Archives for posts with tag: class

Yes, vulture capitalist Thomas Perkins is a motherf***er of the highest degree, one who f***s his own mother, his wife’s mother, their respective mothers, and indeed, any mothers he can lay his scummy little mitts on. Adding to that is the sense of entitlement to the mothers of the world, an outraged response to anyone who suggests that he leave all those mothers alone, and a proposal that he and others like him have laws passed reserving all American mothers for themselves alone. An honest motherf***er is he.

Mr. Perkins made an analogous proposal recently: that only taxpayers be allowed to vote, and that the richer you are, the more votes you can cast. Said it straight up and did not try to pass it off as a joke. And he has not yet walked it back as he did (partly, anyway) his comparison of people like you and me to Nazis. This is what the rich motherf***er really thinks.

And he isn’t the only one: five Supreme Court “justices” said pretty much the same thing when they imposed the Citizens United ruling on the nation. That ruling made money into speech, meaning that those with more money have a right to more speech. This is the wealthy trying to take over our government, and having some success at it.

But unlike Tommy Boy, most of the other motherf***ers don’t admit to being f***ers of mothers. They talk about “freedom”, and “unfettered capitalism” and other such buzzword-laden tripe, and pretend that their vision is not at all Orwellian. But they want the same thing he wants, make no mistake about it: a plutocracy, wherein the rich rule the rest of us.

But honest or not, he wants to f*** our mothers. And the rest of us. So f*** him.

(Next time: motherf***ers crying about being “attacked”.)

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Racial equality wasn’t all that big a deal to the plutocracy (AKA the 1%), because they weren’t going to lose any money from it. But when Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. started the Poor People’s Campaign, that’s when s*** got real. A multi-racial, cross-class movement for economic justice? That was gonna cost some change.

And if you think about it, the leaders of every movement that tried to empower the many and free them from the oppression of the few have been so treated. Jesus, and Gandhi, to name a few. Others survived (like Mandela) but suffered horribly as they were made an example of by the 1% of their day.

Because ultimately the color wars, the culture wars, the party wars, all are of relatively little import to those who would use the world as their own private slush fund. They matter to US, we who are not of the Plutocratic Elite, but all they care about is cash and control. When wealth and power are put on the table, that is when people start getting killed, to protect the fortunes and privileges of the few. If they can mute the voices of freedom and justice, they will do so: but kill they will, if they deem it expedient and to their own benefit.

The leaders of Occupy managed to avoid King’s fate, because they refused (wisely) to have one single person as their capital-L Leader. Their message was marginalized by less drastic means. But marginalized it was, because when it comes to wealth, any and all means will be used to maintain the positions of the Plutocrats.

Remember, Gentle Reader, as you honor Dr. King on this day: he did not only die because he wanted people of color to be free: he died because he wanted all of us to share in the fruits of our labor. That is why he was murdered, as were other warriors before him. And we can best honor him by carrying on that fight.

Mister Blunt and Cranky

PS: This is not intended as slight on those who have bravely fought for justice based on color, creed, class and culture. Those are serious struggles and are very important to the vast majority of us. This post is about the economic aspect of Dr. King’s legacy, which is ofttimes overlooked.

Remember these Christian Soldiers?Image

Yep, the ones who think Jesus wants us to pack hidden heat so as to waste each other as needed. Them are the ones.

This week, they’re running a “Constitution Class”. The good Lord knows what they’re  teaching each other, but if their “understanding” of Constitutional law is anything like their “understanding” of Holy Scripture, this is some pretty scary stuff.

No picture of the Church sign this time: we considered the wisdom of pulling into the parking lot of a church full of gun-crazed Fundagelical loons, any number of whom are likely carrying weapons, and we decided that was NOT the prudent course of action. Kind of like driving by an Al-Quaida training camp – do you REALLY want to drop in on them?

Mr. B & C

P.S. A point of clarification: These zeebs are free to use their First and Second Amendment rights, as we see them doing (Mr. Blunt and Cranky is a Presbyterian who uses all of his Constitutional rights, after all). The reason separation of church and state was brought up here is this: entirely too many Americans (including elected and appointed “representatives” and officials at all levels and in all branches of government) want to trash the Establishment clause and make our nation into a Fundagelical Theocracy.

One thing our Founders knew well were the dangers of such a form of government, but too many of us have forgotten. So when we see churches like this one arming themselves and seeking political power, we need to be aware of the threat they pose

Mister Blunt and Cranky has been mulling over the Presidents he has dealt with in his adult life, and what made some of them better or worse than others.  He has come to the conclusion that the best Prexies were the ones who understood what it meant to be an average American, and the worst were the ones that did not.

Starting with the first one he ever voted for: Gerald Ford.  The child of a broken, working-class home, he had a simple but demanding job  as Nixon’s replacement – calm the country down after Tricky’s constitutional crime spree, and did that job well.

Jimmy Carter: Born into affluence and comfort, he was a brilliant intellect who never really connected with voters. After leaving the White House, he showed how much more he was capable of, but while in office, his record was mixed.

Ronald Reagan: came from modest means and showed an amazing ability to connect with voters. Pity he drank so much Supply-Side Kool-Aid, but one cannot deny that he sussed what it was like to be an average schmoe.

Bush The Smarter: Born into wealth and privilege, he stepped out of that comfort zone for a while to be a war hero (yes, he really was), and then stepped back into the bubble. A good man but a mediocre president.

Billy Bob Clinton: A trailer trash horndog but a bona-fide genius. If he could have kept it in his trousers, he would have been an excellent President. Still, he did a good job of stabilizing the economy, cutting the deficit , moving people off the dole and into the workforce. Bubba understood life on the margins and in the under-and-middle classes.

Bush The Dumber: Exemplified all that is wrong with being born in the bubble of privilege and never venturing out of it. Tried everything his daddy succeeded at, and either fumbled through it or failed miserably. Wrecked the economy, enabled terrorist attacks, trashed our freedoms, and turned the United States into a bankrupt pariah state.

Barack Obama: Child of a broken home, barely above the poverty line at times and shuttled around the globe willy-nilly by a platoon of relatives. Devoted (or dumb) enough to run for President during a national crisis. Well-intentioned and able to understand the plight of the lower and middle classes. Has done a good job of triage and trauma care on a nation that was left bleeding and broke by the previous idiot.

Here’s the conclusion: the more humble your childhood origins, the better President you will make. Remember that as you choose between the lower-middle-class mixed-race kid and the snotty rich brat this November.

Mr. B & C