It's Biden's Fault

 IT’S BIDEN’S FAULT

Once again the Republicans have the perfect opportunity to blame Biden; and just before the midterms too.  It’s the drought.  It has to be Biden’s fault; he has offended the rain gods and we need to get someone in there that will placate them.

It’s really very simple.  If one follows the twitter feeds of Ernst, Grassley, and Feenstra, whatever the problem is, of whatever nature, it can be laid at the feet of the Democrats.  It’s much like a tent revival meeting:  no one is there to be converted, only to be reinvigorated with the faith.  

And it is Biden’s fault that the Mississippi is running dry and the corn and beans can’t be moved south like they are  supposed to be moved.  The people buying corn and beans from our Iowa farmers are stuck and if they are stuck, so are the farmers.  The only thing left to do is to complain - - and after prices had come back too.  Can’t win for losing as they say and it’s got to be somebody’s fault and I say it’s Biden’s.  Has to be, he is president.

So - - we need to elect Republicans - - they will fill the rivers with water and all will be well once again.  The barges will be moving and money will be flowing.  It takes one to get the other and if farmers are not getting paid for their corn and beans, then you know it is Biden’s fault.  After all, isn’t he in charge of the money?  And if you can’t move the corn and beans, whatever it is they make from those substances is going to be really expensive and then it’s INFLATION  and we know that’s Biden’s fault since our senators and congress people have been telling us that now for a year and a half.

It doesn’t matter if there is a war in Ukraine, most people don’t even know where Ukraine is nor that it grows a huge percentage of the world’s wheat.  It simply doesn’t matter:  it only matters how I am affected by prices of food, or even worse, its unavailability.  I only care about me - - this is the mantra of the revival.  And if I am affected, it has to be Biden’s fault because Ernst. Grassley, and Feenstra wouldn’t lie about something like that.  So get out there and vote.  You need to support these people.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

The Family

 THE FAMILY

We all know that "the family" is the foundation of civilization, right?  Its importance has been touted for generations as the cornerstone of all that is proper and good.  The family is important; family values are both necessary and good.  What can be more important than "the family"?

That may be the official proclamation, but we all know that it just isn't so.  The family has been and continues to be an impediment to all that is deemed valuable in a capitalist society and those in power understand this fully.  We, here in the United States, and Iowa in particular, do all we can to disrupt family life, make it difficult to maintain, and ensure that relationships between partners, spouses, children etc. are short and acrimonious.  

Before you say that I am an apostate and have no clue, let's go into a little detail about the State's view of marriage and other forms of partnership.  Divorce, or what they now call dissolution of marriage, is now very convenient; the legislature has made it quite simple.  One doesn't even need to hire an attorney any longer.  The documents needed are online and downloadable.  Quite easy really.  One can divorce oneself.  And then the statutes regarding protective orders where a person can go see a judge and get a protective order without an immediate hearing requiring the other party to be out of the house work really well in getting rid of an unwanted spouse when you can't wait for the dissolution.

The prime example though, and one of long standing, are Child-in-Need of Assistance proceedings.  Iowa has a Juvenile Code that is used extensively to break up families by taking children away from their parents.  This is done in every county of Iowa, probably weekly.  Kids are being yanked out of the home for various reasons by officials called "child protection workers".  This is another term for child snatchers.  And in order to get their kids back, the parents are required to go to through innumerable exercises visiting various counsellers and therapists and drug addiction gurus, and begging the court to let them have their children back all of which is usually pointless unless they do exactly what they are told for an extended period of time which for most people is unlikely or impossible (doing what you're told to do is the most important part).  Through the juvenile system, the State has honed its ability to destroy families; clearly with the understanding that those families who are now childless didn't deserve kids or family life in the first place; "we'll just give those kids to someone else".  And besides if both parents have to work at McDonald's to pay the rent, who's to watch the kids anyway?

The more recent efforts by the State to break up families are the domestic abuse statutes.  Domestic abuse is now similar to OWIs (DUIs), the more convictions you have the more severe the penalty.  All it takes is a call to the police, a statement "he hit me", and a red mark (especially on the neck) and off he goes to jail with a no contact order to follow that he can't go home and he can't contact his significant other, nor his children since he has to call mom to talk to the kids.   In addition to the above and since those examples may not be enough, a bevy of crimes have been passed regarding elderly abuse, sex abuse, child abuse, and all kinds of other abuse usually committed in the family room in front of the TV all of which result in someone being charged with Child Endangerment.  

You have to give it to the people in charge in this State, no family is safe.  We clearly find families unnecessary.  So in summary, it is clear that the State of Iowa is not pro-family but anti-family and does everything in its power to end this silly pro-family attitude that we all seem to still have that family is all important and is the bedrock of our civilization.  Those ideas are  nonsense and always have been and the legislature of Iowa understands this.  

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Loser!

 LOSER!

Don't you just love a loser?  I know I do.  There is no easier mark for ridicule than a loser.  Ridiculing the loser is the converse of idolizing the winner.  You can't have one without the other, and it's fulfilled by athletic contests, or really contests of any kind where there is a winner and a loser.  A win-lose proposition.  The varieties of these situations are almost endless and new ones appear regularly - - for instance, cornhole, ax throwing, and pickleball.  In each endeavor we have winners and losers because we have made it a GAME.

TV and the internet take a bad rap for the blame of a thoughtless and meandering public.  TV and the internet do have the ability to gain a mesmerized public; one fully engaged, emotionally fixated.  A sporting contest does that, whether it be a horse race or a football game.  One obtains a favorite, one or the other.  The vast majority of games have two participants so picking a side is relatively easy.  Easier the better actually, not a lot of thought needs to go into the project of picking a favorite.

Now you note, that the person so engrossed is not playing the game - - a spectator merely.  The people playing the game are also totally engrossed in the game - - they are playing win/lose.  Winners believe they have reached the pinnacle; losers, and they are of equal numbers, obsess on the process of becoming a winner.  Winning is everything as Vince Lombardi said.  And so it is.  A winner is on top; a winner has succeeded; a winner is not a failure; a winner has glory.  It is the "feeling", the unparalleled feeling of victory.

But back to the losers.  Do you realize how many losers there are in this country?  Probably more than can be tabulated readily.  As it turns out, everyone who plays is either a winner or a loser - - that's just the way it is.  So, the real question is; is it worthwhile to be either a loser or a winner?  What does it mean anyway?  So you win a game of basketball or a game of yard croquet.  Is your life given meaning by winning or losing the game?  For many it would seem to be so.  I never felt I was a more complete human being after winning a basketball game nor did I feel incomplete as a human being if our team lost.  Ok, so we lost; I would have rather won than lost, but tomorrow it won't matter.  But I'm thinking that I may be an anomaly.

If to be idealized is the goal, then winning is necessary.  If winning is what gives your life meaning, so be it.  You are in the half of winners rather than the half of losers - - and it is so ephemeral.  Today a winner, tomorrow a loser - - never fails.  But those moments of glory are sweet and memorable and give our lives some meaning.  It fills that empty void of meaningless which normally clings to us throughout our lives.  So, ok, let us have our moments of glory; it really causes little harm and it makes our day.  And for the losers?  There is always tomorrow.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Slavery in America

 

SLAVERY IN AMERICA

On 1 January 1863, Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation ending slavery in the United States, right?  Wrong.  The United States has never given up slavery and neither have the several states.  It simply has moved from private ownership to government ownership - - socialism at work as some would say not knowing anything about socialism.

The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

Article I, Section 23 of the Constitution of the State of Iowa provides as follows:

"There shall be no slavery in this State; nor shall there be involuntary servitude, unless for the punishment of crime."

There you have it folks, slavery and involuntary servitude still exists here in the land of the free.  If you have been convicted of a crime, that is.  So what do we do, we make more crimes every year.  Our legislatures are busy thinking up new ways to make more its citizens less free; it is an ongoing process - - more crimes, more involuntary servitude. 

A major difference between slavery before 1 January 1863 and slavery currently is that prior to 1 January 1863, slavery had mostly an economic function.  Today it is mostly political - - a tried and true method of controlling the public.  If you are convicted of a crime, you are subject to fines, imprisonment, probation, parole, sex offender registry, public identification, a loss of government entitlements, and probably others.  In other words, you are controlled by the government rather than by a plantation owner - - you have to obey.

Of course, one of the elements of the current involuntary servitude (we will call it that rather than slavery in that it doesn't sound quite as bad) is economic.  There is always the requirement that one be employed.  We must keep the economy moving at all costs and fast food places need workers all the time; they simply can't seem to keep employees very long and people on probation or parole required to seek employment are perfect candidates.

In conclusion, it really means a lot if and when people actually think about  the world they live in.  Most do not.  We Americans have been trained to believe that we are free - the most free of anybody on the planet - at some point we really ought to consider this statement rather than just accept what we are being told.  We have approximately 25% of the incarcerated people in the world.  Of the entire world mind you, not just China or Russia or Brazil or Iran or India but of the whole world entire.  We have several million on probation and parole; we have several million more who have no drivers licenses because they owe the government money or committed some infraction. 

So all I'm saying is, that before we start spouting off about how free we are, we give it some thought. 

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

What's It to You?

 WHAT'S IT TO YOU?

Representative Randy Feenstra, one of our more enlightened brethren, is stating unequivocally, that California liberals have no right to tell Iowa farmers they can't raise their livestock in a sadistic manner.  Apparently what happened in California, the majority of the people in a referendum passed a requirement that pork or chicken can't be sold in the State if the hogs and chickens are raised in a sadistic fashion which apparently many are because it's the most profitable manner in which to raise them.

The allegations are that many hogs are confined in crates where they can not turn around or possibly even lie down - - they can't move. The pork industry association claims that few US hog producers would then be able to sell pork in California without significant capital investment.  All I can say about this is, "Go Randy!"  Money matters, hog treatment doesn't.  After all, Randy is correct when he says that humane treatment of the animals we eat is a liberal fantasy and just won't fly here in Iowa.  Here we know what is important - - profit.  If some sow has to suffer for it, so be it, it can't be helped and west coast liberals should mind their own business.

Unfortunately, west coast liberals are minding their own business, a fact that Randy seems to miss.  What Californians are saying to us here in Iowa is that they have decided that they don't want our product.  They aren't telling us we can't raise our livestock in a sadistic manner, they are simply telling us they want no part of it.  Pretty simple really.  Do what you want, just don't involve us.  Apparently Randy believes Californians can not tell us how to raise hogs and chickens, but we can tell Californians what they can buy and eat.  That's one thing you have to give  Randy - - consistency.

Now if we are to define liberals as people who, one, do not want fellow creatures raised in a sadistic manner, or two, are against profiting from it, I'll have to admit I'm with the liberals on this one.  We, here in Iowa,  have passed numerous laws in the past few years making it a crime to mistreat pets, which to my understanding are animals.  How is it then, that hog producers and chicken producers are exempt from these laws?  If you treat a non-human critter in a sadistic manner as a crime, it doesn't seem particularly appropriate that such treatment can't be considered criminal if it is a farm business.  Our legislature has even passed laws making it a crime investigating such farming activities.  Making a profit doesn't seem to me as something that should be the deciding factor in what is criminal and what is just business.  

We have gone so far as to be outraged by puppy mills.  How can this be?  Puppy mills, people in the business of raising dogs for sale, are no different than hog producers and chicken producers except for one salient fact - - they are not considered farmers.  So how is it that we are outraged by the treatment of puppies; after all it is a profitable enterprise - - it is a business just like hogs and chickens.  So let's just get over it - - if these puppies are treated sadistically and then killed if not sold, it's just business just like raising hogs and chickens.

We need a little consistency here (as usual):  either treating animals sadistically is criminal or it isn't.  So forget about California; let's decide for ourselves how we want to proceed.  Iowa for Iowans is what I say.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

Election Time

 ELECTION TIME

We will have another election, and another and another.  There will be more elections and in those elections we will normally be asked to choose between two candidates.  This is not a democracy in any form; it is simply an election.  When I write this, I am visualizing our Iowa legislature.  We elect people to "represent us" in the Iowa legislature.  What we actually have is a group of people who have no interest in the people who elect them other than for their vote in the next election.  

We elect people to enact laws but once elected give every indication of not knowing anything:  i.e with little understanding of the world around them or where it is going.  The world is going somewhere with or without their acknowledgement; and they will be on it for the ride whether they acknowledge it or not.  If you want to call it the Ark or you want to call it 'global warming'; it's coming for us.  Don't you know - - history repeats itself.

The flood and the ark really are a good example of what happens when we displease the gods, whichever god or gods you are inclined to have belief in.  The first story of the flood occurred in Gilgamesh, eons before it was adopted by the Jewish people.  Basically most everyone was killed and the human race started all over again.  This could very well be a recurring event in human history on this planet.  Wouldn't that be something!  We all get wiped out because we have displeased the gods - - again!

A difference, it seems to me, from the people of the flood is that we can see it coming. Although we really don't know that they didn't know.  There is no indication that the Akkadians or the  folks who lived with Noah understood the meaning of the term, "the end times".  However, one would have to assume that Noah's neighbors would have to have given the matter some thought - - the guy's really crazy or maybe we should get us a boat just in case. 

This time we can see it coming.  A planetary crisis is on the horizon and we can see it; we can visualize it; we have people telling us it is coming.  So what do we do about it?  Nothing.  We ignore it.  It must have been the same in Akkadian times or in the time of Noah.  What are you talking about?  A flood?  Give me a break already - - don't be stupid!

I only ask one thing, can't we elect someone who will actually acknowledge what is looming before us rather than worry that their children will realize gay and transgender people exist or that black people want to be full citizens or that there are people who would rather be high than participate in our current work-a-day world?  Is it really too much to ask?  

Richard E H Phelps

Mingo 

The Sporting Life

 

THE SPORTING LIFE

Having a sporting life is normally just  being a fan. Of course, one can play pickleball on a Sunday afternoon, but isn't that for exercise for old people?  I'm a fan.   Rooting for my favorite teams, one in each sport of course, is not engaging in sports, it accomplishes nothing - - it is a nil.  When I am watching a sporting event whether it be professional or my kid playing soccer or  whiffle ball, I accomplish nothing.  And this is the purpose of sports for those who are not actually participating in the "game": to accomplish nothing.

The premier example would be the World Cup.  It was difficult not to stop in, to one channel or another, to see who was winning, who was expected to win, and the crowds present to live and die with their country's team.  And then to see the crowds swell in cities around the world as their team had one success after another.  Another example is American football which currently has religious overtones and glues the eyes of millions to the screens to watch game after game of college and professional football every weekend (and now during the week).

And if it is not football, then basketball, baseball, softball, track and field, and hundreds, and I do mean hundreds, of other "sports" all the way to cornhole.  Watching a sporting event of any kind can be intoxicating, thrilling, depressing, exhilarating, and murderous - - it is feeling producing.  A sporting event produces feelings. It has as its function the production of feelings which produces the most important function of all, the production of income.

The latest sale of a professional football team will reach a billion dollars.  Who pays a billion dollars for a football team?  Those who want a second billion dollars.  A billion dollars is a lot of cash.  Those with a billion dollars understand that in order to make a billion dollars you have to have a billion dollars.  Money reproduces - - it has a high gestation rate.  And the production of feelings is a first-rate method of grabbing that second billion.

The other benefit of sporting activities is that it restrains millions of people from doing anything at all for significant periods of time.  If a person is sitting in front of the TV or in the stands, he or she is not causing anyone any trouble, nor is he or she producing anything worthwhile.  They are simply engaged in the creation of feelings: fleeting,  intense, self-generating feelings.  

This is our current life - - our feelings.  I can feel depressed in the first quarter of a football game, hopeful in the second quarter, anxious in the third quarter, and gleeful in the fourth.  All in two hours - - how great is that? - - a lifetime of emotion in two hours.  Better than a 800 hundred page novel, that's for sure.

However, my understanding, my appreciation of life, the content of my knowledge has not increased in any sense having just watched the Yankees beat the Minnesota Twins.  My understanding, my appreciation of life, my store of knowledge has increased not at all having seen Judge hit another homer to win the game.  Nothing in my life has improved nor lessened because of the two hours I spent sitting in front of a TV with or without friends, with or without food and drink.  

What I have accomplished is spending two hours of a finite lifetime watching someone else play a game.  When one gives this just a little bit of thought, one suddenly realizes that it really is, throughout a life, a vast amount of time without accomplishment.  But then again, most people have a vast amount of time with which to do nothing; their lives are basically without meaning or significance anyway.  I get it. I recently clicked on a channel showing a game of beach volleyball.  Apparently tall, lithesome men and women are paid to play volleyball on a beach in front of spectators and cameras.  Why would an adult, a semi-intelligent person, spend a minute of his or her life watching four people hit a ball over a net in the sand?  I have no answer.  We really have reached a new low in human non-activity.  But let us go elsewhere for the moment.

It is clear that sporting events have been occurring since communities have arisen.  And I must say, having the satisfaction of your team beating another team is certainly better than having a war between the two and this is a positive reason for sporting events.  When two Mayan cities had a sporting contest, it had the same function as a sporting contest today between St. Louis and Kansas City, it gives the populace something to do on their days off rather than rioting or just being a general nuisance and causing unnecessary work for law enforcement.

It would seem to me that this massive use of time in watching sporting events is indicative that we really have too many people on this planet without anything to do.  And if this is true, I will have to admit that it is better to have them engaged in viewing a sporting event than burglarizing my car or garage simply because they have too much time on their hands and are bored.  Committing a burglary is exciting, but it does not have the full range of emotion an athletic contest gives.  It is not as satisfying in that regard.  So in conclusion, if you don't have anything better to do, watch a sporting contest and declare a favorite so that you can have a whole bunch of feelings.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo