Arguing With Idiots For Sport And Pleasure

'SPECIALLY WHEN I'M WRONG

Felicitations, Free Thinkers!

Although his career as a wrestling heel was just a shade before my time, I quickly became enamored with Jesse "The Body" Ventura as a color commentator with the WWF. Even at that impressionable young age I could tell that Ventura was smarter then the average bear. 

I anxiously followed Ventura's dalliances with Hollywood, as he starred in such classic sci-fi fare as Predator and The Running Man. I never did see Abraxas, Guardian of the Universe, but in case the spirit ever moves me some evening, I'll just leave this right hur.

Since so many actors have done the same, I wasn't surprised when Jesse moved out of the public light and entered politics. He first served as the Mayor of Brooklyn Park, Minnesota, from 1991 to 1995 and then went on to become the very first politically-independent Governor of Minnesota from 1999 to 2003.

In this day and age, this latter achievement is almost inconceivable. Despite running a bare-bones campaign on the cheap, Jesse appealed to the everyman by offering an alternative to the usual Republican / Democrat paradigm. While in office he refused to meet with lobbyists and made tremendous strides regarding public transit and tax reform. During this time he also became highly disillusioned with partisan politics and the ruinous nature of corporate-controlled media.

He parleyed these observations into a wildly-successful writing career, penning several notable books including I Ain't Got Time to Bleed: Reworking the Body Politic from the Bottom Up,
Do I Stand Alone? Going to the Mat Against Political Pawns and Media Jackals and 
Jesse Ventura Tells it Like it Is: America's Most Outspoken Governor Speaks Out About Government. As you can probably gather from the titles, Jesse's dark take on the American political system is the direct result of his own experiences serving in office. 

Via Don't Start the Revolution Without Me! I began to learn more about this interesting and multifaceted dude. A former Underwater Demolition Team expert and Vietnam veteran, Jessa had a habit of reading voraciously while traveling across the country between matches with the WWF. While absorbing the works of political rebels such as Major General Smedley Butler and L. Fletcher Prouty Jesse developed a healthy skepticism about the motivations of a government puppeteered by big business.

Thanks to his many years as a wrestler, commentator and bureaucrat, Jesse developed quite a reputation for speaking his mind in a clear, direct and often humorous fashion. As such, when he moved into the realm of political commentary, Ventura certainly wasn't afraid to ask uncomfortable questions about the invasive nature of American foreign policy, the corporate influence on government and the blatant murder of the country's last autonomous President, John Fitzgerald Kennedy.

What I'm trying to say is that Jesse Ventura isn't your average retired wrestling meat-head.

But because he had the unmitigated gall to publicly criticize the false concept of American Exceptionalism, Jesse became the target of Chris Kyle, the self-professed "most lethal sniper in U.S. Military history". In an appearance meant to promote his book American Sniper on an episode of The O'Reilly Factor, Kyle claims to have cold-cocked Ventura for the sin of autonomous critical thought during a speaking engagement at a Navy S.E.A.L. bar: 

So, the other night I'm killing time on Google + and I come across a post in my news feed by the "Americans Against the Tea Party". It featured Ventura in a recent episode of his weekly on-line political screed Off the Grid. 

During this episode Jesse says:

“You are not gonna beat ISIS and somehow make everything right over there. You are still gonna be hated. None of this would have happened had we not gone over there and destabilized it. So here’s who we have to thank for all of this mess today: George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. Two guys who were too chicken to go to Vietnam. Too chicken to join the service and stand up and fight for their country, but they took us over there. If Barack Obama says, 'we need to get involved' and we end up with boots on the ground, I’ve said this before, the first two pairs of boots that oughta be on the ground over there are George Bush and Dick Cheney, leading from the front and not the rear.”

Now any reasonable human being who's even vaguely informed about America's compulsive history of meddling with affairs in the Middle East (dating back to Iran in 1953) would look at this quote and agree with it in principal, in spite of its lack of realism. But as I drilled down on the comments I could see that a bunch of crazed Tea Bagg...er Tea Partiers had responded with nothing but crude, mindless vitriol, verbal thuggery and Fox News-style regurgitations.

"Venturas (s.p.) a whiney (s.p.) little bitch. Sues (s.p.) wife of dead hero that slapped him down."

"Hey Jesse, go suck one!"

 "Ex- wrestler, conspiriscy (s.p.) nut job, black copters are following me loon."

"Ventura is a douce (s.p.) bag. He needs to just put the aluminum foil back on his head and off himself."

"AATP is blathering stupidity and now Ventura is their mascot. "

"Jesse Ventura is an old psychotic, narcissist has been acting like a never will be. What a punk!"

 
Now, I want to make this crystal clear before I proceed: although I'm a huge fan of Jesse and I agree with a lot of what he says, we don't see eye-to-eye on everything, particularly on the subject of gun control. His now-defunct television show Conspiracy Theory was kind of alarmist, giving casual viewers an excuse to dismiss very real and very serious issues as tin-foil-hat histrionics. He often refers to himself in the third person, comes across as opinionated and defensive and likely harbors a justifiably-inflated sense of ego. 

But I also understand Jesse's motivations and know that, underneath all of the bluster and bravado, he's a very well-researched and intelligent guy who uses shock value in an effort to wake people up. He doesn't hate America, quite the opposite. I get the impression that he loves his country so much that he's deeply troubled by its free-fall and would like nothing better then to see the U.S. of A. regain some semblance of its former glory.

As a result, I felt compelled to weigh in on this little tête-à-tête, not so much to defend Jesse, but to see if I could lure these Tea Party wing-nuts into an actual debate.

Here's what happened.

Spoiler alert: what happened is exactly what you'd expect to happen. 

Matthew M: "This traitor! Jesse Ventura, who sued a dead American Navy Seal hero's widow! And now says America deserved 9/11 and to be bombed! Oughta be shot for treason!"
 
ME: @Matthew M "Chris Kyle blatantly LIED about Ventura in a mass-market publication, he deserved to get sued. And Ventura has never, ever said that America deserved to get bombed on 9/11. He's trying to educate people blinded by the myth of American exceptionalism that, like it or not, the United States has a very long and very checkered history of geo-politcal interference around the world, which gives radical forces plenty of motivation to attack us."

Alexandre A: @David Pretty "that's exactly what Jesse Ventura is saying!!! I never heard him say anything against America but true things !!! @MM "every president of the United states needs to be tried for treason at least the living presidents that are around specially Bush and Cheney who sold us the war!!! The people who want us to go neck to neck against each other have been doing this for years they know how to keep an open wound bleeding!!!! How many of you have taken sides about immigration,the survival of Israel, Isis , Ukraine, the deficit, 9/11 all those are topics to keep us from seen what really us going on !!!"

ME: @Alexandre A "You're absolutely right. I've done a lot of research on this and I truly do believe that the last U.S. President that wasn't a puppet of corporations and / or the military industrial complex was JFK."

Alexandre A: @David Pretty "don't forget Dwight Eisenhower warn us about the industrial military complex !!! I trusted Obama up until I saw him going along with war guru's!!!!!"

ME: http://emblogificationcapturedevice.blogspot.ca/2013/04/will-historys-real-greatest-monster.html

Elizabeth M: "I have heard many people quoting from actress and actors, politicians, ect (s.p.)...
These type of people in my opinion, don't have a mind of there on (s.p.), simply because they are to busy with this materialistic life and lazy to go out and gain their on (s.p.) knowledge.

I also think Jesse has an aggressive attitude but maybe is (s.p.) all the anger inside of him, as a former governor he fond (s.p.) out despicable things our government is doing against humanity and therefore expresses himself in a rude way to let all that anger out.

In my personal opinion, I think he is on point on most of what he says, but I do dislike when he speaks so aggressively, if he was to express himself in a more humble way, it would be better for him.

I to (s.p.) respect your opinion and I thank you for respecting mine. :)"

Color Commentary: Hey, look a dissenting comment that doesn't stoop to insults! Although her opinion isn't fact-based (I.E. Jesse is a helluva lot better informed then, say, Matt Damon) but at least her comment is civil and reasonably well-thought-out.

But then, just a few short seconds later it was right back to The Attack of the Knuckle-Draggers:

Greg Hi-Z: "You can have Jesse on your side any time."

William F: "He was piled drived (s.p.) a bit to (s.p.) much by the Arabian sheik, and Bruno sanmartino (s.p.). They did not know the long term effects can make you an idiot and azzhole (s.p.) at same time."

Color Commentary: Who the f#ck is the "Arabian Sheik"?

ME: @ William F "Speaking of libel your statement is nothing but conjecture. Please provide some back up for that blatantly inflammatory statement." 

Matthew M: "Shutup. I don't wanna hear from more like him. You all disgust me! I woulda done more then knock him out if I was there! God bless America!"

Alexandre A: @Elizabeth M "he does speak aggressively but because his in the know how and can't wake up the vast majority of Americans !!! Jesse Ventura is a patriot navy seal remember!!!!"

ME: "Good strategy, +Matthew M. By sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling 'LA!!! LA!!! LA!!! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!' you're sure to avoid reality ad infinitum."  

Matthew M: @David Pretty "yeah liberal idiots know all about that!" 

ME: @Matthew M  "I wouldn't know. I'm not a 'liberal'."

Alexandre A: @Matthew M "I'm an American before any party affiliation left or right !!!! My eyes are wide open and see both points specially when their trying to push something down our throats!!!!"

Austin Stevens: Color Commentary: this guy's on-line handle was clearly inspired by former WWF superstar "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, replete with a profile pic of Austin. Right away, I'm thinking that this guy ain't exactly gonna be Noam Chomsky and two seconds later he proves it by stating:  "Ventura is an idiot a complete moron."
 
ME: @Austin Stevens "Cut and paste from above but it applies to you too: 'Speaking of libel your statement is nothing but conjecture. Please provide some back up for that blatantly inflammatory statement'."

Matthew M: "Ventura, the cowardly, deserter, traitor anti- American, big mouth moron who sues dead hero's (s.p.) widows, and his sheep, will get there's! (s.p.)"

ME:  @Matthew M. "* sigh * If I shot my mouth off and called a friend of yours 'a cowardly, deserter, traitor anti- American, big mouth moron' wouldn't you want me to produce proof of this claim? And if I couldn't, then exactly who is the 'big mouth moron?' Hello? Is this thing on? * taps microphone *"

Alexandre A: @Matthew M.  "Jesse Ventura served our country therefore he can say all he wants about anyone !!!!"

Peter B:  "ANYONE...can say what they want, Regardless of whether they served their country! I know plenty of Patriots, who never enlisted, and plenty of ENLISTED, who forgot their roots, and are world class DB's. Jesse Ventura falls in the latter category. World-Class-conspiracy-theory-Douche-Bag!!! Everyone can agree that the Iraq was handled poorly, after the battle was won. People forgot about the reasons for going into Iraq. WMD's were the least of the issues. Firing on US aircraft, and plots to assassinate Bush Sr, have long since been forgotten. The issue in front of us now, is do we need to leave a QRF force in Iraq, and robust Special Ops units, in order to at minimum, protect our friends(the Kurds and other secularists). Obama has screwed this(like everything else) up! Now it's coming back to haunt him. He's a World Class politician. Period. This is why most active duty soldiers despise Obama, (AND Ventura): because he doesn't listen to his Generals;  he listens to his latest polling!"

Color Commentary: Peter's comments are promising and I wish he'd stuck around as well. Yes, he's grossly informed about Ventura and stoops to cheap name-calling but he's reasonably articulate and included reasons if not hard evidence for his claims. Sure, his perspective is dead wrong, but at least he's trying. 

Alexandre A: @Peter B "Obama listens to those who have money ,to hell with the polling!!!"

ME: "Good Lord, I'm gonna get carpel tunnel syndrome typing this over and over again." @Peter B. '"Jesse Ventura (is a)...World-Class-conspiracy-theory-Douche-Bag!!!' This is nothing but baseless hyperbole. What are you basing this statement on?!?"

Matthew M. @David Pretty "I don't have cowardly traitors for friends! Unlike you it seems? proof? Are you and idiot who can't read?"

Matthew M. @Alexandre A "I've (really) served our country! So I can say what I want about him! Like the truth! He has zero credibility now!"

Alexandre A. @Matthew M "a true patriotic American questions,and that's what Jesse Ventura is doing !!"

ME: @Matthew M. "Despite asking over and over again no-one in this thread has provided a single shred of evidence supporting their attacks on Ventura. Does the phrase 'innocent until proven guilty' mean anything to you?  How 'bout 'burden of proof'?"    

Richard s: @Alexandre A. "if he were a real patriot i think he should have dropped the ridiculous lawsuit against fellow seal and decorated hero after he was killed. Unless he's donating the settlement to a worthty (s.p.) charity he's a little bitch."

Alexandre A. @Richard s. "what lawsuit are you talking about Can you cite your source??!!!"

ME: @Richard s. "Cut and paste from above: "Chris Kyle blatantly LIED about Ventura in a mass-market publication, he deserved to get sued."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/30/the-complicated-but-unveriable-legacy-of-chris-kyle-the-deadliest-sniper-in-american-history/

Color Commentary: Interesting turn of events here: the only thing I really knew about Chris Kyle was the creepy vibe that came off of him in waves during that slavishly pandering Bill O'Reilly interview. By doing a quick bit of research and providing the aforementioned link I discovered that Kyle had tendencies towards self-aggrandizement and playing fast and lose with the facts. This shows how important it is to avoid mixing "truth" up with "truthiness".

Richard s.: @David Pretty "disagree. Thought it was kind of a bitch move to sue a fellow seal in the first place over a claim that he got knocked down. Then to continue the case after mr.kyles death was without honor. That he won the case doesn't really mean the truth as been seen. ( oj. Casey anthoney, etc....) obama lied about keeping your dr. seems there should be a whole lot of folk suing him."

Matthew M: @Richard s "agreed it was a little bitch move! And the little bitch deserved to get knocked down for what he said! Can't believe people defend him. Your (s.p.) a good American."

Color Commentary: Actually I'm not an American, just someone who's more informed then the average American. Which, sadly, isn't saying much.

Richard s. @Matthew M. "i love how some people pick and choose what they believe by virtue of celebrity, because otherwise ventura sounds like a conspirousy (s.p.) nut bag most of the time. Still alot of us left . GBA."

Color Commentary: By the way, the "GBA" in that last post stands for "God Bless America". That right, folks, these people habitually cap off their vicious personal attacks by evoking the favor of an invisible sky man who supposedly teaches tolerance, understanding and peace. Oh irony, why you so ironic?

ME: @Richard s @Matthew M "Whether or not you guys think it's a 'bitch move' what Kyle did was defamation cut and dried. If you read the article I linked above you'll find out that Kyle has a history of self-aggrandizement and making stuff up.  Ventura defended his public honor using perfectly legal means and not by sucker-punching Kyle when his back was turned. "
 
ME: @Richard s. "'ventura sounds like a conspirousy (s.p.) nut bag most of the time. Still alot of us left . GBA.'  Richard, if you're trying to sway people to your POV, then you need to provide a little something called EVIDENCE otherwise this is just an opinion and not fact."

ME: @Matthew Madigan "John Lindsay once stated, 'Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.' For that reason alone I'll defend true patriots like Ventura to the bitter end."

Alexandre A: @David Pretty "well said !!!"

ME: @Alexandre A. "Thank you, sir."

Matthew M: @Richard s "yes your right well said. And I agree there's still lots of good Americans."

Richard s: @David Pretty "and i'll believe the one that left his blood on the battlefield. To each their own."

ME: @Matthew M "I'd like to agree with you on that but (A) Richard S.'s own form of Chris Kyle-style of libel is still only HIS OPINION and (B) he didn't even bother to spell 'conspiracy' properly."

Richard s: @David Pretty "what libel would that be."

Alexandre A: @David Pretty "this people are totally uneducated and it's obviously by their uneducated opinions!!!!"

Color Commentary: I genuinely winced when I read this. Just watch as this cheap shot causes the quality of the discussion to degenerate almost immediately. 

ME:  "Oh, I dunno, how 'bout: 'ventura sounds like a conspirousy (s.p.) nut bag most of the time' or my own personal favorite from earlier in the thread: '(Ventura is a ) cowardly, deserter, traitor anti- American, big mouth moron'. This is SLANDER. If I said that kinda stuff about YOU behind your back you'd be pissed at me. And justifiably so." 

Richard s: @Alexandre A. "and your opinion matters because you think you have an education. Don't make me laugh. That's all you've given is opinion."

Alexandre A: @Richard s "you've only given a mouth full of sewer!"

Color Commentary: "A mouth full of sewer"? Really? What is this...Grade Four?

Richard s: @Alexandre A "now theres edumacation for y'all."

ME: "For the record, when he was challenged by Pierce Morgan about the lawsuit on CNN Jesse said: 'He never hit me. I don’t even know who he is. This never happened. [This lawsuit] has always been about clearing my name and getting back my reputation. I was accused by this gentleman of committing treason; that’s very serious. In fact, it’s a capital offense in the military. It’s not about money; it’s about my reputation.'

When Morgan pursued with 'Are you uncomfortable suing Kyle’s widow?' he replied:

'No, because an insurance company is paying for the whole thing, anyway. It’s the insurance company of the book publisher. I have to sue her just because she is now the estate, since [Chris Kyle] passed away'.”

ME: "Here's another fun fact: Chris Kyle made six million dollars from his book American Sniper.  Oh, and where did I find that out? A friggin' Tea Party website, no less."

ME: @Alexandre A "I don't give a crap about who's 'educated' and who isn't. I think we're starting to make some progress here, so let's try to keep things civil, shall we?"

Richard s: @David Pretty "it's been my understanding from what i had read that publishers insurance was't picking up the entire amount. Didn't know ventura's reputation was that important to him look at his past acting choices. Don' t know of witnesses accounts? never said coward,traitor or anything other than nutbag , pretty sure thats not libal (s.p.)."

ME: @Richard s. "Well, it only took a jury six freakin' days to determine that Chris Kyle made up the whole story. And, of course, Ventura's reputation is important to him: if he runs for President in 2016 he can't have allegations like this floating around out there uncontested."
 
ME: @Richard s. "And you're absolutely right, 'nutbag' isn't libel. It's just a nasty thing to say out of turn without any evidence to support it." 

Color Commentary: Faced with this, Richard s.'s incontrovertible stance seemed to sway just a little bit. But for most die-hard Tea Bag...er, Party people FACTS are the equivalent of flashing a red flag in front of a bull.

Matthew M "Guess all you Ventura ass kissers also deny the facts about the 'Muslim' attack on 9/11 too? (koo koo)And think America deserved it, and deserves to get bombed to hell? As per Jesse's ventures disgusting comments! hey, I hear ISIS is recruiting?"
 
Matthew M "These 'types' are, partly, why I worry America doesn't have the moral clarity anymore to deal with the great threats we face!" 

Steven O "I say Jesse is a gutless coward and should shut his big mouth the only thing he's good at is attacking men that are dead COWARD! !!!!!!"

Color Commentary: Opinion doesn't magically transform into fact with the liberal application of five exclamation points.  

Matthew M @Steven O "very true! G.B.A"

ME: @Matthew M. "What facts? I'd ask you to specify but I've asked before and I'm not holding my breath." @Steven O. "Again, your opinion. And unless you did a tour in Vietnam as a Navy S.E.A.L. and continuously stick your neck out in an effort to inform people about genuine societal ills then your words are pretty cheap to me in comparison. God, I'm tired. Honestly, it's like trying to have a conversation with a bunch of pre-recorded messages."

Sean I:  "everyone I`ve talked to says the following. He (Color Commentary: I assume he's talking about Ventura here) was straight forward. He wasnt a coward. He admitted his mistakes and didnt lie like the rest of the balless and heartless successful politicians America has seen."

Richard s: "U.d.t. at the time ventura was serving was not a part of the navy seals. And himself has never actually admitted seeing action in vietnam (s.p.). Although he may have done classified type stuff. How about 'may not have both oars in the water' is that better than nutjob? still think ventura should donate settlement if it ain't about the money."

Color Commentary: Above and beyond the thinly-veiled insult, I want to concede a point that Richard makes here. By all accounts, Ventura was a frogman with the Underwater Demolition Team in Vietnam and not a full-fledged Navy S.E.A.L., a title he sometimes lays claim to. Eight years after Ventura left the Navy, the U.D.T. was folded into the SEAL team, prompting Jesse to  observe: "Today we refer to all of us as S.E.A.L.s, that's all it is". Semantics? Maybe.

william r: "Let me know when this guy is relevant. I was going to add 'again', but, well, he never was."

Jammie K: @Richard s "and you actually believe that? I guess you personally know them, huh? Oh... you heard about it on Fox.. it must be true."

william r: @Jammie K "Ah, that dear old Fox thing! Gotta love it!  , are you gonna blame Bush next? Then what-call people racists? Substance-not vitriol. Like it or not- 2/3 of America watches Fox. And, also, like it or not, the majority of what they comment on is news. All that being said-if you watch cable TV, you aren't watching news, no matter WHAT channel you watch. You're watching news COMMENTATORS. So, yeah, keep through out that good ole 'Fox News' biscuit! It was tiresome in 2007. Its pedantic at this point."

Color Commentary: No, Billy-Boy, it's this.

Jammie K @william r. "Oh WOW! I guess I should have used one of the other media outlets. Didn't realize my point would be over shadowed by someone devotion and belief in Fox news. But you sir, are a complete idiot for not seeing through the lies and bullcrap the media uses to fuel debates that otherwise would never get attention. As far as blaming Bush and any other crap you can come up with, no, I dont blame Bush. I blame people just like you who are too damn stupid to see reality and choose to believe what they hear instead of what is right in front of their face. But no since in arguing about it... you obviously don't have the intelligence to form an opinion based on facts. Keep believing the media, they like fools like you. It keeps the ratings up. As you pointed out, 2/3 of this country watches Fox. SMH"

Color Commentary: in case you don't know, "SMH" stands for "Shaking My Head".

william r "And, you assume I watch Fox. Which, I don't. Havent had TV for 3 years now. So, again, you're making assumptions based on your personal feelings (we call that talking out your ass). So, once again, name calling and hateful comments-those very things we presume you associate Fox news for spreading-are your tools for communication? Pot, meet kettle."

Jammie K. "Who is making assumptions here?  Who attacked who first about comments, and who is talking out their ass?  For the record, I don't even watch TV.  Shows what you KNOW.   You sir, are the one that attempted to belittle my comments, which I might add had NOTHING to do with FOX or racism.  But you take it how ever you perceive it to be.   Pot, meet kettle."

Color Commentary: From here on in, things continued to degenerate, reminding me of Monty Python once again. Completely bored now, I decided to sit back and watch the fireworks.

william r: "You referenced Fox news, did you not? You called me names, did you not? You also stated I watched Fox news, did you not? Or, am I lying? And, yes, I threw the Bush and racist comments out there-because, lets face it-anyone who references Fox news is OBVIOUSLY a Bush supporter AND a racist. I mean, a simple Google search will prove that out. So, please, just go away. You're stealing valuable oxygen."

Jammie K: @william r "Did you even actually read the comment you so eagerly commented on?  I guess I should have added ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, BBC, etc.  Maybe then you wouldn't ASSUME all these other things you mentioned.   You attack me and then tell me to go away?  Who are you?  To me... the answer is... ABSOLUTELY NOBODY!  No arguing with a dumbass cop, you know everything and everyone else knows nothing.  You must be the pride of the department!   Typical!"

william r: "Ah, more personal attacks. Lovely. That the way you speak to people? Proud of the way you treat people? Making assumptions, calling names, personal attacks? Trying to justify your comment by name calling and mud slinging is pretty low brow. Stop being hateful. No one likes mean people."
  
Jammie K: @william r "I apologize...  I didn't realize this was a popularity contest.  But my point was made.  Just remember this... you called me out, not the other way around.  Like you said...  Pot, meet kettle!"
 
william r: @Jammie K "lets see, your first post was attacking someone else, and jumping to blaming Fox news-even though there was NO REFERENCE to that individual making any comments regarding Fox. In fact, he mentioned people he SPOKE TO. Yet, you took that opportunity to attack HIM and to throw the Fox reference out there. THAT WAS YOUR FIRST POST. I called you out. You attacked me, called me names, attacked my profession. Now, who, in their right mind, would agree with you-who, through your very posts here, is doing the exact same thing you claim to oppose? It certainly is not a popularity contest. I'm merely calling you out as a hypocrite. The only point you successfully made here was that the very thing you claim to stand against, you certainly have no issue doing to others. In America, we call that being a hypocrite."

Color Commentary: See how pointless, boring, pedantic and useless all of this hot air is? Unless you're brokering in cold hard facts in the form of citations, links and quotes then just engaging in the equivalent of "You're stoopid!" / "No, you're stoopid!" Unable to tolerate this anymore, I forced myself to venture once more back into the breach.    

ME: "So, here's what I've learned so far in my mercifully short exposure to Tea Party supporters:

(1) They're 100% convinced that they're right all the time.
(2) They're 100% convinced everyone else is wrong all the time.
(3) Facts and truth are irrelevant to them.
(4) They try to compensate for their willful ignorance with personal attacks and belligerence.
(5) If they're losing a debate (or what passes as for a "debate" in their minds) they'll write "G.B.A!" like its some kind of mystical ward against the truth and then either leave the discussion or Block you before their fantasy-based world starts to crumble.

Please, for the sake of everything holy, make some sort of effort to prove me wrong on these points, Tea Party people. Reality might be a bitter pill to swallow but it ain't that bad if we're all in it together."

william r: @David Pretty "not sure who you're addressing here? Or, are you jumping to conclusions and generalizing people too? I mean, the progressive movement is, after all, all about inclusion. Unless you don't fit their narrowly defined criteria. Then, your a tea party terrorist, support Zionism, hate the poor, etc. You know, progressives: love everyone exactly like you, and, if they don't think like you, blame Bush, then call them a racist. yawn. OF course, we can point to other progressive movements-climate change, lets say-and the 1.2 TONS of trash they left in NYC. Radical is radical. Name calling sure helps though :/"

ME: @william r "I'm referring to the people I've been trying (and failing) to have a civil discussion with here. Please take the time to read the entire thread; it clearly illustrates every single point I just made. For the record I used the term 'Tea Party people' for lack of a better term. I can only assume that they're 'Tea Party people' because they've chosen to come to a 'AATTP' thread and attack Ventura without so much as a single shred of evidence. "

And with that I was out. The thread went on for a little bit longer but no-one responded directly to my last post.

***

Want to know why Americans are so polarized right now? Why so many of them are convinced that they're right and everyone else is wrong? Why there's so much political paralysis? Why Congress can't get anything done and currently has the lowest approval rates in history? Well, I suspect that answer lies encoded within the shattered DNA of the pathetic little thread detailed above.

I'll tell you right now: unless Americans start coming together to hash out their differences using the proper etiquette of debate and remember how to make common sense decisions based upon well-established facts, then the entire country is going to mired in malaise and indecision forever.

EPIC RANT:  Tea Bag...er, Partiers hate Jesse Ventura because he dares to employ dirty pool (otherwise known as "facts") in an effort to show Americans the real face of their country, warts and all.  

G.B.A.!!!!!!

ECHO CHAMBER FAIL: As the old adage goes, "the truth hurts". Don't get caught wearing the "I'm With Stupid" shirt: its not too late to get informed, get enlightened and get active.

All Wet

 
Sooooo, like everyone else on the freakin' planet, it was inevitable that I got nominated for this whole "ALS Ice Bucket Challenge" thingie by at least a half-dozen people .

Which is kinda crazy 'cuz if y'all knew me then you'd know that I'm not motivated at all by public humiliation, guilt, peer pressure, grandstanding, unquestioning acquiescence or chain-style obligatory emails.

Now, even though I would never, ever voluntarily film myself dumping a bucket of freezing-cold (not to mention precious) ice-water over my head and then post it on the innerwebz, I do think that this is an incredibly important cause which deserves as much exposure as possible. 

But unlike the average lemming I decided to do some research before I blindly submitted my donation. That's when I discovered that the ALSA only directs about 7.71% of its budget to Research: I.E. finding a friggin' treatment.

So here's the thing: I need someone, anyone out there who has experience working with not-for-profit organizations to justify this to me because, at face value, this seems woefully low.

Even more baffling is the amount of money the group's administrators make:

Jane H. Gilbert – President and CEO – $339,475.00
Daniel M. Reznikov – Chief Financial Officer – $201,260.00
Steve Gibson – Chief Public Policy Officer – $182,862.00
Kimberly Maginnis - Chief of Care Services Officer – $160,646.00
Lance Slaughter - Chief Chapter Relations and Development Officer – $152,692.00
Michelle Keegan – Chief Development Officer – $178,744.00
John Applegate – Association Finance Officer – $118.726.00
David Moses – Director of Planned Giving – $112,509.00
Carrie Munk – Chief Communications and Marketing Officer – $142,875.00
Patrick Wildman – Director of Public Policy – $112,358.00
Kathi Kromer – Director of State Advocacy – $110,661.00

Now I'm not saying that these people don't do some great work, but do they honestly deserve a "one for you, one for me" kind of arrangement? 

Sorry to be the bucket of ice water cast haphazardly upon this mindless viral phenomenon, but I've never been one to blindly follow groupthink without doing some research first. And, let me tell ya folks, what I discovered really has me scratching my head. In fact, based on their own tax returns, over half the money the ALSA takes in goes directly into the pockets of the people who run the thing.  

Who knows, maybe this is the model for every single non-profit organization on the planet. Maybe the CEO's for the Cancer Society, the Alzheimer's Association and the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation all drive sick rides, no pun intended. But even if that's the case, is is right? Maybe it's time to take a long hard look at the way these massive administrative bodies operate and start asking some tough questions.

Even after my research I went ahead and gave a donation anyway, preferring to think that the lion's share of my money will go directly to helping people with ALS, supporting their families and/or finding a cure for this terrible disease.

'Cuz even more daunting then the prospects of publicly embarrassing myself by dumping ice water on my head is the horrible thought that I just paid for some rich asshole's venti mocha cookie frappuccino.

EPIC RANT  Leave it to acerbic comedian Bill Burr to sum up my thoughts on this whole thing. Not even slightly suitable for work, BTW.

VIRAL FAIL Yes, the videos are doing a great job increasing awareness for ALS but it seems to me that a lot of people are doing them for attention or to see their friends and family members humiliate themselves on-line.

THE "YOU HAD ONE JOB" FAIL  And this is what I was afraid of...

Words Fail...But These Will Have To Do

Ever since Robin Williams took his own life on Monday August 11'th I've been struggling, rather vainly, to process this. Not since we lost Jim Henson have I been so completely and utterly crushed by a celebrity death.

Like so many other people my age, I first became aware of Robin Williams back in 1978 via Mork & Mindy. I was only eight years old at the time. To a kid, Robin was a hyperactive genius. Kids like THINGS THAT GO FAST and Robin was the Speedy Gonzalez of comedy. Often you'd find yourself laughing hysterically at one of his shticks, scarcely able to breathe before you realized that he'd already said three or four other impossibly funny things. Every time I sat down to watch a new episode of the show I took my young life in my hands.

My parents were immediately put off my him, probably because they thought that all of that energy couldn't possibly be generated by one human being without the aid of chemicals. But to me he was always the alpha and omega of funny.

His first lead role in a film, as the squinty, spinach-obsessed titular hero in Popeye, didn't exactly endear him to critics. As far as I was concerned it was a box office smash. I can distinctly remember going to see it at our local Harmon Theatre and being tuned away because the lineup was too long. I never did go back to the cinema, and to this day I've never seen it from start to finish. This is a personal deficit that I will endeavor to  rectifying post-haste.

His next two films, specifically Moscow on the Hudson and The World According to Garp polarized fans and critics alike. As a Juilliard-trained actor, it was pretty clear that Robin was trying to make smart choices and expand his repertoire. Unfortunately, for the average slack-jawed troglodyte who just wanted to see Mork copied and pasted into everything Williams did, they didn't want to see him do anything "different" or "serious". Jim Carey would suffer from the same pall years later.

Mercifully Robin managed to strike the perfect balance in 1987 with Good Morning Vietnam.

This was the ideal cinematic venture for Williams. Bringing his own manic interpretation to his portrayal of real-life U.S Armed Forces Radio Services D.J. Adrian Cronauer, the film also mined plenty of social commentary inherent in the spate of Vietnam War movies which were in vogue at the time. All of a sudden Williams was THE HOTNESS again.

Now on the top of the world, Robin had the pick of the litter when it came to scripts. His next film, Dead Poet's Society, was undoubtedly one of the best roles:

Thanks to a brief but memorable appearance as The King of the Moon in The Adventures of Baron Munchhausen just two years prior, Robin forged a timely relationship with former Monty Python alum Terry Gilliam. Partnered with the perfect straight man in the form of Jeff Bridges, the three delivered Gilliam's most even and satisfying movie to date: The Fisher King.

Williams was so popular with moviegoers his career seemed insulated against failure. Even when Steven Spielberg's Hook famously bombed in 1991 he rebounded one short year later with a characteristically improv-a-licious vocal performance as the Genie in Aladdin.

Robin was still being offered plenty of A-list material so he had no problems bouncing back from the occasional dud. For every Toys, Jack or Flubber there was an Awakenings, a Jumanji, a Mrs. Doubtfire or a Birdcage. In 1997 wunderkind screenwriters Ben Affleck and Matt Damon saw their script for Good Will Hunting get fast-tracked when Williams signed on to play Dr. Sean McGuire. This proved to be a shrewd move for Williams since his performance in that film earned him an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor.

But just like everything else in Hollywood, what goes up must invariably come down. After his Oscar win, things seem to peter out a bit for Williams with a string of forgettable movies. As if sensing that he had nothing to lose, Robin took on his most daring and challenging role to date: that of the socially-crippled stalker Seymour "Sy" Parrish in the tremendously unsettling One Hour Photo.

Except for a memorable supporting role in Night at the Museum as Teddy Roosevelt, from that point on Williams was largely relegated to a string of disposable "comedies" like RV, Father's Day, License To Wed and The Big Wedding. His constant breakneck pace of making anywhere from one to six (!) movies a year seems rather telling to me. Was he a slave to public attention? Did he have addictions to feed? Was he a chronic workaholic? Did he fear obscurity if he didn't keep cranking out at least one movie a year, regardless of quality? Or he just feel as if he was running out of time?

Considering the high quality of his previous roles, I'm sure that Robin must have looked at the scripts he was being offered as a fifty / sixty year old actor as a step backwards. A recent failed trip back into the ghetto of mediocre network television must have been particularly galling.

On the surface Robin was such a happy, ebullient and positive person critics probably though that he was completely immune to their barbs. Whenever one of his films didn't live up to expectations, Robin often bore the brunt of critical wrath. Here's a particularly catty review by Peter Debruge in Variety for The Angriest Man in Brooklyn: 

"It’s movie night, and you can choose between crazy-shouty Robin Williams (think The Fisher King) and blubbering feel-good Robin Williams (like the one who discovers his son, dead from autoerotic asphyxiation, in World’s Greatest Dad). Which would you prefer? Trick question! In The Angriest Man in Brooklyn, you can have it both ways, as Williams plays the human equivalent of a bulging forehead vein who learns he has 90 minutes to live and spends the rest of the movie making amends, like Ebenezer Scrooge at the end of A Christmas Carol. Most auds will prefer have no Robin Williams at all."

But it wasn't just a career dip that killed the comedy genius. He'd been down many times before and stormed back from darker places. No, I think that the reason he's no longer with us is a lot more clinical and chronic then that.

As a kid the very concept of suicide never once crossed my mind. Even during my loneliest, most awkward times I could derive a tremendous amount of happiness from the simplest things in life. Plus, I always felt surrounded by people who loved and supported me, people who would be gutted if I were suddenly gone. But the older I get the more the concept of voluntarily opting out starts to make the tiniest smidgen of sense.

In the movie The Weatherman (not starring Robin Williams, co-incidentally, but Nick Cage back when he obviously had more discriminating taste in scripts) the main character of David (!) Spritz (!!!) is a frustrated writer who falls back into a lingering, unwanted career as a locally-derided weatherman. At one point he observes:

"I remember once imagining what my life would be like, what I'd be like. I pictured having all these qualities, strong positive qualities that people could pick up on from across the room. But as time passed, few ever became any qualities that I actually had. And all the possibilities I faced and the sorts of people I could be, all of them got reduced every year to fewer and fewer. Until finally they got reduced to one, to who I am. And that's who I am, the weather man." 

Now, depending on your outlook on life this is either very life-affirming or one of the most depressing things you'll ever read. I tend to subscribe to the later interpretation, especially in light of this particular quote by Tyler Durden in Fight Club:

"We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars, but we won't. We're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off." 

This life-long process of disappointment begins as soon as we hit adulthood and the realistic options of what we can be and do immediately starts to shrink. Then, as soon as we hit age thirty, the options get pared down again. Then, with each and every passing decade, our modern society tells us that the seemingly infinite number of choices we had as kids has now been whittled down to just a few. Or worse: only one.

I've written before about how society is less then kind to people of seniority. We live in a culture that worships youth and age discrimination is the last bastion of socially acceptable discrimination. On his current press junket for The Expendables 3, Sylvester Stallone seems to be getting an inordinate amount of "Hey, aren't you too old for this?" or "Why the fuck haven't you retired already?" questions. Who gives a shit, I say? If you don't want to watch a film starring a bunch of older actors then don't go see it. Why question his right to keep doing what he wants to do?

Robin endured a birthday recently just one day after my own and I can tell you right now: nothing makes a person more depressed than society as a whole trying to convince you that your best days are behind you. The really scary thing is that, in my estimation, Robin is one of the lucky few who "made it". He appeared to be financially solvent and he'd obviously made a slew of memorable movies that made him universally adored and effectively immortal.

Which inspires the scariest question of them all: if someone like Robin Williams can't survive seniority then what hope do any of us have?

Which is why I want to ensure that everyone who reads this doesn't harbor such thoughts for even so much as a second.

The bottom line is that Robin was struggling with illness, both mental and (as we just learned a few days ago) physical as well. Clearly he wasn't healthy and all of his high-profile connections and financial resources couldn't help him. If you've ever been unfortunate enough to lose someone to suicide you know how inevitable it can feel sometimes. A constant battery of support and treatment is needed just to keep these people alive, let alone permanently banish thoughts of self-harm from their heads. Which inspires another question: did Robin's chemical dependency deepen because of depression or was it just an effort to self medicate the chemical imbalance out of his own brain?

But here's the real truth: most of us arrive at age sixty-three or some other major milestone feeling challenged and sanguine but otherwise fairly upbeat. If you, Gentle Reader, like Robin, find yourself constantly wrestling with inescapable thoughts of downward spirals or a sense of inevitable finality that you can't overcome, then seek help now.

Remember: as dark as things look right right now the paradigm can shift and with it comes new and exciting possibilities.

Because even one new option is better then none.

EPIC HELP   There are a lot of great organizations out there to help people in crisis. S.A.V.E. (Suicide Awareness Voices of Education) is looking for a silver lining in this tragedy by trying to increase awareness about this very serious mental health epidemic.

EPIC DOC  If you don't believe that suicidal folks feel crushed by constant feelings of inevitability then you need to watch this amazing documentary. Then again, you may not if only because it's incredibly heart-breaking.

EPIC CLIP  For me, nothing encapsulates Robin's amazing gifts quite like his ability to entertain a live audience.

FAIL-URE OF WORDS   This short poem I wrote a few years ago seems to apply. But only just so...

Scouting Party

It is a wise invention
          that we leave in generations.
Heroes and icons we come to regard as immortal
                  age and blaze a trail for us.
And make the inevitable passing
                                     a little more tolerable.         

The Same Page

Pozdrowienia, Media Magnates!

Take a look at this photo:

Okay, now have a gander at this one:

Similar-looking photos have inspired the following meme:

But actually there is a difference. There's a helluva big f#@king difference.

In the first olde-timey photo, commuters are being informed about what's important by a horde of independent, muck-raking journalists. Literally everyone is on the same page. In the second photo it's much more likely that people are texting their lunch plans, watching cat videos or playing Candy Crush.

'C'mon, Dave,' I can hear you saying, 'Isn't that just a wee bit cynical?'

Okay, fine, then. Let's just say for argument's sake that everyone in the second photo is doing some independent research - *Pffffttt!!!* - on climate change. The question then becomes are they watching this:

Or this:

Let's look at another example. Say I wanna investigate the income gap in the United States. Do I go watch this:

Or do I watch a report that tries to re-brand the issue as "class warfare":

Maybe I want to check out a retrospective on the Iraq War. I could go with a learned, well-researched documentary featuring expert testimony:

Or watch an op-ed segment featuring a moron who can barely read a teleprompter:

If I'm keen to understand the current strife between the Israelis and the Palestinians I could scope out this reasonably well-balanced animated summary:

Or I could listen to a platoon of hyperbole-spewing tub-thumpers regurgitate theie politically-motivated marching orders:

Speaking of Obama, how's his new Affordable Care Act doing? Well, here's an opinion piece which features the increasingly-rare use of something called "facts":

Or I could subscribe to landed immigrant / professional contrarian Stuart Varney's view and throw the public health care baby out with the President's bathwater simply because the "progressive" ("Ewwwww!!!") desire to improve a country's standard of living should always be rejected wholesale as rank "socialism":

And herein lies the big difference.

In the first photo a clutch of well-informed citizens arrive at work, gather around the lunch table and engage in rabble-rousing conversations about society's genuine ills. In the second photo everyone is cherry-picking whatever re-enforces their own myopic view of the world, even if it's flat-out wrong.

So, until most of us get back on the same page together and the concept of "liberal" and "conservative" are abandoned in favor of the much more sensible paradigm of "right" and "wrong", the divide will continue to grow between us.

And not much of anything is gonna get done. 

EPIC NEW RULE  Leave it to Bill Maher to summarize this concept very nicely.

A "FAIL"-URE TO COMMUNICATE  So close yet so far away.

L'il Shooters

 
I've already talked about the process by which yours truly woke up one day only to discover that I'd inadvertently been transformed into a card-carrying nerd. As such, you'd do well to assume that my pre-University love life was virtually non-existent and can easily be summarized thusly:

• At around age five or six my heterosexuality was presaged by an episode of Wonder Woman starring Lynda Carter. This was confirmed several years later thanks to Erin Gray as Wilma Deering in Buck Rogers.
• In Grade Two I became smitten with a scrawny, dark-haired girl named Ann who was missing her two front teeth. So enraptured was I by this siren that I invited her over to my place one day after school to help me color my favorite Batman coloring book page. Unfortunately no sooner then we'd both sprawled out on my bedroom floor she began to willfully and almost maliciously color outside of the lines. Then, when she proceeded to render the Dark Knight's tights in a day-glo orange, I put my hand on hers, lowered her crayon and then politely asked her to leave. With that our whirlwind love affair was over and our relationship from that point on was "chilly" at best.
• Around Grade Five I developed a crush on a girl who shared her first name (if not the exact spelling) with a certain Star Wars Princess. Now, I don't know if it was her nebulous connection to "a galaxy far, far away" or the fact that she was legitimately cute, but I was enamored with her at first sight. Even though she was always polite and kind to me I'm pretty sure her feelings weren't mutual. The point is moot anyway since I was far too chickenshit to ever express my feelings to her.
• In Grade Six a girl told me that another girl "likes me". I didn't act on this hot tip either because I was too scared, too stupid or too "m'eh" to follow up on it. Many years later I'd be faced with a similar situation and my reaction then would indeed be telling.    
• Around this same time I started lugging around a massive torch for the daughter of some family friends. I remember my distinct horror when she spontaneously walked into my room and saw that I still kept my stuffed Snoopy, Garfield and Papa Smurf proudly displayed on my bed. MACHISMO FAIL.
• In Grade 11 the old "wrong girl likes me" scenario reared its addle-brained head again. An aggressive-but-cute, mini-skirt-wearing Cadet started hanging out by my locker every morning and calling my house. This really did scare the crap outta me because prior to this I'd been brainwashed to think that (A) Only guys are supposed to ask girls out (B) Girls who break this taboo must be "loose" (as if that's a bad thing) (3) You shouldn't get involved with someone unless you really, really like them. Yes, I know how idiotic this sounds. Trust me, if I could go back in time and set young me straight, I would. For starters, I'd debunk all of this bullshit Puritan / Victorian / Catholic crap I'd inherited from my parent's sexually-frustrated generation. "Go ahead, have some fun, you crazy kids!" I'd opine to younger me. "Just be careful, set realistic expectations and, for the love of everything holy, DO...NOT...HURT...HER. If you hurt her, I'll kill you myself." Honestly, this small piece of advice would have done me a world of good. 
• The real girl of my dreams in High School was a smart, sassy, no-nonsense chick with a shock of Captain Caveman hair and a penchant for playing the drums ("SQUEEEEE!!!"). In a blatant attempt to spend more time with her I offered to drive her home from school every day but even with these numerous chances I never drummed (Hah! "Drum", geddit?) up the courage to ask her out. In fact, all I could come up with were stupid music-related questions like "Sooooo...do you think that Terence Trent D'Arby could be the next, um... Michael Jackson?" What an idiot. Anyway, by the time I did screw up the courage to ask her out she was already going out with some other putz. *cue sad trombone sound* 

During all these trials and tribulations I never once thought that it was the girl's failing for not liking me. I knew that, at best, my appeal was limited. I was scrawny, nonathletic, bespectacled, geeky and had appallingly-uninspired fashion sense. Worst still: I was a sheltered and insular only child with woefully inadequate social skills. Again, I always recognized these as my own personal failings, not anyone else's.

In fact, I didn't get bitter about this until my woefully-poor track record with the opposite sex followed me  into my first year of University. This was clearly evidenced in the following heavy-handed poem that I wrote around that time:

Subtle Observation

I am content in the knowledge
   That the one you have chosen
           Has brought so much amusement
                  To so many.

(shaken heads)
(pointed fingers)
(suppressed laughter)

So it stands revealed:

You were not perfect after all.

Sure, I wasn't the best conversationalist in the world, but I was still a decent, nice person. In the immortal words of Roger A. Graham:

I'm so sad and lonely
Sad and lonely, sad and lonely
Won't some sweet mama come and take a chance with me?
'Cause I ain't so bad.

I started to get angry, depressed and kinda resentful as I watched one pretty, sweet, smart girl after another debase herself in a desperate attempt to snag the fleeting attentions of some rampant douchebag. 'I don't get it,' I'd lament to myself, usually while overdosing on depressingly-toxic levels of Leonard Cohen albums, 'I'd treat her like gold. Why would she pick him over me?'

Deep down I still knew that the onus was on me. Whatever you wanted to say about those guys, they were supremely confident or gave the air of supreme confidence. I had all the charisma of Eeyore and that followed me around like a permanent raincloud. Eventually my solitude became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

But even at my lowest point the concept of violently lashing out at another human being never once crossed my mind. Which begs the question: what was the difference between me at that age and a kid like Elliot Rodger who, back on May 23'rd, totally snapped and killed six people and injured thirteen more before finally turning the gun on himself.

Well, this is only guesswork but let's see if I can inventory some the things that I had going for me that maybe Elliot didn't:

(1) I had absolutely amazing parents who were never in absentia. They were always there for me and everything I said and did was influenced by their powerful moral barometer. No matter how busy they were they'd always take the time to check in on me, to ask me how my day went even though my responses were fleeting. The unspoken message was always clear: these people actually give a shit about me.

(2) Even though my parents were really cool people and I usually got along fine with them they were never my "friends". It wasn't their goal to be "buddies" with me and seek out my approbation and approval. Quite the opposite: they were keen disciplinarians who I feared, respected and was always loathe to cross. Since there was always one or more of them around they never felt the need to overcompensate for chronic absence. Having said that, they were supremely generous and giving people, likely because they wanted to make up for all the creature comforts they didn't have as kids.

(3) As a kid, the burden of guilt was always on me. One time back in Junior High I didn't feel like doing a project so my teacher actually picked up the phone and called my parents. Even though I could only hear half of the conversation I knew that, like Lucy, I'd have some serious splainin' to do when that phone hung up. My parents didn't get defensive and push back against the teacher or demand to know why he'd failed to motivate me. Nope, they sided, rather logically, with the educated adult professional and not the cocky, self-centered kid who somehow thought that he could get away with it. Now, they didn't always assume that I was lying or that all adults were infallible but they knew me well enough to recognize my own unique brand of bullshittery and call me out on it. There were always consequences. It's called tough love, modern day parents. Look into it.

(4) My dedicated, omnipresent parental units made sure to impart in me an empathy for everyone and everything. I couldn't even hurt a fly. Like literally, if I found a fly indoors I'd capture it, take it outside and release it. This dovetailed with an almost pathological desire to be liked. Rarely would I ever lose my temper with another human being, almost to a fault. To this day, I'll never go aggo on another person. Instead, my frustration towards idiots tend to manifest itself in the random destruction of some uncooperative inanimate object. I get this directly from my mom who used to verbally lash out at things by saying "Look, look! The Devil's in that now!"

Okay, that sounded kinda bad. For the record, Mom didn't actually believe that stubborn door locks or malfunctioning toasters were actually possessed by Satan. Or, at least I don't think she did. Hmmmm...

(5) Related to this last point, the cold, antiseptic interface of social media didn't exist when I was a kid. If you wanted to be an asshole to someone you either had to do it right to their face, bitch 'em out over the phone or talk shit about them behind their back to whoever was within earshot. Nowadays you can easily annihilate someone's reputation via a series of malicious texts, Facebook posts or Tweets. And the scariest thing about this is that you never have to witness first hand the pain and misery you cause to your intended target. In fact, if you're particularly bloodless bastard, your conscience won't even feel a twinge. Indeed, inflicting anonymous digital harm on someone isn't just cruelly effective it's virtually consequence-free. Which leads me to believe that the first victim in a technology-obsessed world is empathy. 

(6) Sadly, mine was a gentler, more naive time. Not by much, mind you, but by just enough. It's almost comical to look back on alarmist Eighties-era news report claiming that the action movies I watched or the abstract, pixelated video games I played were "too violent". This is especially true when you compare those  antiquated, almost quaint pursuits to the today's cinematic torture porn or console-based killing simulators. Now, don't get me wrong, I would never, ever blame a mass shootings on violent media but I am calling out dumb, permissive, soft-as-shit parents who let their kids marinate in solution-based violence as soon as they can hold their heads upright. I'm no child psychologist but I can't imagine how exposure to this at a tender and formative age could do anything but irreparable harm yo your kid's psyche. Yet time and time again I hear stories of numb-nut, trying-too-hard parents unquestionably giving their kids the latest Grand Theft Auto or obliviously taking them to see Silent Hill: Revelation 3-D. Cripes, people like that need to be sterilized.

(7) "Guns? Where? Where!?!" In the United States, where firearms are more commonplace then Pokemon cards, a whole lotta folks are pretty durned obsessed with an antiquated Second Amendment which they believe gives them the right to pack more heat then Neo in The Matrix. After some independent research, I discovered to my shock and awe that a lot of these people maintain an over-compensatory stockpile of military hardware not for hunting or home defense but in case they need to overthrow the freakin' government if and when it gets too corrupt. Notwithstanding the compelling case that the government actually is totally corrupt, this still doesn't explain how a bunch of camo-wearing yahoos are supposed to go toe-to-toe with F-22 Raptor stealth fighter jets, M1 Abrams tanks and highly-trained troops armed with frikkin' lasers. Which begs the question: is this sort of rampant paranoia worth the sheer proliferation and easy accessibility that kids seem to have to guns? Sure, NRA types like to cite the odd, rare example where a "good guy" with a gun stops a "bad guy" with a gun but are these same people aware of just how many "bad guys" out there apparently don't give a shit (see SOCIETAL FAIL below). Sure, we've got a bunch of penis-deprived neckbeards exercising their "open-carry" rights by "guarding" department stores, restaurants and coffee shops with AR-15's strapped to their backs but do they realize how many normal people they're terrorizing by doing this? Sorry, but until you can guarantee the mental health of every single private sector gun owner in the United States, hardware like this should only be the possession of the military or law enforcement. Personally speaking, the only weapons I ever saw as a kid were BB guns and my dad's 10-gauge shotgun which was permanently ensconced on the basement wall. For all intents and purposes, that sucker was purely ornamental.

***

I really wanted to write this entry from a positive perspective. I didn't want to point fingers at Elliot Rodger, shine a light on his self-absorbed "manifesto" or turn his clearly-suffering parents into pariahs. I also didn't want to speculate about our own recent regional rampage or give that particular nut any more publicity. Instead I really wanted pay homage to the resources that were there me me as a kid. Resources that allowed me to turn out reasonably well-adjusted despite growing up under vaguely similar circumstances.

I'll leave it up to you, Gentle Reader, to discern the lessons inherent in my story and determine what if any of it still applies to our wacky modern-day world.

EPIC OBSERVATION Louis C.K. explains in his own inimitable and characteristically-hilarious way why we're all becoming emotionally dead inside and and increasingly callous to our fellow human beings.

EPIC LOGIC  Some mo' science, courtesy of political comedian John Oliver:

SOCIETAL FAIL There have been one-hundred and twenty five mass shootings in the U.S. since the start of the year, including one that just happened two days ago in Miami. Nope, no problems here.

The Quotable Harper

Hail, Fellow Stand-On-Guardians!

I've always been adamantly opposed to the concept of Steven Joseph Harper as our Prime Minister primarily because my memory extends back further then ten years. I still remember when Harper was a card-carrying member of the ultra-right-wing Reform Party, which gave him the political solidarity to say the following idiotic things regarding:

• The Unemployed - "I don't feel particularly bad for many of these people."
• Human Rights Commissions - "An attack o­n our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society."
• Social Assistance for Child Poverty - "I was sought out as a rare public figure to oppose such projects" and “providing for the poor is a provincial, not a federal responsibility."
• Our Free Universal Health Care - "The best system means having a system where you have as many tiers as possible and you bring in as many health-care dollars into this country as possible." 
• A Proposal by the Progressive Conservative Party Advocating Spousal Benefits for Same-Sex Couples - "What I hope they learn is not to get into it."

Mercifully, the Reformers never achieved national traction, partly because it was led by walking punchline and Howdy Doody impersonator Preston Manning but mainly because most Canadians found their ideals to be completely and utterly repugnant. On January 14'th 1997 Harper jumped off this sinking ship and landed in a comfy Vice Presidential lifeboat provided by the National Citizen's Coalition, an ultra-conservative think tank. Within a year he was the organization's President.

During this time, Harper revealed even more of his Objectivist / Neo-Con / Ayn Randian leanings. In June of 1997 he was invited by the the American equivalent of the N.C.C., the Council for National Policy, to give a presentation in Montreal. Here are just a few choice tidbits from that notorious screed:

• "Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it."
• The United States and the growing Neo-Con movement "is a light and an inspiration to people in this country and across the world."
• "It may not be true, but it's legendary that if you're like all Americans, you know almost nothing except for your own country. Which makes you probably knowledgeable about one more country than most Canadians."
• "The Liberal party is a moderate Democrat, a type of Clinton-pragmatic Democrat. It's moved in the last few years very much to the right on fiscal and economic concerns, but still believes in government intrusion in the economy where possible, and does, in its majority, believe in fairly liberal social values.
  In the last Parliament, [the Liberal Party] enacted comprehensive gun control. There is an important caveat to its liberal social values. For historic reasons that I won't get into, the Liberal party gets the votes of most Catholics in the country, including many practicing Catholics."
• "The NDP is kind of proof that the Devil lives and interferes in the affairs of men."

But it's what Harper had to say about the Progressive Conservative party that's the most telling:

"Then there is the Progressive Conservative party, the PC party, which won only 20 seats. Now, the term Progressive Conservative will immediately raise suspicions in all of your minds. It should. It's obviously kind of an oxymoron. But the Progressive Conservative is very definitely liberal Republican. These are people who are moderately conservative on economic matters, and in the past have been moderately liberal, even sometimes quite liberal on social policy matters. They were in favour of gay rights officially, officially for abortion on demand. This explains one of the reasons why the Reform party has become such a power."

Nothing better illustrates the differences between the original PC party and the current "Harper-ized" version of it. In other words, if you've been voting for Harper's "Conservatives" just because yer Daddy and yer Daddy's Daddy voted PC, then STAHP already! They have nothing to do with one another.

During this time, Harper had a really prolific period of running on at the mouth. Here are just a few more verbal droppings:

• "I, too, am one of these angry westerners. We may love Canada but Canada does not love us. Let's make (Alberta) strong enough that the rest of the country is afraid to threaten us."
• "You've got to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada: people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society."
• "Canada appears content to become a second-tier socialistic country, boasting ever more loudly about its economy and social services to mask its second-rate status."

With their national brand permanently damaged, the Reform Party was rebooted in 2000 as the Alliance Party. But within one short year, these wannabe Republicans were already in trouble. Under the volatile leadership of grinning mannequin / creationist blockhead / outspoken loose cannon Stockwell Day, the fledgeling party quickly stumbled out of the gate.

These Alliance goons probably would have gone the same way as their predecessors if it hadn't been for the intervention of former Reform MP Ian McClelland who initiated what amounts to a leadership coup in June of 2001. In order to get things back on track, McClelland needed to install the perfect candidate: someone so completely and boringly milquetoast, someone so incredibly dull that he provoked absolutely no emotional response from anyone who looked at him. Someone who was a veritable black hole of banality. 

"My cat's breath smells like cat food."

Ergo, Stephen Harper was lured back onto the political spotlight in August of 2001. Despite the fact that he was perceived as a measured moderate when compared to Stockwell Day, he floated some pretty nutbar  ideas at the time:

• Even though, just a few short years earlier, he expressed concern that Stockwell Day was alienating voters due to his ultra-right-wing position on social issues, in March of 2002 Harper hoped to drum up a support base "similar to what George Bush tapped".
• On May 29, 2002 Harper famously uttered: "I think in Atlantic Canada, because of what happened in the decades following Confederation, there is a culture of defeat that we have to overcome. Atlantic Canada's culture of defeat will be hard to overcome as long as Atlantic Canada is actually physically trailing the rest of the country."
• Also from 2002: “I'm not ashamed to say that, in caucus, I have more pro-life M.P.s supporting me than supporting Stockwell Day.”
• He also kept hammering away at his distaste for our non-corporate health care system: “The private provision of publicly insured (health care) services should be permitted. The monopoly of provision of services is not a value that, in and of itself, is worth preserving.” He also continued to attack the Canada Health Act by saying that it “rules out private, public-delivery options. It rules out co-payment, pre-payment and all kinds of options that are frankly going to have to be looked at if we're going to deal with the challenges that the system faces.”

As we all well know, McClelland's gambit hoodwinked everyone and in May of 2002 Harper became the official Leader of the Opposition.

During this time, war-mongering chickenhawks like George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, Paul Wolfowitz and Colin Powell were tub-thumping for an illegal war in Iraq. Pretty soon both Stephen Harper and Stockwell Day were united in their mutual appreciation for American-flavored backside. Here are a few particularly scary quotes from those chaotic days:

• From January 2003: "This party will not take its position based on public opinion polls. We will not take a stand based o­n focus groups. We will not take a stand based o­n phone-in shows or householder surveys or any other vagaries of public opinion. In my judgment Canada will eventually join with the allied coalition if war on Iraq comes to pass. The government will join, notwithstanding its failure to prepare, its neglect in co-operating with its allies, or its inability to contribute. In the end it will join out of the necessity created by a pattern of uncertainty and indecision. It will not join as a leader but unnoticed at the back of the parade."
• From April 2003: "We support the war effort and believe we should be supporting our troops and our allies and be there with them doing everything necessary to win." 
• Later that same month: "We should have been there shoulder to shoulder with our allies. Our concern is the instability of our government as an ally. We are playing again with national and global security matters."
• Also that same month: "(referring to a fellow M.P. as an 'Idiot') was probably not an appropriate term, but we support the war effort and believe we should be supporting our troops and our allies and be there with them doing everything necessary to win."
• In May of 2003: "The world is now unipolar and contains o­nly o­ne superpower. Canada shares a continent with that superpower. In this context, given our common values and the political, economic and security interests that we share with the United States, there is now no more important foreign policy interest for Canada than maintaining the ability to exercise effective influence in Washington so as to advance unique Canadian policy objectives."
• Even after some perspective on the issue had been gleaned by August of 2003, Harper remained adamantly pro-war: "On the justification for the war, it wasn't related to finding any particular weapon of mass destruction. In our judgment, it was much more fundamental. It was the removing of a regime that was hostile, that clearly had the intention of constructing weapons systems. I think, frankly, that everybody knew the post-war situation was probably going to be more difficult than the war itself. Canada remains alienated from its allies, shut out of the reconstruction process to some degree, unable to influence events. There is no upside to the position Canada took."

No upside, huh? How 'bout preserving our international reputation as humanitarians and peacemakers? How 'bout making sure that our sons and daughters didn't needlessly perish in a completely illegal war of occupation? How 'bout not contributing to an economy based on war profiteering?

Sorry, but this wahoo is so far removed from my definition traditional Canadian values, it makes my friggin' head spin.

Harper soon realized that the Alliance Party held very limited appeal for most rational-thinking Canadians and vote-splitting between two right-leaning parties would certainly jeopardize his chances. As such, a Frankensteinian marriage was proposed between the Alliance and the nigh-comatose Progressive Conservative party, which had been devastated under the arrogant watch of Brian Mulrooney.

So, on January 12, 2004, Harper stepped down as Leader of the Opposition and two months later he became the inaugural chief of the newly re-christened Conservative Party of Canada. And just like that, the PC party of yore was gone, replaced by the political equivalent of a pod person from Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Despite the fact that Finance Minister Paul Martin had inherited a Liberal Party fractured by internal conflict, Harper couldn't quite seal the deal in the federal election of June 2004.

Around this time he also served up the following tasty soundbites:

• In March of 2004 he described himself as a "libertarian", which is how most Tea Party members in the U.S. self-identify. Even though I agree with Harper in that government shouldn't impose its values upon its citizenry, I do think that the federal government has a pivotal role to play in safeguarding people from the creeping abuses of crony capitalism. For example, if a single working mom who can't afford privatized health insurance gets plowed down in the street by Stephen Harper's campaign tour bus only a greedy, cruel asshole would deny her free emergency medical treatment. And so long as there's even one unethical corporation out there making harmful products, poisoning the environment or screwing over their employees for a few extra profit points then we need a higher authority in the form of government to step in, investigate, punish and legislate some ethics if need be. Harper's desire to remove corporate regulations is like getting rid of all parole officers.
• To qualify his position, one month later Harper stated that "We must aim to make [Canada] a lower tax jurisdiction than the United States". Of course, in more recent years we've painfully familiar with his strategy to enact this madness: by completely gutting the sort of critically helpful social programs that improve our quality of life and keep us all safe. 
• In February of 2005 he publicly stated: "Same sex marriage is not a human right. (Undermining) the traditional definition of marriage is an assault on multiculturalism and the practices in those communities." Wow, hyperbole much?

Ol' Stevie Boy finally got his big break when the Sponsorship Scandal broke wide open. Now, keep in mind this was back in 2006, when the media still had fangs and people were engaged in reality and apparently gave a shit. Harper manged to parlay this into his very own Reichstag Fire and pretty soon the once-mighty Liberal Party was in shambles.

So it came to pass that on January 24th Paul Martin conceded defeat to Harper in the 2006 Federal Election and two weeks later he was sworn in as the twenty-second Prime Minister of Canada. His first address to Parliament in April was a major sneak preview of coming attractions:

"I would like to acknowledge and thank a number of people. First, I would like to pay tribute to our head of state, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, whose lifelong dedication to duty and self-sacrifice have been a source of inspiration and encouragement to the many countries that make up the Commonwealth and to the people of Canada."

This prompted Toronto Star journalist Graham Fraser to observe that Harper's presentation was "one of the most monarchist speeches a Canadian prime minister has given since John Diefenbaker."

The message was crystal clear: Canada is intrinsically British and y'all better be ready for some olde-skool Margaret Thatcher-style Conservatism.   


EPIC SHOWDOWN  Can you image the shape we'd be in if Harper was in power back then? Just thinking about it terrifies me...

 
A FAILURE OF CON-MUNICATION   In 2011 a legion of Conservative drones were tasked to assemble all of Harper's most controversial quotes in one five-hundred page document. This was then used to formulate rebuttal strategies, a catch-all contingency plan if the press or political rivals tried to expose his true colors.