On June 25, 2015 the Supreme Court upheld the provision for subsidies in the Affordable Care Act regardless of whether the insured procured their insurance coverage through their own state exchanges or were forced into the federal exchange as their own state’s demented leadership refused to establish an exchange.

This ruling makes clear the winners and losers in this ongoing battle over trying to legislate the availability of health insurance for millions of Americans previously denied access, whether due to pre-existing conditions or lack of affordability.

WINNER————–Chief Justice John Roberts whose concise, common sense opinion sliced through all the nonsense of those who brought the lawsuit out of spite, not out of genuine concern the law was harmful. Of course that brought the enmity of conservatives, some of whom (okay a really tiny portion of whom) believe the Good Justice was blackmailed or worse.

LOSER—————-Justice Antonin Scalia whose sputtering dissent, with phrasing like “interpretive jiggery-pokery”, reminds one of a pillar of the community found with his pants down in the local whorehouse amongst a bevy of belles but who would have you believe he was about to lead them in prayer.

WINNER————-President Barack Obama whose signature legislative accomplishment has survived yet another insidious but withering attack from the forces of politics, not of righteousness.

LOSERS————-Republican candidates for their party’s Presidential 2016 nomination who collectively and figuratively had pie shoved in their faces as again their predictions for the demise of the ACA were dashed on the rocks of futility with reactions ranging from the ridiculous to the ridiculous, nothing sublime remotely within their capacity to bloviate. Several shared their opinions via Twitter which proves once again twitter is for twits.

WINNERS………..American Citizens who now have reason to feel more secure in the knowledge that it is less likely they will face either financial ruin from receiving health care when they are not insured and that the availability of such coverage will inure to their physical and mental benefit…even in terms of saving lives… by being able to obtain treatment. 

Gee, imagine that, a federal law that actually is good for the lives of ordinary people.

Economist Paul Krugman highlights the way the law is working after only two full years of implementation.

……….The Affordable Care Act is now in its second year of full operation; how’s it doing?

The answer is, better than even many supporters realize.

Krugman cites, among other positives,  the expansion of coverage to as many as 15 million Americans,  Also

The newly insured have seen a sharp drop in health-related financial distress, and report a high degree of satisfactionwith their coverage.

Too, instead of a budget buster as the rampaging elephants would have you believe, it has helped in lowering the federal deficit and, if repealed, the deficit would rise again.

Krugman does not deny there are some difficulties, but not insurmountable ones. So long as a number of states refuse to expand Medicaid (placing a huge burden on state and local taxpayers, see millions of the most desperate are still denied coverage.

He further speaks of premiums, which is a contentious issue, no doubt. However, the Commonwealth Fund found that the average increase in premiums for coverage under the ACA from 2014 to 2015 was ZERO.

Now average does not mean no increases for anyone anywhere. Anecdotal evidence of large premium hikes are plentiful, especially in internet forums. And even the study above reports substantial increases in some states with lower costs in others.

Which brings me to my real point about WINNERS LOSERS.

So long as health insurance coverage in the United States is in the hands of private, mostly for profit companies, together with the ability of individual states to thwart the purpose of the Affordable Care Act and in light of the vagaries of state laws, insurance regulations, and insurance commissioners, there will be WINNERS and LOSERS in the game of health inusrance coverage and thus health itself.

The health and welfare of our citizens should not be subject to gamesmanship with keeping score a regular and necessary part of it.

This nation needs to wise up and create a system with true universal coverage. This could be achieved through a single payer system as our successful Medicare program could be expanded by making everyone eligible. That is my personal preference.

There are also hybrid systems such as in Australia with mandated coverage for all supported by general revenue taxes, a levy equivalent to our Medicare tax, and private insurance for some.

To me the chief flaw built into the ACA is that it is vulnerable to wanton attacks for purely political purposes, none of which have had either the intent or the ability to actually improve health care coverage in this country.

Of course the saddest part of these attacks is that the assailants simply do not care what harm they cause.

We can acknowledge that no system can be perfect. But our current system, even with the successes of the Affordable Care Act is still far below perfect.

Now, as we adjust to the reality of the ACA it will becvome ever more evident that we have a ways to go.

Let’s make WINNERS of the vast majority of our citizens and consign the LOSERS who oppose a better healthcare coverage system to the back pages of history where they belong.WINNE




In the wake of the recent murders of nine black worshipers in a church in Charleston, South Carolina by a young professed racist, there has arisen a clarion call for removal of the Confederate flag flying on the grounds of the state capital in Columbia.

I deliberately used this image of the Confederate flag because even if you grant that it is flown as a symbol of the South’s heritage from the Confederate army, that heritage is something not to be honored, but to be deplored. Whether the ensign was an offical rperesentation of the Confederate States of America or not…it was the battle flag of Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia…what it stands for is anything but admirable.

Southerners, and there was a man interviewed on NBC News at a cemetery for Confederate soldiers, will state that it honors the brave soldiers who died. I will not dispute the bravery or deny recognition to the horrible tragedy of the men lost to a senseless war. But the man on the news seemed to be pissed off that the Ku Klux Klan had appropriated the banner, thus associating it with hate. He averred that these men died “defending their state”.

Nonsense. They died participating in a war that was the most blatant and broad act of treason ever perpetrated against the United States of America.

The United States Constitution, Article 3 Section 3 reads in part

 Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them,

If ever a clear case of treason could be made one need look only to the events of April 12, 1865 when the first shots were fired at Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor and subsequent events and battles until Sunday, April 9, 1865 when General Robert E. Lee surrendered his armies at Appomattox.

Those men took up arms against their nation and levied war on it for four years. It was not “The War of Northern Aggression” as some attempt to assert. It was not a war for states’ rights as is commonly pleaded. It was plainly a war against their own nation, treason be damned.

The Constitution provided many ways for any grieveances or concerns the people conducting this treasonous act could have addressed those issues, but they chose treason.

The American Civil War was indescribably destructive and demeaning no matter which side one fought on.And the South, the Confedarcy, clearly was defeated and the treason staunched.

As punitive and oppressive as the Reconstruction Acts and other steps taken to reincorporate the secessionist states into the nation as a whole…and they were harsh indeed…the victors did not summarily execute the traitors as they had every right to do under existing precedents.

But merely losing the war wasn’t enough for the rebels. They had to embark upon a path of self-destruction for the next one and one-half centuries though it most frequently assumed the form of treating the black Americans in their midst as less than human. Jim Crow laws, the Ku Klux Klan, denial of voting rights, and various other tools of the racist trade were implemented, overt and subtle, to carry out this War of Southern Aggression on A Race Deemed Inferior.

All too often, just as they had rallied under the Confederate flag in battles led by Robert E. Lee, they also rallied under that same flag in battles led by hate and discrimination and rapacious desire.

What may arguably have once been a banner of morale easily morphed into a banner of immoral behavior.But that banner would have no meaning whatsoever were it not birthed in treason.

(As an aside, what we think of as the Confederate flag was never formlly adopted by the Confederacy, though one design that was adopted had that stars and bars design in the upper left corner with the field of the flag being white. Its designer, William T. Thompson, described this as a “white man’s flag”, with the white field representing the superiority of the white race.)

Oddly the Confederate flag now on the capital grounds in Columbia, previously over the Capitol itself, did not appear there until 1962, coincidentally in the midst of the Civil Rights Movement. It’s argued in some quarters that this was done in direct defiance of the federal governemnt’s efforts to enforce existing law and court rulings that favored blacks and opposed discrimination. Treason Light, if you will.

It is clear that this flag is a symbol of racist hate. Those who fly or display it may be ignorant of its true meaning but the old saying is that “ignorance of the law is no excuse”. Neither is ignorance of racist meaning…most particularly when that racist meaning has been brought to your attention for years.

This symbol was born in treason and spawned the illegitimate offspring of racism and hate. After several generations its appallingly repugnant prodigious progeny must be eliminated.






With apologies to Alfred Lord Tennyson…though admittedly not vey sincere apologies.

Half a mile Half a mile
Half a mile onward
All in the Valley of Iowa
Rode the six Hundred
“Forward the candidates
Charge for the votes”
Into the valley of Iowa
Rode the six hundred

“Forward the candidates”
Was man or woman dismayed?
Not though the candidate knew
They all had blundered
Theirs not to reason why
Climate change to deny
Theirs but to lie and lie
Into the Valley of Iowa
Rode the six hundred.

Reporters to right of them
Reporters to left of them
Reporters in front of them
Volleyed and thundered
Stormed at with “why the hell
Can’t you treat the poor well
Condemning them to death
While you are rich as hell?”
Rode the six hundred.

Flashed all their white teeth bare
“Repeal Obamacare”
Claiming the world ain’t fair
All the world wondered
Why are you blowing smoke
Your platform is a joke
Doctor and Mogul
Sold us a pig in a poke
All rotted and rendered
Then they rode back but not
Not the six hundred

Now reporters to right of them
Polls to left of them
Voters in front of them
Volleyed and thundered
Stormed at with “what the hell!
We’re glad your egos fell”
Your ideas we quell
That came through the Valley of Iowa
Tell you go to hell
All that was left of them
Left of six hundred

When can their nionsense fade
O’ the wild charges they made
All the world wondered
Condemn the charge they made
Condemn this odd brigade
Ignoble six hundred.



A cult following is a group of fans who are highly dedicated to a specific area of culture. A film, book, musical artist, television series or video game, among other things, will be said to have a cult following when it has a small but very passionate fanbase.

One of the most famous of cult movies is Rocky Horror Picture Show which depicts a group of selfie posting mountain climbers caught in an avalanche.

Pulp Fiction is a compilation of tales about practical uses for the innards of oranges, none of which actually work.

Our televison sets have been the receptors of many such shows that became cult classics such as The Ernie Kovacs Show  which surprisingly had no one named Ernie or Kovacs associated with it.

Recently we have witnessed a spate of final episodes of TV cult classics.

Mad Men was concerned with the creation of a satirical magazine in the 1950’s, while Breaking Bad  was a documentary series about the members of an orthopedic physicians’ practice in Ottumwa, Iowa.

The Sopranos had as its theme a female a capella chorus assuming management of a strip club in New Jersey.

The Colbert Report had as its host Bill O’Reilly’s lesser known brother who had a knack for emulating his brothers declarations word for word but somehow they sounded funnier.

The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson starred a Scotsman who took the job away from a white American male. But as soon as Ferguson became a U.S. citizen himself his job was outsourced to Indonesia where a group of pre-teens split the 75 cent hourly salary. But hey! At least dark skinned people and females are being utilized.

Of somewhat older vintage the final episode of the Jerry Seinfeld Show caused critics to long wishfully for the snow globe sensibilities of St. Elsewhere.

On Cheers, where the only name everbody knew was “Norm!”, the lights went dark as Sam Malone was revealing to Diane Sawyer that he was now, offically, Samantha Malone.

Alas, one such cult series will probably not be accorded a final episode to celebrate the ones preceeding it.

I speak, of course of 19 Kids And Counting or as it is now known 19 Kids And Counting While Four Daughters Silently Scream In The Night. This is the Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar clan, living its way through our TV screens, thjough failing to show the immaculate conception details that bring ever more kids.

That program qualifies as a cult classic not only due to its cult following but…because IT IS A CULT!  Sort of like viewing the Manson Family in action but far more disturbing to watch.

Think it’s not a cult? Well look at this check list of the characteristics of cults provided by Janja lalich and Michasel D. Langone, both PhD’s.

The group displays excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader and (whether he is alive or dead) regards his belief system, ideology, and practices as the Truth, as law.


The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself, its leader(s) and members


The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.


The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members.


The group is preoccupied with making money.


Now it is difficult to envison anyone named Jim Bob as a charismatic leader, but in Arkansas anything is possible, I suppose. After all, some old geezer there became a billionaire selling shoddily made foreign goods to unsupecting masses.

How the molestation by son Josh of his sisters stayed unrecognized by his parents for so long is a mystery. After all,during those Monopoly games on family games night, since there were not enough of the usual tokens to go around, weren’t Jim Bob and Michelle suspicious when Josh used a pair of girls panties? Of course their Monopoly games were also notable  for the younger kids being berated when they inevitably went bankrupt for being either lazy or black…or both.

That this all played out on TLC (The Lurid Channel) is not surprising What also is not surprising is the defense of the evangelical right…and FOX News, offered in support of the Duggars.

Gotta go. I need to get ready for Reefer Madness tonight. Not the movie.



When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

I Corinthians 13:11  (KJV)

Like many kids in the 1950’s my friends and I often played “King of The Hill“, a game in which one of the players seeks to gain and maintain control of the high ground within a limited area.. Of course to do so, the winner needs to ensure her rivals go tumbling back down the hill, the other kids facilitating the champion by eliminating each other as they scramble to reach the top.

For too long, especially since the demise of the Soviet Union, the United States has been playing the game on the world stage. In doing so America is undoubtedly stronger than any of its rivals individually but to gain and maintain this superiority it must far too often spread its resources far too thinly to effectively accomplish all its goals.

As we stand atop the crest challenges come from every direction and there is no practical way to dispatch them all without serious damage to ourself.

Yet, we persist in trying.

The United States, through its many adventures, overt and covert, obviously is in denial that, because it outlasted the Soviets of the Cold War, it is THE supreme nation on Earth. Indeed, our leaders seem to believe we are entitled to this supremacy.

It is time to put away childish things.

Michael Klare explores this issue in this essay on

In “Delusionary Thinking in Washington (The Desperate Plight of a Declining Superpower)” Klare discusses the trends in American foreign policy, more precisely the trends in exerting American military power to effectuate that policy, in the past tewnty-five or so years.

He quotes both George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush as to their vision of America in a post Cold War world and, though Bush 43 first formulated his vision as a peaceful one in 1999 early in his campaign for President, that vision obviously morphed into quite something else once he assumed office. (Some would argue the peaceful vision was only a  smokescreen but that argument is for another time.)

To Klare this “delusionary”  thinking extends across the aisle as he credits only Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders as totally removed from it among the D.C. lawmakers and power brokers.

He notes that other powers, big and small did not simply  kowtow to the undeniable singular supremacy of the United States as its superpower rival met its demise. General Colin Powell acknowledged this fact when he declared

We have to put a shingle outside our door saying, ‘Superpower Lives Here,’ no matter what the Soviets do, even if they evacuate from Eastern Europe.

Klare is both wary of and dismissive towards the more bellicose version of this notion of American supremacy mostly coming from the right, but does not spare President Obama.

President Obama, who is clearly all too aware of the country’s strategic limitations, has been typical in his unwillingness to retreat from such a supremacist vision.

Klare is not alone in his analysis even coming from a conservative perspective. Christopher Layne of the George H.W. Bush School at Texas A&M writing in The American Conservative in 2010 made many of these same points

Though the path Layne takes to make his point diverges in many ways from Klare’s his conclusion is

U.S. decline means that in the 21st century the United States will pay a high price if it endlessly repeats its mistakes.To change our foreign policy—to come to grips with the end of the Pax Americanawe first need to chage the way we see the world.

And I see no change in this view at all.

Too, the idea of American supremacy is pretty laughable on any level. This century has already witnessed the utter inability to unilaterally exert our will by force no matter how antagonistic nor how much we spend on our Department of War and all the physical and technological might at our command.

And yes, the current Department of Defense needs to return to its original name of Department of War. After all, we keep seeking ways to dominate others, not protect ourselves. As I recall the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution reads in pertinent part

…provide for the common defence…

not “prepare for war at every opportunity”.

Instead of seeking to exert power over others, I want our military resources devoted to ensuring no one else exerts power over the United States.

To do so, echoing both Klare and Layne, our philosophy towards foreign affairs needs to change.


death by cop

Over the past year we have witnessed the deaths caused by police officers on duty that have led to demonstrations across the country and anguish for many families. The images above are of just some of the victims, and really focus on those of color when there are white victims, too. But this is not just about the emphatic point that “Black Lives Matter” or even the greater/counterpoint that “All Lives Matter”.

Those tenets are indiputable…or should be.

It is also indisputable that some lives lost at the hands of police were of persons who themselves were an active and real threat to the officers or someone else.

That begs the question as to how police officers are trained to deal with situations that have the potential to harm them.

The answer is, not very well.

I have read a number of articles in which even police officials admit that when police violence is a problem for a department, such as most notably in Baltimore recently, training of those officers may have been deficient.

So I was intrigued by this article about police training, specifically about trainees viewing videos in which cops get killed during routine traffic stops. They are shown so that the officers are aware that any stop can turn deadly, especially if they neglect the protocols they are taught.

One training officer states that “98% of the time nothing happens”.

That number is ridiculously wrong.

Look at it this way. Around 34,000,000 speeding tickets are written in the United States every year. And that does not include stops for broken taillights or illegal turns, or ignoring traffic signs, and it does not include all the other possible encounters law enforcement may have that could put them in danger.

Yet, in the 21st century, fewer than 200 law enforcement officers have died in the line of duty each year according to the “Officer Down Memorial Page” which tracks such deaths and lists the specific cause of each one.

Those causes include heart attacks, job related illnesses, drowning, vehicle pursuits, and other causes not the direct result of an assailant.

Let us allow that there may be a thousand or two thousand of other incidents when an officer’s life was on the line due to the unmitigated and unmistaken intent of the suspect, armed and dangerous, and ready to kill.

Yes, those situations are scary and yes officers should be trained to deal with them, and yes officers should be aware of them from the get go.

But no, the focus in training should not be that using your deadly weapon should be the is the first choice of action in response. For when that is your training that is how you will respond to persons who pose no threat to anyone such as Tamir Rice or John Crawford III or Amadou Diallo or Dontre Hamilton or Akai Gurley or…….well you complete the list.

Am I trying to minimize the danger in being in law enforcement? No, that danger is minimized by fact. At least the type of danger that is the be all and end all of these training videos, whcih can be quite graphic. It is easy to imagine that officers develop a mindset whereas their normal and very human desire to remain unharmed may lead to an overreaction to circumstances.

Here I am granting the benefit of the doubt in many of these shootings of unarmed civilians where the truth is, our law enforcement agencies frequently employ their own breed of psychopath, legally armed and with the authority to use that weapon and the rabid eagerness and willingness to do so, irrespective of the need to do so.

If your attitude is “shoot or be shot” you are mush more likely to do the former to pervent the latter, whether justified or not.

Proper training can prepare officers to better handle situations that could put them in danger. When they are taught that every one of over 34 million stops could present that danger when, in fact, fewer than 100 do, it is time to change the training to reflect reality.

I want my police officers to be prepared to protect themselves as well as the public. I do not want them to enter every encounter with a kill or be killed mindset.

We’ll all be safer in the long run.



President Barack Obama has been touting the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and its companion Trans Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TATIP). These are potential trade agreements, the former being negotiated with 11 other nations bordering the Pacific Ocean and the latter with Europe.

There have been accusations that the negotiations are secretive and that entering such pacts, no matter the assertions by the Administration, will result in the loss of American jobs. In that regard it is claimed to be similar as to what the effects were of the North American Free Trade Agreement, better known as the notorious NAFTA passed during Bill Clinton’s tenure that itself was highly praised in advance for its benefits for American workers and highly cursed since by the thousands, if not millions, of American workers who lost jobs as a result.

Obama has encountered resistance to TPP within his own Democratic Party, most notably from Senator Elizabeth Warren.

Currently there is Congressional legislation pending granting Trade Promotional Authority to the President, the power to cut trade deals and expedite their passage through Congress without amendments or procedural hurdles.

And Republicans are leading the way.

Now these are the same Republicans who have opposed just about any legislation favored by Obama, or any executive action, or any thought speech or motion by Obama down to whether he installs the new roll of toilet paper so it rolls over rather than under.

Affordable Care Act? It got no Republican votes even though its basic premise was first developed by Republicans.

Cap and Trade? Nothing has really been done to enact legislation that would allow companies to, in effect, trade for credits to allow more carbon dioxide emissions. But again this principle first emerged under a Republican. George H.W. Bush was President and cap and trade been cited as a market approach to reducing pollution. Senator John McCain was even the main sponsor of such a bill in both 2003 and 2005. Since Obama took office you’d think he had decided to confiscate the first born of every American family and sell them into sexual slavery from the Republican reaction if the topic was even broached.

Immigration reform? George W. Bush tried to get legislation passed and many Republicans favored passing some measures, though the details drew varying levels of support. Now, it seems, that any efforts by Obama to get some degree of reform is such anathema to Republicans that many are willing to self-deport as a symbolic gesture against reform.

And then there is the ongoing case of Iran and its intentions…or not…to build a nuclear weapon. The Obama administration, together with five other nations, has concluded a framework of an agreement with Iran that would prevent such a weapon from being constructed. Finalization of such pact is pending as the details are committed to the legal niceties.

This would appear to be a good thing, keeping an atomic bomb away from what is considered a rogue state. And I recognize that Iran could break the pact, though its actions will be closely monitored. But, then again, Japan could renounce our World War II Treaty with them, re-arm, and flood the U.S. market with autos and electronics, including those fascinating toilets (with the toilet paper coming off over the top, of course.

But first 47 Republican Senators sent an open letter to Iran’s leadership stating their outright opposition to ANY agreement and their intention to thwart Obama at every turn. Some have even voiced a desire for war against Iran in preference to even the most stringently enforceable treaty possible.

So, just why would Republicans all of a sudden fall all over themselves to work with President Obama on the TPA for both the TPP and TATIP? By god they’ve been willing to work with Democrats to get them to agree in the Senate in order to have enough votes to ensure passage.

In the past few years we have witnessed no cooperation between the two parties in Congess unless the American public was going to get screwed.

Senate Democrats may have maintained unity to prevent the fast tracking sought by Obama,

But the mere fact that Republicabns are siding with President Obama on this issue should be sufficient to raise suspicion if not simply reject the TPA out of hand.

The old saying is Politics makes strange bedfellows, commonly atributed to American writer and essayist and friend of Mark Twain, Charles Dudley Warner, though it may have derived from Shakespeare’s The Tempest.

Obama and Senate Republicans make for strange bedfellows indeed.

Anyone have pictures?



The announced and potential candidates for the Republican nomination for the 2016 Presidential election, as well as many of the more run of the mill pols like Louie Giohmert, have been characterized in the media as a clown car, careening down America’s highways, out of control.

I have bought into that metaphor though lately, due to sheer numbers, I have suggested that perhaps instead of a car, the GOP may need to utilize a C-130 Globemaster plane to carry its heavy heavy multitudinous load.

But other comparisons may be just as apt…if not apter…or at least as comical.

For instance, Superman had his mirror image opposite, Bizarro, described as

Since his hilarious debut in the 1950s, Bizarro has been a character of equal parts humor and confusion. The imperfect duplicate of Superman, the chalk faced hero lives on the cube-shaped world of Bizarro where everything is the opposite of life on Earth. Beauty is hated, ugliness is revered, and it is a crime to make anything perfect.

Simply change a few names here and you could be depicting any of a number of the GOP horde (or Hoard, depending on your desired connotation)

But as many of their public stances and utterances can only be portrayed in a kind way as “looney”, (instead of batshit crazy which is more precisely the case) invoking the Warner Brothers classic cartoon collection of personalities, Looney Tunes and deriving a Bizarro equivalent is today’s task.

A few examples.

Foghorn Leghorn‘s pomposity is readily apparent in such as Ted Cruz, always loud, and always right…except for when he is wrong which is……….ALWAYS. And ironically or not, Foghorn himself was the cartoon twin of a fictional Senator Claghorn from the Fred Allen radio show.

Foghorn is often accompanied by the young Chicken Hawk who admires his would be mentor. And we know that GOP leaders are surrounded by all manner of chicken hawks, eh?

Yosemite Sam is a blustery, rootin tootin gun toting egomaniac, ready to fire without provocation, a la Rick Perry.

The Tasmanian Devil is a whirling twirling blast of energy whose spoutings are complete gibberish. Mike Huckabee, Come On Down!

Wile E Coyote. He’s forever scheming to destroy Roadrunner but often finds the destruction turns selfward. This quote from Dean Wormer could very well be appied to Wile. “Put Neidermeyer on it. He’s a sneaky little shit just like you.” Rand Paul to a T.

Sylvester J. Pussycat is forever seeking to oppress those, such as Tweety Bird who are smaller and weaker than himself. Power hungry to a fault and willing to deprive a little old lady of one of her most prized worldly posssessions…who could possibly fil this role out of those eligible? Trick question. Why all of them of course.

Yet the cartoon characters many of us grew up with and stll admire and smile fondly at any recollection of them, within their Republican personnae, are anything but cute and amusing. Bizarro Looney Tunes to be sure.

And don’t forget, seemingly monopolistic The Acme Company represents the Koch brothers.

So while the tedious electoral road ahead to November of 2016 promises no Merrie Melodies, most Americans with the IQ of a sentient being and a modicum of common sense will be anxious to get to the finale of the cartoon and hear those glorious words




I suppose there is a legitimate place in the world for rock critics, as there is for critics of other artistic genres. But usually in those genres pretentiousness is inherent to the process.

Remember, it’s “Sex, Drugs, And Rock and Roll” the third and musical part designed to enhance and elaborate on the first two elements.

In 1998 I toured the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland. In a small theater a film was shown depicting the evolution of muisc into what became known as rock and roll. A large part of rock’s Jurassic period was the tunes and instruments brought to the New World by the Scots-Irish, settling in the mountainous regions of Appalachia.

Out of that grew the ballads and folk tunes some of which are still sung today though in different forms with a distinguishable context. In turn that music was adapted, modified and retuned into Blue Grass, Country, and Country and Western.

Exposure to black music from the Mississippi Delta blues to the urban blues of the Chicago sound morphed into more rhythmic enhancements that Southern hillbillies, reared on country, stole for their rockabilly sound. Sometimes the rockabilly folk stole the blues or rhythm songs directly from the black which caused discerning whites to seek out the originals, usually…but not always…more talented and better.

Deejays such as Alan Freed and Porky Chedwick, played these “race records” on the radio and broadened the audience even more. Kids, always in rebellion against their parents in post World War II America, made these race records commercially viable enabling black artists such as Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, and Little Richard to cross over to the mainstream,.

Yet the parents and civil authorities sought to repress this music. Their repression was spawned in racism as they detertmined, probably with not a lot of deep psychological introspection, that the music appealed to sexual urges which would lead to miscegenation with black guys getting into the pure white panties of virginal (that’s a laugh) white teen girls. Since the black musical culture was known for its drug use, thanks to Harry Anslinger’s persecution of Billie Holliday and others, you had the twin bete noires of sex with Negroes and drug addiction interningled now with the rise of the Alan Freed declared ROCK AND ROLL, to scare the shit out of parents of the 1950’s.

But lo, those teens graduated from high school to go on to college or enter the work force or the miliatry and their younger brothers and sisters in the 1960’s (such as I) went full Monty on the rock, made a zillionaire out of a black man running a recording studio…Berry Gordy of Motown, of course…and then took to long haired invaders from foreign lands.

Vietnam was the first war with its own soundtrack that featured no conventional artists like the white bread big bands and torch singers of World War II or the Goerge M. Cohan jingoistic rallying singalongs of the War to End All Wars.

No, these were blacks and longhairs accompanying our troops into the trenches who also indulged in a big way in banned substances while simultaneously seeking out the bar girls of Saigon or Bangkok.

Sex drugs and rock and roll were a cojoined fact in a war that quickly became political enough to cause thousands of budding young writers to declare rock an art form worthy of interpretations of great insight which…if one were to fairly evaluate them… would reveal thier own bullshit quota had been reached by the second paragraph.

Not that rock music is incapable or unworthy of a serious critique. And true, many rock songs carried anti-war or racial equality, or pro drug use messages, but the deepest songs still required a beat and a certain feel to be popular and produce multi-millionaires from the populists who made the music.

My concern here is a piece I just read looking at the new Mumford And Sons album, Wilder Mind.

Perhaps it’s me since I’m admittedly stuck in decades past for most of my preferred listening, but this review is inclined neither to move me towards purchase of or listening to the recording or send me screaming in the opposite direction away from it. Instead I almost wish I was in the author’s presence to stifle his mad descent into meaninghless comparisons and obscure references and just tell me whether the damned thing might be as pleasant to listen to as has been my experience with minimum exposure to prior Mumford And Sons efforts.

In fact, the group was on David Letterman last night playing one of the new tunes and I enjoyed it. Just as I have enjoyed other of their works on the maybe fifteen times they have appeared in my living room thanks be to the miracle of television.


I generally get my fill of new groups or new songs on late night TV, especially Letterman. But, while I glanced at some articles highly favoring a recent Taylor Swift album, when I saw her perform an excerpt on Letterman I just wanted to throw a shoe at her.It was trite and repetitious and over over dubbed and largely a piece of crap. Sort of how I feel about Seasons In The Sun by Terry Jacks.

Now this approaching 70 year old butt can still be moved to move (not as fast nor as long, to be sure) when the muisc gets to me. I also find meaning in much of MY music that is evocative of a certain time or place…or ex-girlfriend…or speaks to my conscience, such as U2‘s Pride (In The Name Of Loveor Springsteen’The Ghost Of Tom Joad.

But I love those songs for their sonic effect first of all and wonderful music’s sonic effect on me means I feel it in my bones. Dvorak‘s From The New World, especially the fourth movement, causes me to tingle just as much as the Stones‘ Jumpin Jack Flash. I don’t need some inflated ego self-appointed expert to tell me why or f it should.

Or maybe I’m just an old Fogie?


RWANDA-GENOCIDE-HEALTHChurch in Nyamata, Rwanda

I’m not sure if many of you have been watching the Travel Channel program “Breaking Borders”. In it a foreign correspondent and a food guy travel to areas of conflict and meet with locals to get individual perspectives on the conflict and their involvement in any questionable activiities. At the end these folks are gathered together for a dinner where open discussion is encouraged, some of which gets farily heated while remaining ultimately civil.

Sunday night’s show traveled to Rwanda looking at the 1994 genocide of Tutsis by Hutus. One young man, who was seven at the time, recounts how about 3000 people were slaughtered in a church. He was one of only seven survivors and did so only because his brother covered him with victims’ blood and instructed him to play dead. His entire family was murdered.

With smaller children the preferred method was to pick them up by their heels and to smash their heads against the church walls. Bloodstains are still visible. There are bundles of victims’ clothing on display and a room where many skulls and skeletal parts are exhibited.

The story takes us back to when the Belgians ruled and they made deliberate efforts to separate the Tutsis from other enthnicities, going so far as to measure their facial features in order to classify them. The Tutsis were then demonized which, together with evil government after liberation, led to the slaughter (800,000 in about 100 days) A couple of Hutus who were convicted for their parts in these murders were interviewed in prison.

What is remarkable is that great progress has been made in reconciliation. The man who lost his family and witnessed ugly murder harbors no ill will. In fact all sides seem to agree that the conflict between the two groups was nurtured by the Belgians and then succeeding governments when their did not appear to be a natural source of rivalry/conflict sufficient to spawn such horrors.

I am sure that is a gross oversimplification to an extent, yet still a reasonable overview of the evolution of the conflict

The folks at the dinner do have some areas of difference but it appears that this may be a result of the inability to fully absorb the horrors of the genocide and how they were affected.

Now that is my instant impressioin from viewing the program and I assure you there was greater depth to the program and undoubtedly much greater depth to be plumbed in that torn nation.

But as the Hutus and Tutsis are now living in peace, perhaps there is hope for other regions where similar long standing conflicts may have been eased, but remain a possible source of agony should the conflict again manifest itself violently.

Prior episodes have taken place in Israel, Sarajevo, and Belfacst, among other locales and it is quality viewing to observe the hosts try to draw the locals out.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 126 other followers