Last Night I Dreamt Of Ronald Reagan

And no, it was not a nightmare.

I was sitting alone in a crowded restaurant when Ronald Reagan placed a brown leather pouch on my table. He was very old and worn, obviously in the late stages of alzheimers. He pressed buttons on the side of the pouch and there emitted a rather sweet melody as if coming from a tiny piano. He shambled to the side of the room, whereupon two young men in suits, one white and the other African-American seized the pouch and took it to their table. I couldn't see President Reagan's response, but I immediately sensed dismay at such brashness. I quietly went to the table of the men in suits, snatched up the melodious pouch and then took it to the President.

"Thank you, sir, I believe this is yours." 

He accepted it without a nod or a smile. The room feel silent, then people rose one by one to applaud the gesture. Whether it was for me or out of respect to Reagan, I didn't know. I left the room while they were still applauding.

In the most stultified lays compassion and consideration. Ronald Reagan seemed to be an extremely personable man, but when it came to issues like AIDS, he was ramrod straight in refusal to acknowledge a problem. 

Alzheimers may have erased that facet of his personality. Through alzheimers he became less of a conservative icon and more of a human being, one to be respected even through the ordeal. At least, that's what I think my dream meant.

The Road To A Francis Christmas: Compassion vs. Capitalism or Compassion vs Koch?

With Pope Francis I dedicating much of his reign to compassion to the poor, it's no wonder that much of America's Right have balked. Paul Ryan called Francis' concept of capitalism "naive" and Rush Limbaugh has denigrated the Vatican and its attack on "unfettered capitalism." John Stossel once held a symposium of sorts on the "good" of greed, in which he gave the analogy of a cake with only a small part cut for the lower classes - "why not just make another cake?" But Francis countered:

Now the Koch brothers have entered the fray, with one Washington Post OpEd piece (John and Carol Saeman) insisting that the Koch brothers love the poor as much as Francis (!!):

Patricia Miller, Religion Dispatches:

It’s through their association with Freedom Partners that the Saemans have become aware of the Koch brothers’ “deep concern for the least fortunate,” which they express by supporting organizations that “bear the common mission of advancing free enterprise and free societies.” The Saemans write that “promoting limited government alongside the Kochs is an important part of heeding Pope Francis’s call to love and serve the poor.” This despite Francis’ unequivocal statements almost exactly a year ago in opposition to the “free enterprise” ideology.

Of course, the Saemans resurrect the "tough love"/"bootstraps" kind of ideology as the REAL compassion, while scrapping all safety nets and welfare programs.

How very, very compassionate.

And how very, very wrong. The Saemans, it's worth noting, are financial contributors to the Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce:

wikipedia:

Freedom Partners gave grants worth a total of $236 million to conservative organizations including Tea Party groups like the Tea Party Patriotsand organizations which opposed the Affordable Care Act prior to the 2012 election. A majority of Freedom Partners board is made up of long time employees of the Koch brothers.[6][7][8] In 2012, Freedom Partners made a grant of $115 million to the Center to Protect Patient Rights.

Getting Compassion Right

The truest form of compassion was given in the parable of the Good Samaritan: he did not judge the battered Jew, nor did he tell him that he, and not big government, was the answer. The Good Samaritan just did what was necessary for the Jew to live - to survive. Had he been passing by a Jewish beggar in the road, he would have seen to his food, shelter and clothing. He would not have told him to go out and get a job. 

Francis is scaring people like the Koch brothers simply because he is getting compassion right and people are beginning to question the Koch ideology. And along with the Koch ideology comes the "prosperity gospel" preachers, Christian Right churches assailing "social justice" and a horde of Paul Ryans, Rush Limbaughs, John Stossels, Sean Hannitys, Ann Coulters who praise capitalism as the savior of mankind. 

When will the message hit?

Of course, Francis’ message of compassion will take time: although Black Friday wasn’t as “black” as usual, that doesn’t mean that the American public has chosen to put more of its wealth into worthy causes. Ads for the “perfect” gift will still blare until late Christmas Eve and the kettles of Salvation Army will not see any jump in donations. 

But the Koch pitch of "just as compassionate as Francis" is showing some serious re-branding which may trickle down to some worthwhile agencies. Not the way Francis would like, but progress just the same.

The road to Christmas is going to be very interesting this year. 

Leading The War On The Homeless: Fort Lauderdale Plans to Confiscate Pitiful Possessions

If he's a "personal possession", probably.

Though they may not have a home in which to secure their stuff, homeless people still have possessions like everyone else.


The war on the nation's homeless is ramping up.

Yet the city of Ft. Lauderdale, Florida is on the cusp of passing a new regulation that would make it illegal for anyone to store their personal things on public property. Specifically, it would empower police to confiscate any personal possessions stored on public property, provided they have given the homeless person 24-hours notice. If the homeless people wish to retrieve their items, they must pay the city “reasonable charges for storage and removal of the items,” though that fee is waived if the person is able to demonstrate he or she cannot afford to pay. The city may dispose of any possessions not retrieved within 30 days. One of the driving factors behind the measure, according to the legislation, is the city’s “interest in aesthetics.”

"Aesthetics"


While no one wants to see ragged, unkempt people sitting on the streets with whatever they have left out of a life of poverty, "aesthetics" may be the most frivolous, contemptuous reason to cast a human being aside. However, newborn tech industries seem to be very, very concerned about aesthetics: the Facebook post of San Francisco's Greg Gopman may have garnered outrage in the City by the Bay known for its compassion, but other cities eager to cash in on the gentrification start-ups bring with them (like higher rent and real estate values) have turned a blind eye to "the last of these."


Venice, California used to be a haven for homeless people, but not any more. Even though people were horrified at the beating of a homeless person last December, the attitudes of the new tech residents is less than compassionate:


Recently, a homeless man named Brian Connolly bought food at the Starbucks at Navy and Main, but was told he'd have to eat it outside; he wrote last month that the incident has a creepy segregation feel to it: Starbucks will take his money, but they don't want him hanging around.


And some meanies added padlocks to a homeless storage facility. Park and Rec had to apply bolt cutters to return the stored goods back to their owners.

"Possessions"


The above proposed law has not delineated what "personal possessions" are, but one can guess that it may be up to law enforcement to determine it: is a dog a "personal possession"? Aren't clothes personal possessions? Cigarettes? Blankets? Shoes? Will the homeless be strip-searched?

Criminalizing Compassion


In an effort to consolidate compassion to the homeless, Houston tried to enact a law that forbade any unpaid volunteers for "sharing cooked food with the needy public." Mayor Annise Parker got a lot of flak for it, not for the seeming heartlessness of it, but because the measure was supported by Star of Hope Mission, a large evangelical concern that wanted to get the homeless off the streets and into its city-subsidized shelters. You can go to the Mayor Parker, empress of homelessness Facebook page to see related videos on the issue.


Back To Fort Lauderdale


The measures are just the first in a series to come before the commission. City staff is currently drafting ordinances that would prohibit panhandling and other solicitations at intersections, that would prohibit people from sleeping on public property, and that would restrict when, where and how often groups could set up sites to feed the homeless.

How far this situation will go is anybody's guess.

One could argue, of course, that Fort Lauderdale did not go as far as some police in Detroit who really seemed to declare a "war on the homeless" by rounding up people in certain areas, putting them in vans, and abandoning them miles from the city center (and their lifelines).




But give the idea time: other cities are waging the "war" and there's no telling what new "aesthetics" they will come up with.


There can be no lighter note to this dilemma, but George Carlin made people laugh (i.e. look at themselves) in his own inimitable way:

The Next Anti-Christ Is 16 Years Old, A Brilliant Scientist, A Mountain Of Compassion, And ... Gay.

Bryan Fischer will be taking tickets to the auto de fe.

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Pope Francis I move over, there's a new Anti-Christ in town and he's sure to be the devil's favorite for a while: he's 16 year-old Jack Andraka and he's adorable. At fifteen, he developed an inexpensive test to detect early signs of pancreatic, ovarian and lung cancers because a close family friend had died of pancreatic cancer. He's also a Life Scout with the Boy Scouts of America (but not a member of the Boy Sodomizers of America ala Bryan Fischer), and he's butch enough to love kayaking. 

I’m openly gay and one of my biggest hopes is that I can help inspire other LGBT youth to get involved in STEM [Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics]. I didn’t have many [gay] role models [in science] besides Alan Turing." 

Yes, he's gay. But that's only part of the reason he might be the next Anti-Christ.

In the world of the Christian Right, there are enemies and ENEMIES, and one of the worst, most, insidious enemies it has been battling for decades (centuries, really), is science. 

"Science Shouldn't Be A Luxury"

One more reason to think Jack is an abomination to mankind: he is a scientist dedicated to making scientific knowledge more available to the world - especially to youth. In trying to roll back strides in science as the horrendous results of anti-God belief or playing God, the Christian Right has been trying to twist science to do its bidding (e.g. pseudo-historian David Barton stated unequivocally that science would eventually prove that everything in the Bible was true, or the ridiculous junk scientists of the Creation Museum).

"Science shouldn't be a luxury, and knowledge shouldn't be a commodity," he said Monday at the 2013 Social Good Summit.

"We're living in a knowledge aristocracy. We have a knowledge elite," he said, explaining that less than 1% of the world controls scientific, academic research.

"If a 15-year-old who didn't even know what a pancreas was could find a new way to detect pancreatic cancer, then just imagine what we all can do," he said.

"Just imagine" is what the Christian Right is afraid of: a world of young, progressive, compassionate, (and possibly gay) scientists. They might prove conclusively that God's Word (The Bible) is more metaphorical than real. They might find cures to God's plagues. They might encourage humanity to question more and make blind belief a thing of the past. 

Today's Christian Right is cast from the same mold as the people who thought Gutenberg's new invention was evil, since reading and writing was limited to clergy and the church's aristocratic donors. 

Backing Off - For Now

The Christian Right needs a new Anti-Christ: Barack Obama is old hat, Hillary's close, but not nearly charismatic enough and the pope is not considered the effort since he won't be around long enough and Anti-Christs need to take root and grow for a while. It has also been determined that naming a new Anti-Christ every week is counterproductive - that strategy has no staying power. Yes, Jack Andraka fits the bill on so many levels.

To date, however, there has been no word from Christian Right powers-that-be. Not Bryan Fischer. Not Tony Perkins. Not even Linda Harvey.* Perhaps they are conjuring up a case against Jack's parents (obviously "exploiting" him and being too liberal). But perhaps they are wary of backlash, and not merely from the LGBT community: America does not take kindly to demonizing young people unless they are wild celebrities (like McCauley Culkin or Miley Cyrus), and Jack Andraka is as dedicated to social justice for humanity as they come. 

And yes, they're afraid of  that too. 


*Often characterized as America's most homophobic woman, Harvey (Mission America) has ranted against gay teachers and anti-bullying programs because she firmly believes that teens like Jack Andraka will be indoctrinated. 

Legislating Compassion: Why Does The Right Hate It So Much?

In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of. - Confucius

Right Wing Watch:

     "Last month, the Family Research Council’s Kenneth Blackwell hailed House Republicans for passing a massive cut in food aid for low-income families, arguing that there is 'nothing more Christian' than kicking millions off the food stamp program."

A matter of "Dependency"

      Blackwell also suggested that there was "nothing more Christian" than "not locking people into a permanent dependency on government handouts, but making sure they are participants in their own upliftment and empowerment so that they in fact through the dignity of work and can break from the plantation of big government."

Using antebellum messaging has been the strategy of today's Right: people on welfare have been made slaves to government, their dependency locking them into a socialist system that is totally anti-capitalist and therefore un-American. It's the dependency that is destructive. It is the dependency they hate.

Or so they say.

However, whenever you take away something people have gotten dependent upon (or enjoy), you must replace it with something else, or else you invite insurrection, anarchy or ... heresy. Early Christians were wise in replacing pagan holidays with feast days and saint's days: Christmas, for example, replaced winter solstice festivities. So what should the poor become dependent upon?

Keep'em Poor And They'll Come To Jesus has been the strategy for the Right (OK, the Christian Right) for a very long time. Switch the dependency. Simple.

Luke 14:12-14 But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you, for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous."

Although Tony Perkins' comments might might seem ridiculously hypocritical to "bleeding heart" liberals (the Christian Right crying for a theocracy - through Reconstructionism - for many years), it makes perfect sense to people trying to hang on to their money in a taxless and minimum-government world. “The government has a responsibility to care for the poor? That’s not what Scripture says.” Grover Norquist gets the point, so why not the rest of America?

Luke 11:42 "But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and herbs of all kinds, and neglect justice and the love of God."

Compassion Costs Money

Boiling down to money may seem too simple an answer for why so many on the Right seem to hate compassion and social justice, but it's unavoidable: Pope Francis I recently hit a nerve with his focus on it (capitalized by his new economical papal style). Money is not for the poor, but for rich people to dole out to the poor subjectively. Money is for large homes and Bentleys (see video) with which to demonstrate God's love. Money is for ministry administrative costs.

Yes, the contorted reasoning for not legislating compassion is based solely on money: the Puritan, bootstraps, God-helps-those-who-help-themselves mentality governs the Right and that form of self-government is driven by money. Everyone knows it, but the reasoning must be cloaked in compassionate terms or else no one buys it.

And certainly the most compassionate term today is "Christian." What Jesus would say to using His name in such a manner, is obvious:

From Andrew Sullivan:

In an interview with the novelist and essayist Marilynne Robinson, Robert Long asked her about the too-frequent identification of Christianity with the religious right in America. She doesn’t hold back:

Well, what is a Christian, after all? Can we say that most of us are defined by the belief that Jesus Christ made the most gracious gift of his life and death for our redemption? Then what does he deserve from us? He said we are to love our enemies, to turn the other cheek. Granted, these are difficult teachings. But does our most gracious Lord deserve to have his name associated with concealed weapons and stand-your-ground laws, things that fly in the face of his teaching and example? Does he say anywhere that we exist primarily to drive an economy and flourish in it? He says precisely the opposite. Surely we all know this. I suspect that the association of Christianity with positions that would not survive a glance at the Gospels or the Epistles is opportunistic, and that if the actual Christians raised these questions those whose real commitments are to money and hostility and potential violence would drop the pretense and walk away.

Legislating Compassion

The ever-widening gap between rich and poor in America should be proof that of religious institutions have not been willing fill to the gap. Rep. Paul Ryan once remarked that faith-based charities would pick up the slack left from budget cuts.* That remark must have made those institutions shudder: soup kitchens for the poor are one thing, but expensive programs are quite another matter.

It's their money, after all.

*The comic moment of his remarks came when his tax returns were release, revealing the fact that he gave far less in charitable contributions than the national average.