At first the concept that the homeless have been evicted from the Venice Beach area might sound like a bit of absurdisms that could be an excuse for making some glib comments about an inconsistency in the assertion that America is being run by compassionate conservative Christians and that we had mentioned that this columnist would collect material on that subject while visiting the Los Angeles area recently. The March 2011 issue of the Free Venice Beachhead has a lead story that tells about “Blue Bus Patty,” who came to the Venice area when she was 19, and thirty five years later returned to her native state of New Jersey, when a local L. A. politician used his influence to get the homeless out of the Venice Beach area. Who among us can not see that the principles of Christ clearly are in peril when xenophobia can motivate a return to the level of charity in America that was the backdrop for John Steinbeck’s “Grapes of Wrath” achievement in literature? Change? Only the bumper sticker slogans have been changed to protect the self-esteem of the politicians’ heartless efforts to use the situation for their own political advantage. It seems like the concept of Christian Charity has done a meltdown in America (again).
Newt Gingrich has taken the Republican concept of screwing the citizens for ostensibly patriotic reasons to a new level of absurdity. Patriotic adultery? Contemporary American Culture seems unquestioningly willing to embrace that illogical example of rationalization from a Republican who is offering himself as a contender for his party’s next nominee for President. The compassionate conservative Christians were ready to impeach Clinton, but now seem willing to embrace Newt. Isn’t that very convenient for the Newtster? Will Newt spark a revival of the swing parties as a way of manifesting a surplus of Patriotic national pride? (If he does; will super patriotic hot babes be desperate enough to e-mail their kink needs to an understanding columnist from “across the aisle”?) Did Newt ask ladies to wear only a flag while the sound system played Randy (nudge nudge wink wink) Newman’s “You Can Leave Your Hat On”?
Who is the greater patriot: Newt Gingrich, Larry Flynt, or Hugh Hefner?
Has any well known member of the Clergy called out Newt for this ridiculous blatant example of rationalization or do they just go into meltdown when a Republican gives American youth the green light to go to the red light district style of behavior? Did Oral Roberts condemn Newt? (How did he get that odd first name?)
Speaking of meltdowns, aren’t the folks, who are speculating about the disaster potential of the nuclear facilities in Japan, scientists? Why is the Fox Comedy Cable Network (How does one pronounce: FCCN?) willing to give the scientists airtime when it comes to an atomic meltdown but not the melting of the polar ice caps?
Why did America ignore the charity needs of Australia after recent floods and fires in that country and then immediately rush ships to help Japan? Which one of those two countries was fighting along side America during WWII and which wasn’t? Why wasn’t help offered to America’s strongest ally country? Can anyone explain why a former enemy deserves more assistance than a country that has always answered America’s call for wartime assistance?
Did the union movement experience a meltdown in Wisconsin?
Did the hopes of Democrats for leadership from Barry meltdown this week? Is Barry’s legacy melting down at a geometric progression way?
Isn’t what happened in Wisconsin the political equivalent of the commission of war crimes by a certain military group that invaded Poland on September 1, 1939, because of the evidence that Poland had military weapons and needed to be invaded to be disarmed?
Is it a war crime for a military to destroy lives but OK for politicians to ruin the lives of their working constituents? How is it different?
Isn’t it a pretty picture to see Barry sitting on the sidelines and shrugging his shoulders at the (registered Democratic Party) union members’ anguish and nonchalantly accepting the prospect of being a one-term wonder in the history books? This columnist wonders if there was a quid pro quo agreement between Barry and Karl Rove of the “we’ll make you the first (and last?) American President of Pan-African heritage in return for folding on certain issues when we give you the signal!”?
America’s Party of Warmongers will never see a potential quagmire they don’t love, so we can expect Barry’s handlers to have him greenlight a temporary intervention in Libya.
Which brings us to yet another meltdown: Why does some happy-go-lucky Irish heritage blogger have to be the one to point out (in relative obscurity) things that a genuine free press should be blaring in big headlines? Where is the Media Outrage? Where are the Media’s brutally honest assessments of all these disgraceful hypocrisies?
Speaking of keeping a muzzle on things, how is the writers’ strike going at one well known aggregate online site? We have refused to “cross the picket line” and click on that site until we get news of a strike settlement. If it is ever over, would someone please post a comment about that? It is our assessment that the strike (like the one at the Los Angeles Herald Examiner) will never be settled by negotiations or mediation. [Didn’t Ralph Kramden tell his wife: “Don’t aggregate me, Alice; or POW! right to the moon.”?]
If someone mouths liberal platitudes and then treats the workers like indentured slaves, what political philosophy would you ascribe to that kind of management?
In the Book of Proverbs it is written: “To the hungry soul every bitter thing is sweet.” (27:7) Does anyone deny that the Republicans are hungry for sex, money, and power? That might explain why they think invading Iraq, torture, and evicting homeless from Venice CA is sweet.
Now the disk jockey will play Barry Manilow’s “Mandy,” Len Barry’s “1-2-3,” and Barry McGuire’s “Eve of Destruction.” We have to go buy some more Girl Scout cookies on our way to a St. Patrick’s Day celebration. Have a “Patriotism makes me want to f*** people” type week.
God Bless Republican Swingers?
Some recent tidbits of information which have landed in the World’s Laziest Journalist’s inbox indicate that it may be time to write a column about the possibility that Republican Party may soon need to redefine their stand on the Sanctity of Marriage.
Item no. one is the fact that after admitting that he had asked his wife for an open marriage, Newt Gingrich won the South Carolina Primary.
Item no. two: Playboy magazine is about to begin marking the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of the Playboy Philosophy series.
Item no. three: A caller to the Norm Goldman radio talk show pointed out that the Republicans discredited Herman Kane because of clandestine love affairs, but the Republicans are giving Newt the old “See no evil” response for his request for an open marriage. The caller automatically accused the Republicans of being racist in their diverse reactions. It never occurred to that caller that the difference is the transparency of the need for diversity. Kane relied on deceit. Newt prefers the philosophy of openness and Swinging.
Item no. four: We found our paperback copy of Gay Talese’s book “Thy Neighbor’s Wife.”
Since a large portion of journalism in America these days is based on celebrity gossip wouldn’t a Swinging couple in the White House be a godsend to the Political desks in newsrooms all across the USA? Can you just imagine how enthusiastic the coverage of a visit by a Swinging first family to French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s home would be?
Newt could elicit (not to be confused with the word illicit) comparisons to JFK by quipping to the press: “I’m the man who is accompanying Callista to Paris.”
Didn’t the wife of a Canadian Prime Minister generate extensive gossip and criticism of her husband by being a fan of the Rolling Stones band, a few years back?
Reality TV is very popular on cable these days. Perhaps it’s time for an adventuresome production company to make a deal with a swingers group? How about a series titled “Return to the A-Frame”?
If you think that despising the boss is a universal manifestation of a natural workers’ tendency then you have never talked with writers who have gotten a check from Larry Flynt Publications. Some Conservative Compassionate Christians may not (openly) agree with Flynt’s liberal attitude toward sex, but isn’t it remarkable when all of a fellow’s employees speak well of the boss?
Do people who get a chance to visit the Playboy Mansion brag about the experience or do they treat it as if it were a shameful incident which must quickly be forgotten? Who doesn’t want an invitation to visit there? Would Bishop Sheen have turned down such an opportunity?
Are Hugh Hefner’s employees inundated with requests for a chance to see their boss’ home? Is this year’s Playboy Mansion Halloween Party already booked to capacity?
Remind us to ask a former co-worker at the Independent Journal that question the next time we visit Santa Monica.
On page 220 of the Dell Book paperback edition of “Thy Neighbors Wife,” Gay Talese wrote: “The Berkeley Free Speech Movement in 1965, which forged its slogan from the initials of a four-letter word (“Freedom Under Clark Kerr”), as well as civil rights protests in the South, and the subsequent anti-war demonstrations and marches on Washington – the sit-ins, the teach-ins, the love-ins – all were manifestations of a new generation that was less sexually repressed than its ancestors and also less willing to respect political authority and social tradition, color barriers and draft boards, deans and priests.”
Wouldn’t the people who graduated in the Class of 1965, just now be getting to be Presidential Candidate age? What college did Newt attend? Could it be that the flower power generation is just now getting its chance to do what they said LBJ and Nixon couldn’t or wouldn’t do?
Is Newt just now getting ready to bring the party that once included George Romney, into the era of the Playboy Philosophy . . . or has Newt been “brainwashed”?
While we are on the subject, aren’t all the top Republicans encouraging the current field of candidates to tear each other apart? Crocodile tears? Where are the candidates spending their campaign funds? On ads, right? Who owns the newspapers and TV stations around the USA? Usually it’s conservative Republicans, eh? If the top Republicans are raking in the ad revenue stirred up by the continuing series of Primary cage matches and if the same media moguls plan to pull a fast one and substitute someone else as the candidate, then, metaphorically speaking, aren’t a lot of donors to the various Republican candidates “getting their ashes hauled” by the “three card Monte” style subterfuge?
We thought that all the boys in the One Percent Club had mutual non-aggression pacts with each other and the idea was to be relentless in squeezing every last dollar from every last bank account of the Ninty Nine Percenters.
If (hypothetically alert!) there is some kind of nefarious plan to put someone other than the fab four at the top of the ticket, then aren’t some members of the One Percent Club committing a fraud that will relieve some of their fellow club members of some serious amounts of money? Why donate to a fellow who is predestined not to get the nomination? Why should a candidate who is being cheated out of any fair chance to be nominated spend ad dollars to try to get spurious (if you don’t know what that word means ask a Fox News fan) votes?
It’s OK for the Republicans to fool Democrats into thinking that the Presidential elections (2000 and 2004 for instance) are not rigged, but wouldn’t it be dishonest for someone to rig the Republican Primary Election process? Isn’t there a secret “honor among thieves” clause in the Republican Party secret handbook that precludes such a fiendish double-cross?
On Monday, January 30, 2012, the New York Times featured a story on page one (above the fold), written by Jeff Zeleny, that drew attention to the curious fact that Jeb Bush, has remained curiously silent (above the fray?) about endorsing any candidate to help draw votes in Tuesday’s Florida Primary. Isn’t it intriguing that such an influential Republican who served as that state’s governor isn’t making an endorsement?
Is this an example of the B’rer Rabbit’s “Please don’t throw me in that briar patch” philosophy being applied to politics?
Haven’t Romney and Gingrich destroyed each other’s ability to represent the entire Party membership? Doesn’t that indicate that a spectator on the sidelines who didn’t get into the mudslinging free-for-all would be much better qualified to use the word “we” when giving an acceptance speech to the 2012 Republican National Convention?
Meanwhile returning to this column’s topic: Did Gingrich see and enjoy the heist flick “Bandits”? A trio of bank robbers had an unconventional love relationship. It sounds like just the kind of action adventure movie that would appeal to open-minded folks. What does Mitt think about that flick? We’d love to hear his review of “Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice.”
The other most likely person to get the Republican nomination is a fellow who belongs to a religion that permits polygamy. Either way, it seems that the Republican Party has to realize that if their candidate wins the Presidential race, the Grand Old Party is going to have to reconfigure its policy on the Sanctity of Marriage .
This column’s closing quote was provided by someone who shall be called “an anonymous source,” and was heard as it was uttered by the World’s Laziest Journalist. “When I saw a picture of my wife in her underwear, sitting on Mick Jagger’s lap, I knew my marriage was over.” (Wasn’t the Stones’ best selling single, “Angie,” written about David Bowie’s wife?)
Now the disk jockey will play Jimmy Buffet’s song “Let’s get drunk and screw,” the Beatles’ song “Let’s do it in the road,” and Francis Albert Sinatra’s album “Songs for Swingin’ Lovers.” We have to get back to reading a fabulous book titled “Velvet Underground.” As the leader of the rat pack would say: “Have a ring-ding-ding” week.