Drill it, mine it, melt it

The ongoing drama in the Arctic presages much in the battle to fight global warming. It includes, but goes beyond, the contradiction of President Obama using Alaska as an example of the horrors of climate change while at the same time calling for offshore oil drilling. Every country that has any history of Arctic exploration and usage is involved in a fight for access to Arctic resources. They want to drill and mine; they don't talk much about saving the wildlife. The United States will have its share of the pie regardless of consequences.
Someday, after the Arctic is ravaged, the battle will shift to Antarctica where that pristine landscape will truly show the devastation of resource gathering without proper clean-up and prudence. The Arctic has not been pure for over a century. Mining and oil detritus is common there. When we humans attack the Antarctic the contrast of before and after mining and drilling will be crystal clear to anyone who looks. Will enough people care?
Few of us go to the polar regions and out of sight is out of mind. When it comes to saving the earth versus government-fueled capitalism the die is cast. Big corporations can only be stopped by big government. In the words of that country song, "The race is on and here comes pride up the backstretch. Heartache is gaining on the inside."

The "Christians" who will devil us to Armageddon

            I grew up as a Southern Baptist and fell out as a teenager over the same issue that I see as the primary failure of most Christians – they do not follow the most simple advice of Jesus as found in the Sermon on the Mount. To me then and now, Jesus was advocating a humble, loving, merciful message. Jesus was a Pacifist. Jesus said to “resist not evil.” I can’t accept the current messengers who overlook the simple message of Jesus and replace it with complexity. I am still enough of a Christian to believe that the New Testament replaced the Old in matters of behavior. You can’t take and “eye for an eye” and claim to follow Jesus.

            This essay assumes some familiarity with the Bible. I won’t quote chapter and verse as if I were preaching. I want to share with you, or those of you not familiar with the subject, an introduction to Dominion Theology or Christian Reconstructionism. I’ll even point you right now to a Youtube video that can save you the reading of this blog. Here it is. This is only one of many videos on the subject on good old Youtube.

            If you don’t mind reading a highly intellectual article on the subject go here toSalon.com’s article on the subject. I had to take notes from that article to prepare myself to write this essay. Unfortunately, the Salon article as it exists this moment is poorly edited, but you can still get the facts from it. The article is based upon an interview with Julie Ingersoll and her book Building God’s Kingdom: Inside the World of Christian Reconstructionism.

            Essentially, Christian Reconstructionism seeks to establish a society based upon Biblical Law with a huge emphasis upon the Old Testament dictates - even the most outrageous dictates such as stoning to death homosexuals and adulterers. They seek dominion over all of society, exactly as a fundamentalist Muslim would. Different Bible, same radical control. Rational Age-of-Enlightenment thinking, upon which US founding documents are based, is to be superseded by God’s Law as revealed in the Bible. Not however, the teachings of Jesus which touch upon mercy and empathy. I don’t know how these people dance around that, but believe me even Baptists do that kind of dance! The job of humans is to enact God’s will through the family, the church, and the government in order to establish the Kingdom of God on Earth. The husband rules the family, the church rules all humans, and the government should do not much more than maintain a powerful military.

            These people believe that all knowledge arises from presuppositions. There is no such thing as fair, reasoned, scientific, humanistic thought. Reason is the enemy. The will of God as revealed in an inerrantly true Bible is the only true starting point for truth. You can’t arrive at truth any other way. Once again, I cannot tell how they dance around the Sermon on the Mount. I imagine they simply ignore it. Oklahoma’s famous Ten Commandment statue is right up the Dominion Theologian’s alley. Who needs all these laws based upon the Constitution and Democracy? We have God’s laws and lots of stones!

            The famous Left Behind series of books is right up the Christian Reconstructionist alley, too. They are post-millennialists – they believe that there will be an end of history, that the book of Revelations is among the biblical predictors of how it will end, and that it will end with the dominion of Jesus Christ and his believers over all else. It is the job of these believers to build that Kingdom of God. They can’t wait for God Himself to do the job. The Christian’s job is to bring about the prophesies of the Bible – including Armageddon. Speaking of Armageddon, the above Youtube link will explain to you how George W. Bush is linked to these people. In recent years there has been an interesting link between Christians and Jews. Why? Because Reconstructionist Christians believe Israel will play a major role in bringing about the End Times.

            These people are against the Constitutional precept of separation of church and state. They believe everything is religious – and not just to them. Non-believers must submit to their view of right and wrong. They are against birth control so you can’t have it.

            Understanding this stuff at it’s philosophical level is tedious, but essential because it seeps into our culture in dribbles and drabs. The recent reworking of the Advanced Placement History exam is an example of society caving in to these people. The idea of “a thousand points of light” replacing the social safety net is an example of their influence. Christian home schooling is a tool, but they want to destroy public education.

            Ultimately, I see no difference between ISIS or the Taliban and Christian Reconstructionists. They both favor barbaric punishments, the rule of preachers (Imams), male dominance, and the use of violence to achieve their ends. They are the greatest danger in the world today. They will devil us to Armageddon.

            

Demand public toilets or live in squalor

Buenos Aires and other thoughtful cities have sidewalk toilets. Mexico has many public toilets that cost about a dime to use. The United States has newspapers and TV stations that publicize and shame homeless people caught peeing in public.  In the US, one must go into a place of business and ask to use a toilet. I duck into fast food joints, but when I encounter the need to ask an employee for the key I'm usually ok even if the sign says "For customers only." I guess I get by because I am well dressed. And white. Homeless people are in a bind and what are they going to do? Not go?
As a society, Americans are edging toward trouble. Sooner or later I think we will begin to jail more and more homeless people for unavoidable crimes. The cost of toilets is much cheaper than jailing, but since there are privatized jails and prisons, the pressure on lawmakers will be to jail ever more people. Common sense is a tough sell.
If cities would provide many more public toilets and pay to clean them daily you would see that everybody would use them -  the middle class and the rich get "caught" in need, too. It would cost some money and we have an entire class of citizens who can afford to pay more taxes. No one gets rich without society because "No man is an island." The rich cannot always avoid the messy realities of life. What kind of a society do we want and how can we possibly have a decent society without facilities for the poorest of the poor?

Sandra Bland and the curse of standing up for your rights.

It took seeing the first few minutes of the Sandra Bland ticket video for me to understand. The cop initiated a discussion about how she felt instead of simply issuing the traffic citation. Then he upped the ante by asking her to put her cigarette out. Then he simply bullied her. I don't think anything except complete humility on Ms. Bland's part could have protected her from this man. This kind of behavior can be expected more and more from the people in society who are elevated to "hero" status simply because they wear a uniform. In their minds they deserve not just obedience but also respect, not just respect but jovial politeness. Sandra Bland might have gotten away from her traffic stop if she had "yes sir" and "no-sired" the hell out of the man. Might. But her tone of voice could have become an issue, too. His attitude and her anger put them on a collision course right on the cutting edge of American racial politics.
I am reminded of a statement I read in an Eli Lilly worksheet on mental illness. According to the drug maker Lilly, "I know my rights and I will stand up for them" is a statement that indicates possible mental illness. I have already blogged about what a disgusting belief that is. It's anti-freedom; it's totalitarian, but, if you want to live on to fight another day it is an attitude you should control. Take your ticket, then go to court to fight it and make your statement there. Going one-on-one with cops is not the answer. Be polite. Then, if you must, be jovial and self-deprecating. It's wrong; it goes against your beliefs, yes. But that's how you get away to fight another day.
I've walked or driven away from police encounters with this jovial technique where I was detained and bullied for over 30 minutes, but then I'm white. The odds are with me from the start. I'm sorry to say it, but Sandra Bland would be alive today if she had "eaten crow." But then, Jim Crow is a bitter dish and poor Sandra Bland had had enough.

The Fate of Dylann Roof's Roommate

By the day after Charleston's Emanuel AME church shooting I was seeing quotes from "Dylann Roof's Roommate." The poor fellow seems to have jumped right into his 15 minutes of fame - and, I think, the police. He admitted being aware of Roof's plan for 6 months. Should he have called police? Will he be contrasted to the woman who identified Roof in North Carolina and called police?
Is the Pope a socialist? (sorry) I believe the answer to all 3 is - yes.
The man should have called police at least after Roof actually had a gun in hand. But he won't get to be an "un-indicted co-conspirator." They'll paint him with guilt beyond what the man can comprehend. I'm not in that debate.
My thoughts are running, beyond the irony of his confession, to this - will the roommate be considered part of the hate crime or even terrorism? Does a terrorism charge both enhance punishment and lower standards of proof beyond a reasonable doubt? (If this blog gets hits I'll research that myself. Better- how about you leave a comment?) And let's be more clear in our culture about the laissez faire hate language of so much of the media. Father Coughlin ain't in it. If the roommate should have reported prior to Roof's possession of a gun, then there are over a hundred more haters out there broadcasting hate to untold numbers of Dylann Roof-types. They will not be indicted.
Nor will the politicians who ignore common-sense modern solutions to gun control such as mandatory insurance tied to each gun and gun locks that only respond to the owner. They will not be indicted.
The roommate will pay a price and he earned something, but just what? Will it have an impact on friends of violent people with guns to call police? Ha. I can just see the rash of folks crushed by local right-wing, freedom-loving cops.
Every mass shooting must continue to lead to rational people speaking out about solutions. Thanks to President Obama for pointing out that other leading countries in the world don't have so many of these massacres.
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..."
Let's insure each gun and require all new guns to be manufactured with personalized locks specific to the buyer. (The hand print technology is there.) Let's mandate police reports from whistleblower friends who hear of actual plans- and follow-up with suspects.
There will always be a million reasons why we can't do these things until - someday - we will do them and wonder what was wrong with us all along.

Were exchanges established by the states or by the State?

We The Poor of the United States await the ruling of our masters, the Supreme Court on the issue of federal subsidies for Obamacare. The line in the law that allowed the rabid nine to jump in talks about exchanges "established by the state." Thirty-four states did not establish the exchanges. Will the entire law be in jeopardy because of the lack of capitalization? To me, "the state" means individual states whereas "established by the State" could conceivably refer to the State meaning 'the government' in which case the Federal Government would meet the requirement. I think the entire mess can be laid at the feet of the Democratic Party. How could they have been so careless?! There is no room in law for careless mistakes. They will lose this decision and the culpable party will be lost in the translation. People will howl about the court and how it should not have accepted the case, but it's like giving a seven-foot-tall East European basketball player a set-up for a slam dunk. They just hang under the basket for this. They live for this. They'll cram the decision down our throats and all the yelling about subsidies for roads and disaster relief and big oil will be moot. The point is the Democrats blew it. Why? That will be the subject of many a book. How? That only takes this short blog by a long hair leaping unknown. Maybe it's the lower-case "s." Maybe it's just the use of the word "state" instead of "federal government."
I suspect that some lobbyist created this mess and the Democrats fell for it.

Four Burl Dunn songs with son Forest Arturo Dunn

My son Forest (1972-2008) and I did a lot of home recording together for a couple of years in the early century. Yeah, it was a special time for us. Forest played piano, keyboards, percussion (on whatever was at hand), and that excellent bass. Oh, he also sang his ass off in the background.
I've taken the digital recorder we used into studios to clean up the sound. Some of our work is on "Texas Socialist Infiltration Dance Songs" and now I've a digital release called "Four With Forest." I went to the fine Elephonic Studios in Albuquerque and worked with Jesse Korman on these four songs. Hear the full songs here at CD Baby or here:
The EP opens with "Williwas," a song inspired by the famous Southeastern Alaska winds and crab fishing. Hey check it out below. I'd like the song to appear on The Deadliest Catch; that'd be nice. If it does I'll owe a lot to Forest's keyboard riffs. "Gale winds 40 knots, still pullin' crab pots. Captain calls all the shots; he's dry, we're not. Willie was."

The second song is "That's Why I'm So Shook" with Forest at his honky-tonk finest. "I don't need your thoughtlessness; I've grown cold to your hard caress."

I wrote "I Didn't See You" right after my first trip to Alaska on a state ferry, the Wickersham. Dig Forest's bass line and Hammond organ. "Maybe you were in a bar in New York City or loving Louisiana living with a Bourbon Street high. Maybe you were on that same boat with me, and I passed with a far-away look in my eye."
"In the End" resonates today in ways I wish it did not, but in the end, we lost Forest and all that good music he never got to play.
It's up on Spotify, CD Baby and all the usual suspects.