not an accident. Israel knew the only way they could hold on to this territory was to populate it and make it a de-facto part of their nation. When Netanyahu says the pre-1967 borders are indefensible, what he doesn't say is this has been part of the plan from the beginning. Other than the Israelis, no one in the international community believes the settlements are legal. Even American presidents have agreed with that characterization. They are a deliberate design to annex the West Bank and have it subsumed by Israel. The billions of dollars America has given to Israel were used to offset the expense of building these settlements and to find the Israeli military to enforce their continued existence.
Israel is in a tough spot. As the revolutions of the Arab Spring continue, they face new leadership in Tunis, Egypt, Yemen, and possibly Bahrain, Libya and elsewhere, who are not interested in maintaining the status quo. Egypt brokered a deal between the PLO and Hamas on the governing of the West Bank and Gaza. They say they will open the border with Gaza to allow trade and commerce to resume. Israel faces a demographic time bomb and within a few years could have a Jewish minority ruling over an Arab majority in a new form of apartheid. In September, the United Nations will vote on whether to recognize Palestine as an independent nation. Unless the United States vetoes the proposal, it is expected to pass. (Some think Obama's recent speech calling for a return to the pre-1967 borders as a starting point was an intended to assuage European nations and give them a reason to vote against the UN resolution) Yet, in front of Congress, Netanyahu raised every boogey man and threat scenarios to create a picture of a besieged Israel threatened with destruction daring American politicians to waver in their support and face electoral doom.
According to Netanyahu, Israel must maintain the strongest military in the region, built on American tax dollars and using weapons given to them for virtually nothing, while the Palestinians must be de-militarized. Israel must keep the land annexed in the West Bank while Palestinians live within the claustrophobic boundaries Israel allows. Israel must maintain control of the air; while Palestine asks permission to have their own airport and Israel must be free to cross into Palestine at any time for security reasons as it builds a wall to prevent Palestinians from encroaching on Israeli territory. This asymmetry is the basis for any peace talks so far as Israel is concerned. Therefore, no peace talks can resume and Palestine will be recognized as an independent state and Israel's security will be weakened and imperiled.
On the other side, this is what must happen. The Palestinian authority must recognize Israel's right to exist and that means convincing Hamas to agree as well. There cannot be negotiations if one party doesn't acknowledge the legitimacy of the other. Palestinians displaced by the wars on Israel will not be able to return. That ship has sailed. Palestinians must halt rocket and other attacks on Israel and show they can control the security in their land. Jerusalem has to become an international city under the auspices of the U.N. open to all faiths and not the private refuge of Jews, Muslims or Christians.
In his speech to Congress, Netanyahu had the chutzpah to threaten American politicians who support the rights of the Palestinians. They are selling Israel out and are soft on terrorism. He drew a political line in the sand daring any member of Congress to cross it. Any wavering on supporting Israel is appeasement and will lead to Israel's destruction. Any talk of negotiations is code for weakening Israel and you do so at your own political peril.
President Obama has staked out a clear position. Peace talks start with the pre-1967 borders as a basis of discussion. Land swaps will be part of any talks, but at the end of the day, settlements will have to go and the buffer, which is the West Bank, must change. The President and American taxpayers need to tell Mr. Netanyahu if he disagrees fine, but he does so sacrificing all American foreign and military aid. Obama has to let American Jewish donors know he will not be intimidated nor will he sacrifice American national security to protect an Israel not interested in peace.
We now reach the crux of the problem for the president. America's national security and its ability to fight terrorism hinge on a settlement between Israel and Palestine. Right now Israel is the tail wagging the American dog. American support for dictators in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and other nations in the region was based on maintaining the status quo with Israel. Our national security is compromised as long as this current standoff continues. Over 5,000 Americans died and hundreds of thousands wounded in Iraq because President Bush's national security team, Cheney...Wolfowitz...Pearl...Feith...Rumsfeld...Libby..Hadley...Bolton et. al. were signatories and supporters of the Project for a New American Century which had as its centerpiece policy invading Iraq to eliminate Saddam Hussein because he was a threat to Israel.
I have no illusions any American politician will threaten to cut off aid to Israel. President Obama will court Jewish donors and will soften if not abandon any real attempts to pressure Israel. The status quo will remain. However, the U.N. will vote to recognize Palestine. (What will the US do?) New leadership in many Arab nations will be less supportive of the current situation. The Arab population in the occupied territories will continue to grow and our national security will continue under threat. A two-state solution is the only answer. There must be a solution guaranteeing Israel's security and recognizing the rights of the Palestinians. However this cannot happen as long as Netanyahu leads Israel and American politicians are scared to take him on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)