Calling All Non-Racist Racists

http://www.politicalgroove.com/gener...machine-6.html

2/3/08

Calling All Non-Racist Racists

Let's get a couple things straight, shall we? First, not to say foremost, I don't owe any of you anything. You don't pay my bills. I'll guess that not one of you has even sent TWO WHOLE DOLLARS to help me possibly get a good thing off the ground. If nothing else, I will satisfy government and the public as to whether The State would have gotten a bigger share of my income by charging a flat 15% income tax or by running me through our utterly asinine tax code. That's gotta be worth something.

Who doesn't recognize 'half the people don't know what they're talking about' as an acceptable figure of speech? Couple that with the time-honored counsel 'don't believe half of what you hear' and you see the problem. Conceivably, people could go their whole lives without ever landing on the Truth. Except insofar as they discover Truth for themselves, which is what I'm trying to do. Clarify Truth for myself.

PC ASIDE: When I say 'you,' it is often generic. You plural...all y'all, in the South...is often not all-inclusive. I get enough private mail to know that this post isn't addressed to everyone. Remember 'He' is often simply human, encompassing both genders. I haven't sorted that one out to my liking...s/he is very convenient, but not so much his/her and wo/man seems as contrived as the hyphenated name thing. My opinion.

I can do that, hold opinions and have personal preferences on which I simply act. I could decide to designate the feminine as my uni-sex default grammar. It's allowed. It's important to remember that. I find it somehow jarring when She is substituted for He in reference to God, so I don't do that. Personal preference.

Since I have been old enough to get in trouble, my trouble has revolved around money, men and/or alcohol. Always. I have spent YEARS now, trying to clean up my act, also the wreckage of my past, shift my concern off of the small future and on to the big future, and to train my attention and my effort squarely on the present. Reality.

This is, IN MY EXPERIENCE, pretty much required in order for an alcoholic not to return to drinking, a regression that there is every reason to suppose would kill me. I don't know whether it stands but, during one relapse, I did set a record not only in a recovery ward but in that entire Los Angeles hospital for blood alcohol content. Imagine my pride.

Since my son left for college, I do smoke pot, for which I have a prescription. I defy anyone to argue that alcohol should be any less regulated, any more legal or any more readily available than marijuana. I mean to see to it that some just consistency is established, and I don't much care which way we do it. That's not true, actually. I prefer that we normalize marijuana and hemp, regulating and taxing the former as we do alcohol, but I'm flexible more flexible than are the many many Americans who couldn't go so long as a week without a drink. We can normalize marijuana or we can reinstitute the prohibition of alcohol. Fair's fair...we pay a lotta lip service to fair in America.

Even at the pharmacy at which medical marijuana is dispensed, the employees tell me in that nay-saying-there's-always-a-reason-why-not way, "It'll never happen."

I say, "I've never been on the case before." And that's true. I have never truly applied myself to anything, except parenthood. Alcoholism notwithstanding, I took the parent thing super seriously-in-a-fun-way but, other than that pretty big that, I have never truly made a move...you know, put MYSELF on the line, go all in.

I tested the waters once, and could have made a move, but my kid was still young and vocalized his objections. Plus, it really took the wind out of my sails and my sales when I promptly had legal trouble from McDonalds Corporation, who opposed my trademark for McGreet greeting cards claiming, with the support of our federal government, that McDonalds has exclusive use of the prefix Mc...despite Mc standing freely in the dictionary and irrespective of whether goods traded under a Mc trademark could be mistaken by any reasonable person to be affiliated with or trading upon the Fast Food Giant. McDonalds and my federal government are going to re-visit that episode, but I digress.

I am of the generation of parents who overindulged their children. I read an interesting article...no, I don't remember the author or the publication, I'm pretty sure he was a professor at one of the few universities the statements and "statesmen" from which we inexplicably have collective regard. This article was about the children of the Baby Boomers..."my" people...calling them the most protected generation of all time. Car seats, helmets, security systems, et al. He pointed to the over-orchestrated schedules of these kids and suggested that, left to their own devices, the most privileged children on earth are CLUELESS what to do with themselves. Very often incompetent, to boot. He warned of an upcoming lack of innovation.

On the train to Iowa...to witness those thoroughly bogus caucuses...I had dinner one evening with a couple from California, him a retired research scientist, her still working...missing the research she prefers, owing to her heading some Multi-Campus Integrated Bio-Tech thing. I do not recall her name, didn't even understand the details of the project, but the work sounded Important. She said whippersnappers with advanced degrees cruise in able to perform brilliantly upon her exact instruction, but unable to "come up with anything on their own." I digress again. Except I'm not. Note the connection of dots. This article in that waiting room talking about the same thing as that woman on this train.

I would draw attention to the potential lack of discretion. California/research/multi-campus/biotech, that pretty much narrows it down. I have no wish to get any but corrupt officials and white collar criminals in trouble. MANY people who tell me things tell me things in confidence, specifiying that they do not want to be identified. People alternately fear reprisals, or don't want to get involved. Next, I would draw attention to how often the articles to which you DO lend credence cite sources "who spoke on condition of anonymity." I'm not suggesting, in this case, that University brass somewhere is reading PoliticalGroove, then having a word with the head of an Integrated Multi-Campus Biotech Thing about her indiscretion on an Amtrak train. But there ARE people who follow my writing...watch the View counts after I post. I'm not completely crazy, I don't think.

I could be, though, I acknowledge that. Whereas some of you think you're right all the time, I question all the time whether I'm nuts. I suspect we're both wrong.

Be that as it may, the two people who alluded to an out-of-wedlock son for Obama were both women, both older, one in her 80's and one in her 70's, one in California and one in Georgia, neither senile to my knowledge but you never know, both of them more plugged in news-wise than many people who work all day. Shall I print their names and addresses?

Before Obama supporters were all hot under the collar, I asked the same question SEVERAL TIMES on the Bill Maher Board, seeking corroboration. I got neither corroboration NOR hysteria. I have also asked, and not yet learned, whether Ron Paul has a relative by the name of Roy Paul who sits or sat on the Los Angeles Superior Court bench. I've been asking about the First Wives Club since Day One, too...which is to say since TWO YEARS before the election.

It's the long way to a point, to be sure. Not only that, this is only the first of SEVERAL points I mean to make. The good news is, reading is optional.

Somewhat abrupt to break right here, but not arbitrary. I'm onto the 10,000-character limit, and I have only a few more minutes to get this posted today.

A long post every day for 29 days, to give me and some other people a sense of my ouput and the options for monetization. Since I AM, in fact, a procrastinator and people ARE, in fact, cheapskates.

Is that what one of the Hysterics called me behind my back? Cheapskate? Oh brother. No, really, with hard-nosed rhetoric like that, you've got the neoconservatives practically licked.