Jharrin4's Blog

There are now five candidates still running campaigns for President. Three Republicans, two Democrats. The guy with the orange hair gets most of the media coverage. He was literally created by the media, having become quite successful as a reality TV creature in “The Apprentice”. Sure, Agent Orange has been a media favorite for a long time. He has hotels and casinos named–not after him, but named after him/by himself. He brags about being great at cutting deals and coming out richer for the effort. Never mind his documented business failures and bankruptcies. Hey, no one is perfect. This candidate for President is oh, so far from perfect, spouting blatantly xenophobic, racist, misogynistic pronouncements with seeming immunity granted by the mainstream media, which is ipso facto conducting a feast of folly for the ages. Yes, the “news” programs love Agent Orange.  And why not? The corporate media traffics in the superficial and sensational, not the the substantial and serious. Context? Analysis? Dream on. Sir Orange even asserted he can shoot someone and his followers would still stick with him, yet those mics and cameras gravitate toward him, pulled into his black hole of buffoonery and bluster day after day.  He’s won most of the come-and-gone primaries. Those polls reflect his popularity (!) among a certain (disturbing) segment of the American populace. It’s hard to imagine that he can win the Oval Office. However…

…I’m at the point where it seems possible. Note my recent blog entry asserting the documented voter suppression and the “strip and flip” theft of votes on electronic voting machines. But even with that, are there really enough xenophobes, bigots, misogynists and racists to elect him to be President? Well, that depends on how many of the potential voting public votes in November, especially those who have a reasonable grasp on our current grim reality. Agent Orange’s followers will absolutely make it to the polls. Make no mistake, there are millions and millions of Americans who reject this “colorful” candidate’s character. It’s not too hard for the rational, sensible voter-citizen to realize there is  a lot at stake in the November election, in all levels of national government.

Unless Agent Orange is somehow sabotaged at the Republican convention, it seems a fait accompli he will be representing the GOP  in that fall election. Not that the other GOP hopefuls are much less frightening!

But wait! There’s millions and millions of people who are excited about either Hillary Clinton  or Bernie Sanders. The media, however, doesn’t  fawn over either of them–especially Bernie–the way it does for Agent Orange. But between Hillary and Bernie, Ms.Clinton usually is the lead story as far as how the race for the White House is shaping up for the Democratic side of our alleged “two party” system of government.

At this point, Hillary seems to be on her way to the nomination. That’s what the media has asserted even before primary season started. Clinton. That name. Sure. Wife of ex-President Bill. Former New York senator and Secretary of State during Barack Obama’s first term as current President. By comparison, Bernie has come out from a political wilderness called Vermont where he ran and won a seat in his state’s senate proclaiming himself to be–of all things political–a socialist! Socialist? But when he announced his run for President in May of 2015, he was wise enough to run as a Democrat. A democratic socialist, to be precise The media first snickered at him, then virtually ignored his existence. But, if you are at all politically aware on this 23rd of March 2016, he is quite popular (thanks to social media and lots of individual donations, and none from corporate puppet-masters) and has won numerous primaries. Now, in spite of his initial lack of name recognition and the media’s dismissal of him, it had has no choice to at least, in dribs and drabs, acknowledge he not only does exist, but he speaks passionately and honestly, and has a detectable, palpable political pulse.

Neither Hillary or Bernie have any assurance at this point that they will get the nomination, though Hillary is ahead in delegates. But Bernie isn’t 37 lengths behind as they make the far turn and keep heading to the long stretch run, which include New York and California  the two primaries that have enough combined delegates at stake to keep things lively. The finish line is still a good distance ahead.

Here’s my concern: There are  scores of hard core Bernie supporters (and there are many, mostly flying beneath the mainstream media’s radar in regards to polling techniques) who really, truly dislike Hillary Clinton. She has the above noted political assets, but does come off as a bit of a hypocrite when trying to deny her corporate connections and “super pac” contributions, her military hawkishness and bizarre praise for nefarious political personaes such as the Reagans and Henry Kissenger. She panders pathetically to the Afro American voter who, ironically was done no favors when her husband joined republicans in gutting social/welfare/safety net programs, and championed NAFTA,  the trade agreement that sent scores of blue collar jobs out of the country. Evidently, based on the primary results racial breakdown, many Afro Americans believe Hillary’s promises to not be like minded in such matters. Berne calls her out on all these bits of history. Then she dodges, weaves, and deflects in a dissembling kind of well nuanced dance. Then, not-so-subtly she parrots some of Mr.Sander’s liberal ideas enough to add disingenuous to the list of unflattering adjectives used by her detractors to describe her characteristics on the campaign trail (I’m talking about the Sanders detractors, exclusively, at this point).

So, if Ms.Clinton is the nominee, and scores of Bernie true believers feel another kind of burn, one that hasn’t enough time to heal by ballot casting time, enough may refuse to vote for her (and vote Green, Independent, Mickey Mouse or whatever, or not at all) then with the red state voter suppression and theft, Agent Orange could–egad!–become…

I won’t blame Ms.Clinton, though, should this nightmare scenario come to pass. Nor will I blame the Sanders supporters. I’ll blame the absolutely terrible, corrupted election process in this country. The activist Court. The bought-and-paid-for congress. Bait-and-switch administrations past and present. Oh, and voter apathy…ignorance. The collective erosion of empathy…

Well, we shall see. Yesterday’s terror attack in Brussels provides fresh red meat for the Islam-a-phobes on the Right, adding energy to their fiery rhetoric of fear mongering. As has been shown in recent history, fear mongering works. Does it ever. Demonization. Divide and conquer. Iraq. Remember? A phony war by a phony president. Aided and abetted by a complacent and compliant mass media,  that shoulders plenty of blame if we go off a cliff.

It’s should be quite a summer. As a long-standing student of history,  especially in its political context, I’m hoping it doesn’t repeat itself in regards to certain shocking and regrettable outcomes. You know, those who don’t learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. You bet. As James Joyce famously lamented: history is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake.

Yesterday, the 2016 NCAA men’s basketball tourney brackets were announced. Office pools will have bracket fanatics prognosticating on game results. There’s no “betting line” involved in bracket guessing. It’s instinct and dumb luck that will have someone, somewhere pick as many winners as possible, including the ultimate winner of the trophy.

There will be a betting “line” on each game, and if one team is a “prohibitive favorite”, the Vegas sport “books” likely will have that favorite go off, before the game even starts, as  “laying” 25-30 pts. That means the underdog is winning 25 or 30 to nothing even before the refs starts the game. In games featuring more evenly matched teams, the “dog” might get 2, 3 points. Get it (those not hip to the gaming jargon)? Oh, and the House always gets some “vig” even if the bet is a winner. The vig is the price of merely doing business with the casino or even your local, charming juice loan operator.

These terms will ALL be on the test!

Sports generate lots of betting revenue. College and pro football and basketball lead the way in getting the casual or committed gambler to examine the odds and plunk down some moolah. The House usually wins (and the bettor loses $$, plus that “vig”). All those mega casino/resorts in Sin City are brick and mortar proof of it. It’s hard to “handicap” that betting line with any certainty. There’s never, ever really  “a mortal lock” or “lead-pipe cinch” as far as an outcome. It’s called gambling!  Hey, life is a gamble, right? From the moment we stagger out of bed it’s all akin to a roll of the dice. Could be winning 7’s. Or  instant  “snake eyes” to reckon with. So, no matter how confident one may be about a bet, we can just never know for sure. Not until that fat lady sings…

Taking notes? Betting jargon 101. That test will be unannounced…

But wait. Ever heard of another bit of jargon mostly related to gambling on just about anything?: the fix is IN. What that means is that someone or two or who knows how many nefarious types have tampered with things. The endgame isn’t going to reflect a natural, honest, outcome in which the winners and losers are determined. These things have happened over and over through the decades. Players, coaches, and those who influence the fix usually get busted, sooner or later. Loose lips sink…ya know? The cards might be stacked. The dice have been loaded.

Which leads me to our election process. You can even bet on elections! Really! Right now, Oddschecker has Hillary favored to become President at 8/15 odds (you bet $15 on Hillary in order to win $8). Sanders is at 12/1. Hey, bet a buck, maybe win twelve. Or add some zeros to the initial number and increase that payoff. If you pick the winner. A certain candidate with an odd orange hue is listed at 16/5. Do the math…

Whatever other cites have as their betting lines on the candidates, I  must assert that there is one “line” not being publicized: the vote suppression/theft line. Seriously. If you may recall, the 2000 election for President had the notorious “hanging chads” in Florida, with the Supreme Court ultimately (by a 5-4 vote) appointing George Bush as winner when they told the Florida election officials to stop verifying voting ballots. Ensuing analysis of the Florida fiasco was that Al Gore legitimately won Florida and its electoral votes that would have given him the White House. This has been documented (if skeptical, use some critical thinking and do some research on it. It’s out there.) Along with what happened in Ohio in 2004, when John Kerry’s announced 4% lead in that state late in the evening somehow disappeared in what has been called a “statistical improbability” Some statisticians even say it was an impossibility.  By 2 A.M.Bush that night, had a 2% lead and, like with Florida in 2000, those electoral votes meant he, not Kerry would be the winner. Again, the facts are out there, though not disseminated by the mainstream media. Hell, bizarrely neither AL Gore or John Kerry even bitched about the stink of seeming election fraud, a fact that begs a certain cynical, disturbing question about our so-called two-party system of government. Isn’t there suppose to be at least some token opposition or dispute in those two cases of the fix is IN?

The clear lesson of 2000 and 2004 is that if the election is close, then it’s ripe for tampering and tinkering with the outcome. Recall that President Obama won both his elections by healthy margins. Don’t think some votes weren’t tinkered with though. Hanging chads are one thing. Electronic voting machines are another. Harvey Wasserman has a book coming out entitled The Strip and Flip Selection of 2016: Five Jim Crows and Electronic Election Theft. Wasserman is a bona fide journalist. He pinpoints the type of electronic machines that have been proven “hackable” using the terms “strip and flip” to explain how Kerry’s late night Ohio advantage was systematically wiped out. Strip the original voter’s choice and flip it to the opponent. In 2000 and 2004 Florida and Ohio, respectively, had Republican governors and, perhaps more importantly, Republican Secretaries of State, who command election day machinations. These are facts, not “sour grapes”. If you are a fan of conservative politics, you’re welcome to say stop living in the past and get over it, which has been the mantra for the last 16 years. Well, in the immortal words of Bartleby the Scrivener, I’d prefer not to…get…over…it.

Beyond the hanging chads, and strip and flip scenarios, there’s Republican controlled states right now that have passed blatant voter suppression laws. There’s several, including North Carolina, Kansas, Texas, Ohio and Wisconsin that now require special ID’s, elimination of same-day registration, dual registration systems and other laws that appear to target college-age people, seniors and the poor, most of whom historically vote more Democratic than Republican.

Okay, I’m not a professional odds maker, but based on my knowledge of those recent dubious voting outcomes for President and the current crop  of “red states” that have enacted those sinister voting laws, along with those infernal electronic voting machines, (no paper trail!) I hereby assert that, before the Tuesday in November later this year welcoming citizens to the polls to decide many offices, none more prized than President, the Democratic candidates are at a disadvantage (whether they care or not, and I really do wonder in some cases given our current Democratic appointed U.S.Attorney General’s seeming lack of challenging and prosecuting red state, anti-democratic voting restrictions). I’d say the Democrats are about three to four millions votes in the hole RIGHT NOW.

So, if you are hoping for Hillary or Bernie to prevail, then vote and ask for a paper ballot, and maybe they can win by at least 5%. If not, get ready for Agent Orange, or The Messiah or the little robo-candidate to prevail.

Wanna bet? I’ll give you 9/5 odds.

Not

Hey, everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die. Except for the suicidal, I suppose, whom likely don’t believe in heaven or hell and and obviously don’t buy into the biblical passage of  knoweth no man the day or hour of…

…of his or her…you know…the big sleep. The final curtain. The shuffling off of this mortal coil.

And while I’m at it, let’s toss in some John Donne with …any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind…and therefore send not to seek for whom the bell tolls…it tolls for thee.

Where is this going? Sounds a bit morbid? Sorry.But the bell will toll for one and all, by natural or self-inflicted or “other” inflicted means. While everyday the obits offer the latest updates on reminders of our mortality, as long as we’re still in the game, we can continue to either feel diminished or indifferent about the recently departed. And most all of those departed we know not a thing. I mean, there’s over 7 billion of us! Who has the time!? For that matter, I’m not that inclined to know too many people, period. Recall that a friend to everyone is a friend to no one. Less is more, okay?

For instance, one of the recently departed, whom I knew only of, was Antonin Scalia, a member of the United States Supreme Court. Depending on one’s political mojo, Mr.Scalia’s demise might make someone feel diminished. Or, possibly, increased. Count me among the latter. Increased in the manner of there being one less extremist who had the means to inflict harm on many a person, if not the country itself.

To me, and I’m thinking, a lot of others, Antonin Scalia was not a very nice man. Oh, he’s gotten plenty of praise in his passing from this and that diplomatic-minded member of the media, politics and the vox populi, but those of us not so beholden to a John Donne sense of bonhomie prefer to call him and his followers out on seemingly asserting that his loss is a terrible thing. Keeping in mind that, while no one can know that day or hour, know that a Supreme Court Justice knows he or she is appointed for as long as they remain above ground and retain adequate levels of consciousness. I mean, some of the previous Justices plowed well into their 80s and Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. finally ran out of gas at age 90. He retired at that age and had four years to enjoy not having to be draped in a somber black robe when at work.

And know that the word supreme means just that: nothing exceeds it. The Court renders decisions based–supposedly–on an interpretation of our Constitution. Those decisions then are what the rest of us have to live with, with the presumption that a fair-minded, free thinking person on that Court might want to leave his or her personal bias or predispositions out of any rulings. Not easy to go tabula rasa when assessing a case, but the presumption is the members of the Court should be willing to give it a try, given what  may be at stake in any given ruling.  Appointed for life and wielding enormous power, when a case makes it to the highest court in the land, the general public expects rulings that somehow respects the “all men are created equal” spirit, and other language from that Declaration, as well as the aforementioned Constitution, documents that we are all taught were created to make us all feel protected from extremist agendas, tyranny and oppression.

*   *   *

With that last paragraph in mind, here’s why I shed no tear for Antonin’s passing:

Lawrence vs Texas: Scalia was among the minority dissent in a case that struck down a law making it a criminal offense to indulge in sodomy. So, it’s the  government’s job to legislate morality? Even in the privacy of one’s home? What next, morality squads? Antonin wants to peep through your bedroom window. Perverted, no?

Columbia vs Heller: Scalia wrote the majority opinion that overturned a previous Court decision that framed the 2nd amendment as limiting gun ownership outside the context of it’s well regulated malitia provision. Thanks to this ruling, the militia is now a very loose term, as is “regulated”. We now have a gun-crazed culture that treats this revised view of that amendment as sacrosanct and virtually impossible in any way to apply any control over the number and types of weapons flooding the streets. And when 20 primary grade boys and girls are ripped apart by an assault weapon psycho, (Sandy Hook elementary school) and our congress, bought and paid for by the gun lobby, won’t even strengthen background checks, I’d say Scalia, and his gun-freak homies, died with the blood of those innocents on his hands. (Oh, UPDATE! BREAKING NEWS! Uber driver shoots and kills six seemingly random victims–and picked up a fare after one of his crazed pit-stops. Guns, guns, guns. It’s how we Americans settle arguments. Even with people we never met! Thank goodness for that liberal ruling on the almighty 2nd Amendment).

Weber vs Reproductive Health Services: Scalia was adamently anti-choice regarding a woman’s right to a legal, safe abortion, not to mention the not-so-underlying contempt for women’s reproductive rights in general. Scalia sided with not overturning what the reproductive rights advocates felt, in this Court case, endangered some women’s lives and required mandatory “counseling” on the matter of getting an abortion at all. Again, governmental snooping into private matters. The upholding of this extremist Missouri legislation wasn’t good enough for Antonin , though. He lamented Roe vs Wade was not struck down as well.  I guess the return of back alley abortions would not cause Mr.Scalia any loss of sleep, any more than those dead school children ever likely did.

Scalia wrote the dissenting opinion when the Affordable Care Act was challenged in his Court. Though not the greatest health care legislation, the ACA is better than nothing, nothing being apparently preferred by Antonin, however. Hey, just don’t get sick, right? This opinion, as he was receiving single-payer, government healthcare as a member of the Supremes. So magnanimous! Such an pompous, unctuous asswipe!

Bush vs Gore (2000): Scalia sided with his fellow conservative judges in having Florida stop counting votes and thus had George W. Bush inserted as President, thus nullifying the will of the electorate, who gave Gore half-a-million more votes than Bush and without the judicial tinkering of Florida, he would have had the electoral college victory as well. Antonin, the election-rigging, water boy for W.!  And, may I remind you, dear reader,  that George and most of his cabinet are now, in several foreign countries, considered war criminals who have committed CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY. Not in ScaliaStan, though.

Antonin, assessing  “all men are created equal”  in his very distorted way, sided with the Court’s fairly recent ruling that gutted the better part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Hey, he simply concluded that minorities (obviously, primarily for whom the law was enacted), need not ever again worry about any racism or prejudice from the white, power elite. Sure, blacks and Hispanics, and other non-white beings hardly ever face discrimination in this more enlightened, 21st century.

Then there’s pending decisions that Antonin will never get to vote (the wrong way) on: legislative redistricting (brought by conservative interests to gerrymander districts and boost Republican victories). Challenges to the blatant voter suppression laws (see previous paragraph) from Republican controlled state legislators are working their way up the judicial food chain. Fortunately, Antonin won’t be there to take another bite out of what’s left of a ragged “democracy”.

Also, a case concerning any organized union’s “fair share” provision that asks for those not wanting to be in a union, but who accept a union’s protections, to pay “a fair share,” would have been decided with Scalia part of the conservative wing of the court. If the fair share provision is ruled unconstitutional, unions–already under attack since the Reagan years–would be further diminished. Let’s face it, like the long-since-gone need to protect the sanctity of the vote, and its attendant racial discrimination, it’s inconceivable that company management would ever again do anything to exploit or mistreat an employee. Unions? No need. Right? Antonin evidently was sure of it.

Oh, there’s more to invoke in support of my contempt for Antonin Scalia. But enough. He’s gone. Appointed for life, and he used up his 79 years of it. Your bell has tolled, yee legal scholar and “brilliant mind” (ha!). Me? Diminished? No. But with one less racist, hateful ideologue on the Supreme Court, less is more, again. At least for now.

There. I said it! Call it my own “ruling” on a court of one. With a half hearted apology to the sentiments John Donne. But he never met Antonin Scalia…

Have you been paying attention to the 2016 political campaigns, especially for President? I have seen a few of the Sanders/ Clinton show-downs (and for awhile Martin O’Malley was in the race). Bernie has surprised the Democratic movers and shakers who arrogantly presumed Hillary was a shoe-in to get the nomination, especially since the DNC, headed by Debra Wasserman Schultz, attempted to bury all of three originally scheduled debates in time slots meant to result in a minimal number of eyeballs and ears attached to those whom might be interested.

Ms. Schultz was excoriated by more than a few credible political watchdogs whose audible barking about blatantly strategizing for Clinton started to resonate more forcefully as time went by. And in spite of Debbie’s effort to limit debate exposure for Bernie or Martin, the general polling numbers kept showing Senator Sanders gaining momentum and garnering millions of dollars from individual donors. He was not going away. Martin O’Malley did drop out. Bernie’s voice was now all but impossible to ignore, and more debates were scheduled between Hillary and Bernie. The mainstream media, with its pathetic pandering to Donald Trump and his xenophobic, misogynistic blathering, has now had to give candidate Sanders more than a passing acknowledgement and assessment of his ideas. We, the people! seemed to be assuring he’d keep his polling numbers too high to be dissed or dismissed.

As of the here and now, Hillary still appears to benefit from a lot of mainstream media propelled  presumptions that Sanders can’t actually overtake her as the front runner, that she is going to get the nomination, and pay no attention to those who doubt such, a mantra of sorts that could eventually have to resort to a Big Lie strategy if she loses a few more primaries to her only remaining opponent. This “spin” is initially channeled by the status quo elements the national Democratic echo chamber: Hillary is going to win. Hillary is Oval Office ready. Hillary will be the first female President. Hillary knows blah blah, First Lady, Secretary of State, blah blah. Bernie is just a cantankerous, white-haired, one-issue socialist! Gasp!

Hillary the hypocrite.

She insists she not beholden to Wall St. But she has Super Pac money from that financial sector. Bernie takes only donations from regular folks, an average $27 hand-out that has totaled millions of dollars. Hillary’s daughter, Chelsea, is married to a mega wealthy hedge fund mojo. Gee. I’m sure mommy will bust her ass to bust up Wall St. if elected. Sanders asserts he will do just that. In fact, Bernie frames his candidacy on what we need to do to stop the income inequality created by 35 years of Reaganomics; how we all CAN bring about positive change. We can…we can…we can.

Hillary responds to Sander’s proposals with we can’t…we can’t…we can’t asserting that she knows it’ll be difficult to alter the legislative landscape in any expedient manner, and that “I will…I know…I have…”  As such, Mrs. Clinton doesn’t seem to be talking to the people, as much as talking at them. We, the People? Not so much.

Hillary is a dove. Ha! In that last debate she sang the praises of Henry Kissinger, upon whom Sanders heaped nothing but scorn after Hillary invoked Henry the Hawk as a confidant, of sorts. Ever seen the documentary The Trials of Henry Kissinger? Cambodia. Chile. Indonesia. Regime change. Millions of dead civilians. Our historical, creepy CIA modus operandi for getting a user-friendly leader inserted here and there, one who’ll will play political paddy cake and bake up a cake that tastes great to our geo-political interests, and not at all intended for the taste buds of the locals, many of whom get government offerings laced with arsenic. And recall, Hillary voted FOR the invasion of Iraq in 2003, buying into the the fear-mongering prevarication of either we fight them there, or we fight them here!  Bernie voted against it, clearly smelling the bullshit being shoveled by Bush/Cheney et al. Their smell now lingers but it’s the residual funk of a failed foreign policy that helped create the terror-states that didn’t exist in the region prior to that invasion. Can you say ISIS? But only a few brave souls in congress had the conviction to say no to that disastrous invasion. Hillary the dove, huh?

Well, having just bashed Hillary Clinton, I have to admit that she is still better than any of the Republicans running for the Oval Office. Trump, (see above); Cruz (the Messiah!); Rubio (the redundant, robotic, vapid mouthpiece). Yeah, Hillary is better in orders of magnitude than any of those loose cannons. But that says far more about the freak show of Republicans seeking the Oval Office than it does Mrs.Clinton, marinated in corporate money and admirer of the likes of Henry Kissinger.

No, it’s Bernie who resonates with we, the people! And when he says we all whom does that not automatically include? But what about the African-American voters? The Hispanics? They are somehow not part of that first-person plural pronoun, is that it?  The media beats that current drum. Just like that dubious drumbeat for war in 2003. But I, for one, am hearing the beat of a different drummer, one that resonates in its refutation of business-as-usual. Yeah, it’s that democratic socialist! I’m sensing that he’ll get respectable support from across the board, from those who understand that WE automatically includes them, regardless of their skin color.

Bernie is talking to you, and we all can win, if everyone listens and thinks, perhaps for a change, perhaps for once, for themselves.

br

Okay. Duly noted: a lot of folks dig Star Wars, the 38 year-old spaced-out franchise whose latest installment has now become the all-time box office ( $852 million, domestic) champ. Have you seen it? If not, does that make you a pop culture snob? I mean, if you haven’t seen it and don’t intend to see it. I’ve read some reviews, most of which are favorable. But those critics who dislike it really trash not just the movie itself, but its decades-long ethos as some type of cutting-edge example of sci-fi mojo. But, the box-office numbers speak for themselves (though I’m a bit discouraged as to what is being said, the movie’s intrinsically science fiction, technical and narrative elements aside; see below).

For my money, Stanley Kubrick’s 2001, a Space Odyssey is much more of an engaging visual and narrative wonder. To give Harrison Ford a clear case of sci-fi genre gravitas, so is Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner.  Ford’s character in Scott’s film occupied a more complex character in a much more provocative, edgy offering for filling up a couple hours of a viewer’s time. This entry might read as a “it’s just your opinion, so what?,” but I am weaving a thematic thread here, okay? How’s this?: I suppose Star Wars vs Blade Runner is analogous to a James Patterson or Janet Evanovich mass consumption approach to writing/storytelling and say, the likes of Jim Harrison, Chuck Palahniuk or William Gibson. Those last three writers are likely not household names as far as readership goes, but each has had Hollywood turn at least one of their books into films that visually articulate a respectable amount of their exceptional (and I’m not just spouting personal opinion here, believe me) literary talents. So, what they don’t accrue financially in total book sales, they get a boost from selling the rights to a studio. In this respect they thereby, seemingly, are not much different than George Lucas or Janet E. or James P., though not  quite occupying the rarified commercial air as that at the highest rungs of the profit-generating ladder that occasionally, in print or movie-making (see above, per the current cinematic rage) can reach astronomical heights. But I sense Harrison and other writers such as he, want to make money, if not by a public cultivating a larger appreciation for their writings, then cashing in via Hollywood in order to be financially stable enough to keep writing without their publishers expecting their work to become blatantly, formulaically commercial. You know, like Tom Clancy, Stephen King, E.L. James and Janet and  James, some of the authors whose products are, in my humble opinion, trafficking in the fast-food franchise lane of the commercial, cultural highway.

But, of course, to each their own. Back to that latest cinematic money monster, Star Wars, for the record, while visiting a friend in Dallas in 1977, when the first installment in the franchise hit the big screens, we decided to check out the big buzz hailing it as some kind of movie marvel. After less than an hour, we walked out, not giving a damn about Han Solo and the gimmicky robot tandem, or any of what met our eyes and ears that crowded the cheesy story. I guess we reviewed the movie with our feet, after putting money in the Lucas coffer that entitled us to stay until its end. We figured our time was better spent doing something else, not knowing what that was as we headed to her car in the mall lot. I can’t recall what we did. But no regrets!

So, I contend that there are movies, then there are films. There are books, then there is literature. Right, right, it’s all subjective. Opinions are like assholes; everybody has one! Yeah, yeah. And some people believe climate change is a hoax. And that the Kardashians matter. And Elvis faked his death. It’s right here, in the National Enquirer!

Different strokes and all that.  It’s a free country, and we’re free as to what we consume as cultural calories.  With actual food-based caloric intake, we are encouraged to eat healthy. Read the nutrition labels. Avoid the artery clogging junk. Get some exercise. Walk. Bike. Mind and body. They’re connected, right?

Cultural calories work the same way, methinks. You want to see Star Wars a few times? Do it. A couple of viewings in 3D (while dressed as one of the movie’s characters) and maybe one last fix in 2D. And ummm, that hot, buttered popcorn by the free refill buckets! Then you buy the dvd. The box set! George Lucas loves you. The costume shops love you. I’m a snob, no doubt, because this Star Wars, the Force Awakens, event suggests to me that too many people get all worked up about things that really don’t matter but for the brief fix it provides that takes them away from external and important realities. While we’re rarely able to get more than 40% of the eligible voters to actually vote (sometimes in mid-term elections maybe 30%, tops) there’s apparently intense involvement with media content that keeps folks entertained, but not very well informed about the local or global world in which they live.

For many reality is visited on a tourist-level of involvement. Elections? Debates? Gun control? Ugh! Too real. Where’s the remote? The media provides so many empty calorie dishes that plenty of people eat up at a rate that apparently precludes not trying for something that could give their brains a better workout, you know, just once in awhile. And that includes programs–if one looks for them–about our brains and the body that contains it. But who has time? We’re busy with our lives! Jobs. Kids. Bills. Wait did someone say Jobs? Oh, yes, Apple products are so fascinating. Look! My watch! I can watch movies and tv programs on it! I’m so connected with my Google glasses.

Or, alas, if not Star Wars, part 7, it’s the umpteenth iteration of a cop drama, a canned-laughter sit-com, the zombie and vampire narratives that have everyone from Sherlock Holmes to Abe Lincoln somehow now being part of the modern take on those horror genres. Are you ready for the zombie apocalypse. No?! What the hell is the matter with you. Are you wasting time watching PBS? Reading who? What? Never heard of it…

The horror. The horror! says the reclusive, paranoid Colonel Kurtz near the end of the film, Apocalypse Now! Yeah, well I’m increasingly inclined to share his feelings about the shape of things, but in a different context. The horror I see and hear is present in our  short attention span, instant gratification, mindless consumerism and preference for easily digested information and cynical persuasive pitches that are at the surface of a mile-wide, half-inch deep cultural landscape.

Margaret Atwood. Cormac McCarthy. Jerzy Kosinski. Aldous Huxley. George Orwell, if only you knew! Richard Wright. Ralph Ellison. Rachel Carson…

Bonfire of the Vanities.

Absurdistan…

Hey. It’s been awhile. Hmm. Let’s see. I’d say about a stretch of time equal to several alarming videos being released having to do with mostly white police officers killing black people. Call them “gotcha!” videos that capture what almost always appear to be police with itchy trigger fingers when encountering their African-American “subjects,” to use the lingo of police officials. This is an old story, and by that I don’t mean just the past few years or so. Seriously, what is really old about this story is just how far back the”gotcha!” moments go. As where before the hand-held camcorders became readily available in the marketplace, replacing bulkier, cumbersome equipment, by the early 1990s more and more people could use their easy-to-carry-around, video recorders. Hey. Instant video journalists! Find those video moments. Ready. Aim. Action! The world finally seen…through a viewfinder.  Cute animal moments. Even cuter kiddie moments. At the ballgame. From that hilltop. By the river. The beautiful birds landing on the backyard feeder. The family cat pouncing… (never mind); Uncle Ernie’s birthday bash…smashed…trashed.

Wait…did I say bash?

Hey…that guy, over there. What the? What’s happening? That’s no party! It’s a lively urban street scene, yes. Some black guy seems to be getting the shit beat out of him by several cops, apparently taking turns whacking him with their nightsticks. The guy seems defenseless. He’s groping about on his hands and knees. What the hell?! Camcorder, don’t fail me now!

When did that happen?

Remember, Rodney King being beaten senseless in March of 1991 in Los Angeles, as a nearby member of John Q.Public had a camcorder capturing the four officers treating Rodney like a pinada? The officers were charged with abusive actions, but their trial ended with all four being acquitted. In spite of the “smoking gun” video.

Then came the riots and the looting of mostly inner city L.A. as a response to the perceived miscarriage of justice. When the riot ended there were 50 dead, 2000 injured. $1 billion in property damage. This post-acquittal action was captured on video as well, but on live video from news choppers. It was bloody, ugly and angry.

Fast forward 23 years, and Rodney King’s beating seems almost an act of restraint by the L.A. police. Now, with dash-cam and body-cams on police personnel and vehicles, as well as seemingly everyone with video capture on their smart phones, we have seen a disturbing number of near-instant fatal encounters by young black men with officers of the law. Shoot first, sort it out later, seems to be the police force modus operandi.

And these days, the various video sources serve as near-literal smoking gun evidence.

Some video “gotcha” moments come to light quickly, others not quite so. It depends on the source of the video. In the Chicago area, there’s the now notorious case of Laquan McDonald being shot sixteen times by one officer. By the time the dash-cam video was handed over to the media, after legal action forcing its release, mayor Rahm Emanuel had survived a run-off election against a Hispanic opponent. Now, the prevailing opinion of a lot of people, of various races, is that the video was held back for political reasons. Hmm. Playing politics with justice?!  Say it isn’t so!

And of course these videos, whether from back when or occurring as I write this, are all about politics. Racial, most obviously. In the city of Chicago, where I have lived most of my life (and I have memories of the Mayor Richard J. Daley  years, starting in the mid-50s) the plight of  “people of color” on the South and West sides has seemingly not ever changed for the better. At all. Their schools are underfunded by a rotten, state-wide taxing process based on an area’s revenue generation by (in some places) a healthy business district. Most of the South and West sides have few, if any, major businesses. Lots of liquor and dollar stores, for sure.  Property values are very low. The term “food desert” connotes this dearth of branded big business where the residents can shop–or find decent employment opportunities. And, instead of well maintained public spaces, there are countless encounters with the broken glass glitter of empty, littered lots. Gang violence is a daily dose of bitter reality on the streets around these trashed out empty spaces. Decades and decades of socio-economic stasis. City government at work. Well, for some. And so it goes, on and on, as if that is simply the way it was meant to be. Mayor after mayor, police chief after police chief.

I don’t have the formal expertise or mental energy required to intricately, concisely, analyze my direct, long term, observations of the dubious conditions of above noted parts of Chicago. But one certainly need not have a doctorate in social science, psychology, political science, economics or public policy  to see this particular reality and assume that the lack of progress for the West an South sides is quite intentional. Social planning? Sure, building cookie-cutter, drab, poorly managed and barely maintained high-rise public housing was some urban planner’s most inspired project. After several decades of their mismanagement and governmental neglect, and becoming natural nesting grounds for gangs, drugs, violence and despair, they’ve all been imploded. So, the skyline looks a bit different. But the basic view from ground level is still the funk and flotsam of Chicago’s mean streets. City Hall? Any new ideas?

Not really. Except to have police answer dramatically to those pesky 9-1-1 calls coming from Desolation Row. Make no mistake about it, the police are weary of the residents of the South and West sides as much as the residents are weary of the men and women sworn to serve and protect.
As noted above, this has been a loooonnnng running situation. The conundrum of “chicken or egg?” comes to mind

Back to that Laquan McDonald video. Caught on dash-cam from a police cruiser. The African-American community, taking up the “black lives matter” mantra that has been echoing around the country, are demanding that Mayor Emanuel resign, along with Cook County prosecutor Anita Alvarez.  Sure, why not? The accusation that the video took about a year to be released for media viewing reeks of mayoral and prosecutorial covering up. I agree, in principle, with the activists taking to streets. Presumably,  those who reside in Chicago and live in those Chi-raq battlegrounds should be fed up.  Articulate your disapproval and disgust! You’re mad as hell and you’re not going to take it anymore! Grrr. Argh! Professional camera operators are there to capture your moments. Keep calling for the mayor to resign. A mayor with this kind of kiss-my-ass stink on him just has to go. And now! Resign! As for Ms.Alvarez, well all the protesters have to do is go to the polls next year and VOTE HER OUT. Democracy at work! Vote all the bums out!

Vote? Wait a minute! This arrogant Rahm guy who is now having many fingers pointing at him as no friend of the minority victims being shot dead by the police, didn’t he just have to run for re-election? Right. Just earlier this year, 2015. And if memory serves, I believe he was forced into a run-off with one Chuy Garcia. Rahm needed more than 50% of the vote but garnered only 45%. Chuy got 36%. A handful of others got the other 19%. Hmm. That means that 55% of those who voted in the mayoral election in Chicago early this year did NOT want Rahm returned to office. So, those who went to the polls sent a clear signal that Rahm wasn’t cutting that metropolitan mustard. Of course! The VOTER speaks! And as we all know, when the run-off election came around a couple months later, all those 55% voted against Rahm again, with others who sat out the initial election from the battered and bloodied mean streets joining in and Chuy became mayor of Chicago! The power of the ballot! Hell yeah!

Wait. Wait. I re-call my re-call! That was what I assumed had to happen. Rahm was political dead meat and he sensed it by his mopey apologies to those 55% of detractors. But I’ll  be damned if  Rahm didn’t win the run-off. It wasn’t even close. Now, what in tarnation happened?! Didn’t all these protesters/voter-citizens band together before the run-off, take to streets and urge their fellow citizens to make a change? But I can’t recall any media coverage of big rallies to that effect. In fact, barely anyone went to the polls for that run-off. Those who did certainly couldn’t have been mostly from the South and West sides. Not to mention the Hispanic neighborhoods. Didn’t they come out in droves for one of their own? WTF?

I guess not. Gee. And all they had to do was think for themselves, and not let prevaricating political ads put them in a stupor. Or not take their ballot-box marching orders from their righteous local ministers. Most of the ads were for Rahm. Sure. He had deep-pocketed corporate backers. But still, Chuy must have gotten donations from regular people. Maybe not wheelbarrows of money but still… just seize the goddam ballot booth. Wake the fuck up on run-off day and go VOTE! Remember what happened when you DID let your actions speak louder than your words, as in getting African-American Harold Washington elected Chicago Mayor 30 years ago? And Richard M.Daley was his high profile, well financed  opponent!

But the Rahm defeat did not happen. And now the protesters want a “re-call” vote. The protesters march and have “die-ins” and  block pathways to Mag Mile retailers, seemingly oblivious to the blatant irony and ineptitude that frames their cries for urgent action. You had your re-call chance and blew it. You blew it really bad. But now you want another re-call.

You’re making it hard for me to not to wish you’d all go away.

Dash cams, chopper cams, body cams, smart cams, it’s cinema verite, all right. Reality TV! And if it bleeds, it leads. CSI: USA. The news cams will give the at-once beleaguered and befuddled Chicago citizen-activists attention as they continue demanding to have happen what they could have made sure happened months ago.

For other communities fed-up with their police and local governments, I wish them well in their demands for change. But we still do have elections, and if enough people get to the voting booth…things could…maybe…possibly…somehow…someway…change?

Yawn…have you checked how local and national government is doing lately? Uh, we voted for this? Who’s “we”, pale face?, to quote Tonto. We the People. Ugh. Never mind.

Time to see the news. Oh, no! Another “gotcha!” video. This story needs a re-write.

Robert Pirsig has authored two great novels: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and Lila. The narrative substance of either book is considerable and I would recommend them to anyone who likes to think.  But I mean only now to point out the subtitle of each. Zen was “an inquiry into values,”  Lila “an inquiry into morals”. Along the way, Pirsig discusses the concept of quality, as in how we sense one thing having more of it than others, and how it is virtually impossible to explain how various perceptions of quality of a particular entity/idea can be radically different from person to person. He asks, essentially, what is quality and how does one describe its features?

I preface this blog entry with a tip of the virtual hat to Robert Pirsig’s iconic literary efforts as an entrée into the rather bewildering, if not disturbing, state of our current political and pop culture landscapes. At the top of what I consider to be a hybrid trash heap are Donald Trump and the mainstream news’ obsession with his cartoonish, hot air machine pronouncements, and in pop culture the continued mass appeal of reality TV (from whence came candidate Trump!), trash TV, (think Maury Povich) the myriad variations on Judge Judy, endless CSI spin-offs and similar sappy police dramas, the usual assortment of canned-laughter-infested sit-coms,  vapid late-night, can-you-top-this? shows hosted by “Jimmy” this or that, and now even Steven Colbert, bailing on his clever, creative cable show to sell-out for stodgy, cookie-cutter, network programming. Quality, anyone? What am I missing here?

Social media?  Have you had your Facebook fix today?

Old school, TV. The “vast wasteland,” as asserted fifty years ago (!) by Newton Minow, then head of the FCC, remains ever-more-vast and still mostly a massive waste of time. You know, “900 channels and nothing to watch!”.  In this 21st century, however, TV is but one fragment of media’s myriad outlets. Finding this seemingly undefinable “quality” amidst our digital options for content is, in my opinion, quite the challenge. There are guilty pleasures, sure, and I have mine from time to time, but most of what my eyes and ears encounter or have learned of, emanating out of every device from giant I-Max screens to surround sound 65″ plasma TVs to iPads, laptops, watches, Google glasses and of course ever-smarter smart phones, providing endless content, compels me to ponder: how much more constant empty calorie consumption can the public ingest before digital diabetes and computer-coded coronary artery disease sets in?

Currently, there appears to be a glut of Trump spewing forth on our gizmos. Obviously, a lot of people apparently must value Donald Trump’s bluster as he chides women and vilifies people from south of the border, to name but two of his headline-grabbers. But he’s an “outsider” as the media spin proclaims, and people are sick of beltway insiders. So I guess that matters most and he’s allowed to get away with denigrating others while offering no substantive ideas on how he’ll realistically solve any problems facing the U.S.  His poll numbers are high enough that many of the consumer public must like his renegade brand of political sausage, regardless of the toxic ingredients contained in it. So, he has quality?

These days, anything is possible as far as media content goes, be it “entertainment” or “news” which has morphed pretty much into infotainment. What I sense is the cultural bar has been lowered dramatically over time, regarding the content being transmitted and waiting to be received by one device or another. Over at least the 50 years since Mr.Minow uttered his pejorative proclamation of television being a vast wasteland, that bar certainly hasn’t been raised!

So, besides 24/7 Trump-vision what’s up? Who’s this Sanders guy? Bernie, right? Hmmm. I think he’s running for President too, but he must never, EVER have much interesting to say. Besides, he’s an insider, a sitting U.S. Senator. I think he’s for the working slob. Dreamer! Trump is the real deal. He’s the oft bankrupt-filing real estate mogul who inherited $200 million as kick-starter funds, AND he had that reality TV show! What did he say today?! Paging CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, NPR,  and newspaper coverage and their commentators. Trump said what? STOP THE PRESSES!

Hillary? Clinton, right? Isn’t she the one who has an email issue? Sure. Must be. That’s all I hear about her presidential aspirations. No, actually what I keep hearing about Hillary also has to do with that Sanders guy. The media do notice Bernie, but only insofar as he is getting decent poll numbers and thus the cameras and mics immediately are turned to Hillary, so she can explain this “problem”. Oh, right. Must be those emails. Or Benghazi. Or are those two “problems” one and the same? I have no idea what Hillary’s actual campaign proposals are. She must not have any…

Whatever, eh? Enjoy the steady stream of mass media content, delivering pop and  political cultural encased sausage. Be happy! Consume! Watch, listen and enjoy the latest Trump-isms, and those compelling dramas and sit-coms, as the world churns. You might feel woozy and bloated when you de-couch, but you likely won’t stumble over our cultural bar, the one that has been lowered so much that by now that it’s flush with the floor. The wasteland is as flat as Kansas and about as scenic.

Time to check those Twitter feeds…

I must make comment on an evolving news story. Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk whose job responsibilities include the issuing of marriage licenses. Kim, in her deeply felt Christian beliefs, had for weeks been refusing to issue said licenses to same-sex couples. Then, she was finally shown the door…to her jail cell, after being held in contempt by the judge presiding over the legal showdown between Kim’s faith and the constitutional right of same-sex marriage.

There’s been plenty of hoohah on both sides of this matter, with those believing she got what was coming to her seeming to be the prevailing opinion. Count me among those who have no pity for Kim. She was asking to be held in contempt, implicitly, by ignoring the law of the land as she invoked her faith as reason enough to be determinedly, derelict of duty in a governmental position beholden to other’s constitutional rights.

The intransigent attitude Kim holds stubbornly to thereby reeks of arrogance and ignorance. C’mon, woman! Just step aside and let another, less religiously fervent, clerk issue the license and then pray for the souls of everyone involved without sitting in some slammer. Of course, the knee-jerk reaction from right-wing blowhards include Mike (wannabee President) Huckabee, who likens the jailing of Kim to “judicial tyranny”. Really? No, really? Well, Mike is a one-time Baptist preacher. He’s thus a de facto expert of this type of “tyranny”

Kim is in jail because she believes an invisible man who lives up in the sky tells her she must do what he commands (more or less what she has stated in her defense). And this voice from above apparently forbids Kim from issuing those same-sex couples their marriage licenses. Okay, lots and lots of people have their religious beliefs, and perhaps they believe they’re “instructed” by some invisible entity. Most of the time, however (and thankfully), such guiding spiritual principles are practiced quietly, internally digested, kept safe by seclusion from all but their parish’s other true believers and not trotted out at their workplace or public to crate controversy or spotlight their righteousness. Do you know many such zealots in your circle of friends or extended social network? Me neither. There’s plenty of craziness in this world already. Religious-oriented misfits are the worst of the lot.  Why would any sane person claim to have some direct, personal, cosmic hot-line with their god? It’s irrational. It’s scary.

Perhaps Kim needs to be in the psych ward, the special wing reserved for religious wacko martyrs-in-the-making.

Better there than back in her position as a county clerk.

Sadly, another disgruntled person with access to a gun made a dramatic, ugly statement today. Oh, not that he had any verbal prefacing remarks before releasing his anger . It was visual only. And graphic. He took video as he went ballistic. He knew the news wires would get the alert on the shootings, and send out a satellite truck, a reporter and a camera operator to “get that story!”

Television news programs, whether big market or small market will, unless some stunning, natural or man-made mass disaster demands full attention, likely lead each broadcast with whatever the news editor deems be a most attention-getting story. You may have heard the derisive phrase if it bleeds, it leads invoked regarding such choices for the news anchors to breathlessly proclaim as “breaking news!” or “developing story!” before jumping to the on-the-spot reporter rushed to that fire, that drive-by shooting, a horrific traffic accident. Get video! Sure. I saw this first hand when I briefly interned at a Chicago news station years ago.

In a most bitter, ironic twist on this news media modus operandi aimed at immediately grabbing the attention of the viewers, this morning’s crazed gunman’s victims were, of all possible victims, a female reporter and her male cameraman, working for WDBJ in Roanoke, Virginia, out shooting a routine story on tourism in Moneta, Virginia. Those viewing this sedate remote news segment watched the  24 year-old reporter and the woman she was interviewing get shot. The shooter, wearing a video camera, captured his own actions and the cameraman being shot and then posted it on social media. He then fled, was cornered by police, at which time he turned the gun on himself and then took a couple of hours to die at a nearby hospital. The shooter, as it turns out, was an ex WDBJ reporter himself. His left-behind “manifesto” indicates he felt unfairly dismissed by the station.

One can only imagine the WDBJ news viewer’s shock, revulsion and disbelief of a typical, live remote “fluff” piece of general interest reporting perversely transformed into it’s own crime scene.  The shooter’s POV video briefly being available on social media added to the surreal aspect of this profoundly regrettable instance of what has otherwise become a rather not-so-unusual news story in the United States: gun violence and deaths, in varying numbers of victims.

It’s really not shocking that this emotionally twisted person killed two people. It’s not shocking that he was able to get guns. Sad, but no longer shocking. The only people for whom unadulterated “shock” ensued from this particular crazed gunman story would be those who watched it on live TV, rather than in the usual after-the fact, news reporting of a now common type of crime. Also, those working at WBDJ had to have been quite personally devastated on a few dizzying levels. Try to maintain an objective sense of electronic journalism when the blood and death being mulled over happen to be your own reporter and cameraman, killed while on the air! Their world turned inside out and upside down. And, by professional extension, broadcasters everywhere feeling a little less secure about that next remote assignment.

So, what to make of this latest shooting tragedy that took the lives of two young people? Beyond the fact that this gun-toting man with a mentally deranged mission had a live TV audience and another one in social media land (ever-so-briefly), it surely is not inherently a story that will change the non-existent debate on gun control.  Let’s face it, when 20 six and seven year-old children can be slaughtered, along with six adult staff members at Sandy Hook elementary school in December 2012, and our political “leaders” can’t muster the will to stand up to the NRA lobby, then there is no further debate on the issue. The NRA has won. Each time another wacko with a reason to feel slighted grabs a gun–or an arsenal–takes down a couple, a few, a dozen or twenty-six or more people, the NRA can etch another notch on its pearl handled metaphorical pistol it holds to heads of virtually every gutless member of congress. Every disgruntled spouse who walks into his/her (usually it’s a gunman) former lover’s place of work or stalks his prey and shoots and kills said ex; every gang-banger who picks off a kid sitting on the stoop, whether that stoop-sitter was the intended target or not; every time a convenient store clerk gets whacked by some junkie, or not if but when the next domestic, born-and-bred citizen plans and carries out mass carnage, the NRA will issue their pathetic dogma about guns not killing people, but criminals getting guns illegally doing all the harm, and how we need to arm the store clerks, the teachers, the ushers at the movie houses and live performance venues, arm the wait staffs at every restaurant from Alinea to Arby’s, and now even the news reporters sent out to cover the dead and wounded resulting from access to everything from Saturday night specials to AK-47s and shoulder-mounted rocket launchers need to pack some heat of their own. Each of these seemingly inevitable breaking news! stories will further resound with the deafening silence of the non-existent gun control issue.

Get the body bags. Mark off the crime scene. Start the investigation of how and why. Investigate the mental health records of the shooter (who usually commits suicide afterwards). It’s a mental health issue, not a gun issue, you see.

At this rate, we will all succumb to the NRA’s utopian desire to have any and all good citizens armed to the teeth. How else to feel safe? After all, there are guns, guns, guns galore to fulfill this fight-fire-with-fire fantasy.

When that flood of firearms becomes reality, I predict the most common manner in which relationships will be broken up will be a murder/suicide scenario. We humanoids are so emotional! We get very angry and descend into mental imbalance. And to quote a character from Kurt Vonnegut’s novel, Slaughterhouse-Five, “there’s nothing as sweet as revenge!” And recall that, as the saying goes, “revenge is a dish best served cold.” Hot heads, but cold-blooded all at once.

So, when will we address the issue of so many mentally ill people in our society? I’m sure that will be a huge campaign issue in next year’s elections.

Or never mind. Nothing to see here.  Move along. Clear the street! Go back to watching TV. You’ll might get a real bang out of it.

2015? Let’s see, if you are a member of the Boomer generation (especially the late 40’s editions) you were born, as the Chinese proverb wishes to all, into interesting times. Count me as one such member, brought into this world during the Harry Truman (the buck stops here) administration, and ever since, much has happened, although the word interesting may not be the most precise adjective to describe what has come to pass. Feel free to highlight your adjectival acumen.

Not many days ago marked the 70th anniversary of the United States dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. Never since has any country used the The Bomb on another country. The nuclear country club now has many members, although one was one too many for starters. That nuclear Genie can never be put back in its lab-created lamp, and so all generations born during and after its creation have been delivered into a nuclear age pestered by a perverted usage of that word interesting. As in “wouldn’t it be interesting if we just nuked the… (fill in your perceived evil empire here) …and just got rid of the problem? Hell, use ’em or lose ’em, right? The U.S. has nukes the way the Crips and the Bloods have AK-47s and Glock 9’s.

Be careful with that extremist jive, though. Recall Einstein’s quote about not knowing with what weapons World War Three might be fought but being certain World War Four would be settled with sticks and stones. But who cares what Albert E. ever said when we have Trump’s daily pronouncements to deconstruct and plumb the depths of his  profundity?  SO interesting…

So far, so good, and Japan has made it all the way back from their atomic ashes.  Damn right. I drive one of that country’s recent vintage cars, and it’s the most reliable ride I’ve ever had. It gets pretty good gas mileage, too. But I digress. Please forgive. Don’t shoot! Damn. Does everyone have a gun?

Interesting times. Yeah, beyond the never-ending nuke threat, we’ve had the Cold War (featuring those no-win Korean and Vietnam proxy wars against the now defunct USSR, plus our ironic one-time financial and military support of Osama Bin Laden, when Afghanistan battled the invading Reds in the 80’s), civil rights and women’s movements. Now, with the Communist boogeyman of the Soviet era caput, and post September 11, 2001, (transforming Bin Laden into public enemy number one) we have the Terrorist threat. Hmm. Isn’t all of that historical, global nastiness, well, interesting?

Then comes our Iraq invasion and Saddam gets the same Bin Laden comeuppance. As is we snuff them. But still the Terrorist lurks. He/she now occupies the space beneath your bed or in the closet, where you once were told the godless commie was hiding. Shit, can’t we all just get along. to quote Rodney King. I guess not. So, when and how will the fool for Allah strike next?, as in the recent incident aboard an Amsterdam to Paris bullet train, wherein several passengers, mostly Americans (we police the world!), jumped into action and likely, by beating him into submission, thwarted a possible barrage of bullets on that bullet transport. Bravo for our good guys.

Not that the U.S. need fear only foreign terrorists. Tim McVeigh? Columbine? The Cineplex massacres. Newtown/Sandy Hook.  And counting…

Interesting times? Xanax times? Wild Turkey 101 times?

Then there’s the current market convulsions. Blame China! Blame Canada! Blame Brazil! Blame Hillary! Nuke ’em all. No, wait. Chill!

Okay, take the Xanax, and wash it down with a jigger of 101. Try not to think about any of it. Space out. Commune with nature. Walden Pond. Spoon River. The Blue Lagoon. Ah, that sunset. Never mind, too ominous a symbol, no?

Check out that Beatles cover band. Let the Synthetic Fab Four take you away… Heed the advise of Tim Leary: turn on, tune in, drop out.

Or, see a ballgame. By some peanuts and Crackerjacks. And don’t give a crap if you ever get back…Or just do some crack (Leary-esque). Read a good book. Maybe a Scandinavian thriller. But stay away from the mainstream news media. It markets in anxiety and fear, fluff and piffle. As Mark Twain said, “Those who don’t read newspapers are uninformed. Those who do read the newspaper are misinformed.”

Well, this has been very interesting, dear reader, no? Whatever. Pardon me, I have to check under my bed and in the closets, and hope I don’t find a Cold War commie and a terrorist, both hugging a nuke.

Beam me up, Scotty! And have an Old Crow and Seconal ready to serve to settle my nerves..