Searching for Meaning

In a world filled with labor-saving technologies, home shopping, 24-hour news cycles and easy access to information, we like to think we have it pretty good. One thing which all of our advances have thus far failed to provide, however, is a sense of meaning. Of purpose.

We have become accustomed to the easy and the instantaneous, and yet the metanoia of our existence continues to elude us. Many people turn to religion (often to a fundamentalist degree) to fill this void in their lives, sometimes unsuccessfully. Others turn to advanced science or to prescription medication.

Others still – and indeed some of the same people – appear to have given up on a search for meaning and have instead replaced it with a search for sensation. We no longer experience the small blessings and joys of life the way we did before we understood the world outside. This, surely, is a big driver of our societal use of recreational drugs, of celebrity-worship, of breaking the law for thrills, and indeed of many of the stories we hear as the funny-yet-disturbing bits at the end of the TV news, where someone has been apprehended attempting to have coital relations with children, animals or household appliances. In the absence of meaning and purpose, we look for something into which we can put our collective dick.

Not this one.

So how can we rediscover the path toward meaning? Once again, as I so often have, I turn to the wisdom of America’s founding fathers, and their triad of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. Happiness is not a momentary thrill, a passing sensation, but a lasting condition attainable by making a positive change in yourself, in another person, or in the world at large. As we better our own lives and those of our neighbors, we can rediscover that sense of purpose and meaning.

Read Full Post »

If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…

… it’s probably just another part of the giant government conspiracy.

I was reminded this morning of the theory that the Apollo moon landings were faked. My inner conspiracy theorist loves this one, because there’s so much you can do with it.

See, in the early 1960s, the Western World was stunned when Yuri Gagarin successfully went into orbit. The United States in particular went a little batshit over this news, largely because the nascent NASA had had a great deal of money pumped into it, and here the Russians were launching a machine which surely had to be predominantly made of duct tape – and there was a cosmonaut IN it. Kennedy, in his optimistic fashion, called for the United States to put a man on the surface of the moon by the end of the decade.

Shouldn’t have been difficult, one would think. After all, we had access to the technology salvaged at Roswell, NM, back in 1947, and had been having dialogue with several different races of alien life for some time. Trouble was, a great deal of that technology was under the control of the CIA. Kennedy and the CIA didn’t get along too well, as evidenced by the fact that he planned to dissolve the Agency entirely.

Lo and behold, in November ’63, a magic bullet came from three different locations at once, entered Kennedy’s head at the wrong angle for any of said locations, and the alchemical ritual killing of the Divine King was completed.

CIA-trained operative Lee Harvey Oswald, observing this while still trying to get a good visual through his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, is reported to have said “OMG WTF?” Meanwhile, CIA-trained operative James Files calmly left the scene, his own gun still in hand, and the mission was accomplished.

Future Agency Director George Scherf Jr., during the course of the investigation, requested that all pertinent documents be turned over to him, a request which was duly honored. It should be noted that George Scherf Jr. was no longer under that name at this time, hence the record showing that the documents were provided to ‘George Bush of the CIA’. This individual, it should be noted, went on to become the nation’s 41st President.

The furore over Kennedy’s assassination allowed the CIA to continue its operations without hindrance, especially since the views of one Lyndon Baines Johnson were rather more friendly to the CIA. Nonetheless, in order to continue deflecting attention from the perpetrators of perhaps the single greatest con of all time, Kennedy’s memory needed to be kept alive. And so it was that a TV studio of sorts was set up at a base in Nevada, not far from Groom Lake.

It should also be noted at this point that there are few better ways for a shaky administration to get the public firmly behind them than by providing a common enemy. A military action was quickly contrived and the United States entered Vietnam.

A growing counterculture movement, featuring the likes of LSD pioneer Timothy Leary, protested vociferously against the war, never realizing that they were simply being distracted from the assimilation of the entire country by the New World Order, with the help of the CIA as well as high-standing politicians from both sides of the partisan divide.

Though the enduring popularity of the Beatles threatened their Machiavellian machinations, the NWO quickly devised counter-strategies. The assassination of Paul McCartney and his replacement with their own lookalike (William Campbell) kept the Beatles from getting too outspoken, although Mark Chapman would eventually need to be deployed also once the Beatles had broken up.

What about the Moon landings? We’re coming back to that.

The public was beginning to embrace the counterculture more strongly than anticipated, and the Russians were starting to get their act together. Something needed to happen at this point to re-establish American superiority. And so it was that a little movie was made. A gentleman named Kubrick was drafted to make the landing look as realistic as possible, and a great script was put together.

Getting up onto a stage was one small step for a man. Getting that movie out was a giant leap for the NWO.

NOTE: The above is a work of fiction and is provided for entertainment purposes only. Allegedly.

Read Full Post »

Politics and Wheaties

I’m going to talk about politics a little bit here. Any and all Secret Service agents reading this can feel free to desist; I’m only planning to poke fun at the politicians. I sure as heck wouldn’t poke ’em with anything else.

Most of my political writings tend to be barely-coherent diatribes directed at the Republican party, but that’s not entirely fair. While my thinking tends to be mostly leftist, there are plenty of good targets on both sides. Or there may not be. Ask John Kerry, he’ll tell you. And then he’ll tell you again, and you’ll get confused.

So what does America need? Socialized medicine, gay marriage, clean energy, a commitment to peace? Not necessarily. That’s not where I want to go with this. Besides, I sometimes think the Republican Party is just trying to be helpful. Perhaps they’re just fucking the gay community up the ass to save them some effort.

The so-called “red states”, though, are not bad places, there aren’t bad people there. Something that I’ve heard a few times about the much-maligned South, though, is that people are nice to each other there sometimes. This is far less likely in, say, New York City:

“Hey mister, how do you get to Carnegie Hall?”

“Fuck you.”

“Ah. I’ll try that, thanks….”

I am told that similar things happen in Philadelphia. That’s some brotherly love right there. I have no doubt that DC is the same way, except that there you at least stand a chance of getting “Fuck you, sir.”

I think the government needs a good dose of happy. Almost every politician you ever see on TV looks like such a miserable bastard. Especially Dick Cheney. He perpetually looks as though somebody shat in his Wheaties.

And then there’s John Edwards. I think he got the entire city’s supply of happy pills. Though he never quite looks like he’s smiling at what’s going on around him. It’s like he doesn’t really look at you, he just points his eyes at you while he notices something about himself. Like, “Dude! There’s stuff in my lower intestine. Neat-o!”

Maybe he shat in Cheney’s Wheaties.

I’m joking, of course. If a trial lawyer, even a former trial lawyer, comes anywhere near Cheney, those Wheaties get taken off the table faster than you can say “secure location”.

Speaking of secure locations, I bet tourist flights to North Korea are getting cheap.

Read Full Post »

To impeach, or not to impeach?

On the first anniversary of the American incursion into Vietnam, a handful of college professors and radical beatniks started to make a little noise, but were dismissed as nuts.

At two years a few more had joined the movement, largely still members of the same “nut” crowd.

At three years, with the introduction of the hippies into the fray, thousands started to show up to demonstrate.

At four years, there were hundreds of thousands.

On the fifth anniversary, millions of protesters took to the streets! The resounding voice of the American public spoke, and the United States withdrew from a quagmire in which there was no hope of victory.

Flash forward.

Prior to the start of the Iraq invasion, millions marched in protest worldwide; half a million in Florence, Italy, 1.5 million in Rome, 1 million in London, half a million in New York City, 200,000 in San Francisco. Almost every large community had some form of protest. Entire cities were shut down.

Marking the one year anniversary the numbers of demonstrators were large (still in the hundreds of thousands) but probably half that prior to the invasion.

Two years after, the numbers were down to tens of thousands.

Three years after, a few hundred showed up.

This year, four years after the invasion, more people were killed in one week in car bombs in Iraq than showed up to protest. And the quagmire continues.

Have we given up? Have we all been cowed into submission by the Evil Empire?

Many of us are posting in blogs, or talking about how terrible it all is while we drink our Starbucks. Some of us sit and seethe while watching the TV news, then flick over to American Idol. A lot of people are counting down the last 18 months of Bush’s presidency in the mindset that it can’t possibly get any worse.

It can get worse, and probably will.

Bush’s Attorney General, Alberto Gonzalez, testifying under oath, claimed 73 times not to be able to recall crucial details of conversations with other senior-level administration officials. He also claimed that the Constitution did not automatically grant the right of habeas corpus, which is completely incorrect.

Gonzalez is either incompetent to perform the duties of his office or perjuring himself and obstructing justice, both of which are grounds for removal from office. In either case, the Bush administration have been protected by his actions.

The declarations of executive privilege, under which the Bush administration have ducked a vast number of Congressional subpoenas, have undermined Congressional process entirely.

The assertion that Vice-President Cheney is not required to comply with regulations on the executive or legislative branches of Government, citing allegiance to whichever branch allows him to evade regulations, has undermined process in all three branches of Government.

The Bush administration, under the most recent version of their Continuity Of Government plan, has the option to declare martial law when there is a catastrophic event. The power to define a catastrophic event, for these purposes, lies with… the Bush administration.

This gives the administration the power to suspend elections and prolong Bush’s presidency indefinitely. A terrifying prospect, if ever I heard one.

The mountains of evidence are overwhelming. The violations of the once-sacrosanct Constitution and other American laws abound, and the Bush administration lurch in their ineptitude from the disastrous to the catastrophic with nary a thought for G.I. Joe, never mind Average Joe.

The calls for impeachment grow ever louder outside the hallowed halls of Congress, a veritable sea of noise which threatens to drown out any voice calling for more moderate approaches or bipartisan cooperation.

Why is it, then, that impeachment has been off the table for so long? Why is the very notion considered anathema?

It is hardly that there have been no high crimes or misdemeanors. It is not even a simple case of the Democratic Party being “chicken”.

Bush, Cheney and their assorted friends and minions, however, do still have substantial “pull” in this country. Impeachment proceedings would effectively turn Bush and Cheney into martyrs, taking a hit for taking a stand in the name of their party, their country and their God. These men would become a rallying point around which the Republican base could mobilize. Anyone with any dislike for or unease about the Democrats would finally have somewhere to take a stand, despite the relative weakness of the current crop of Republican candidates.

In short, impeaching Bush might result in a moral victory for the Democrats but would place them at huge risk for an electoral defeat.

Any senior Democrat involved in the proceedings would also see a probable end to their chances of assuming higher office themselves further down the line, since they could easily be challenged over the impeachment issue by their opponents.

Allowing the Bush crowd to run out their final year and a half in power, however, gives the Democrats further opportunities to point at the ongoing shambles, strengthening their own relative virtues in the public perception.

Perhaps in February 2009, a newly-minted Democratic President will have the opportunity to arraign many members of the current administration on charges of war crimes, falsification of intelligence, obstruction of justice, leaking classified information and a host of other infractions. The people responsible for these illegal acts can be tried and convicted with much less of the political circus which would otherwise be inherent in the process, thus allowing the new administration to get on with running the country and salvaging its reputation as a bastion of real freedom and democracy.

Despite some efforts, the Constitution has yet to be dealt a killing blow. Another eighteen months of Bushism may be a small price to pay for restoring it to its former glory in years to come.

But then… once martial law is imposed, impeachment proceedings can be shut down as quickly as they can be initiated. Maybe there wouldn’t BE a Democratic President in 2009. It would hardly be sensible for an administration to issue decrees which protect their own power at the expense of the Constitution and then willingly hand over the reins to someone who would use those decrees against them.

Some have suggested that later this year Cheney will step down, citing health concerns, and a more moderate (supposedly) Vice-President appointed, to boost the GOP’s chances of winning in 2008 and keeping the tyrannical, totalitarian streak alive.

Others have suggested that there will be another attack on a U.S. target, probably blamed on Iran, to fire up the public so that they won’t rebel when martial law is declared.

Who can say what further rabbits are to be pulled from the Bush hat?

So… to impeach, or not to impeach? That is the question. If we’re lucky, we have 18 months to answer it.

Read Full Post »