That's a Great Question

 THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION

Any time you hear, on talk radio, tv, or otherwise someone say "That's a great question", you automatically know that the question asked was really stupid and the person asked the question is trying to figure out how to answer such a stupid question without looking stupid him or herself.  It takes a minute, usually  the reason that the statement "That's a great question" was made by the interviewee in the first place - -  to make time to reflect before answering.

Reflection really does not help though.  The answer will normally be a stupid one, since the question was stupid, but, if luck prevails,  the people listening to this exchange may not know a stupid answer from an intelligent one.  Therefore, no harm would be done to the person asked.  At least one can hope. 

What is never done, but which would add immensely to the exchange and give entertainment is to simply declare that "I'm not going to answer a question that stupid and I am offended that you would ask such a stupid question for the only possible reason of making me look stupid."  One does not have to act in a stupid manner simply because one is invited to do so; in fact, one should show some intelligence if available.

Now, the person asking the stupid question may be stupid enough not to know how stupid the question is and therefore, if one were to enlighten the questioner of the stupidity of the question, one would, hopefully, be doing the questioner a service by pointing out how stupid he or she is being and maybe next time they might possibly frame their question in a manner that doesn't cause immediate blow back; or even better, obtain another line of work and not ask stupid questions ever again.

The reader may think that this is a little over the top:  not at all I say.  One should not be required to appear stupid, especially when and where a number of people may be listening or viewing or otherwise able to hear the exchange.  A stupid question is not for the purpose of presenting ideas nor of the exchange of ideas; it is for the purpose of making the interviewee appear stupid and ridiculous.   This is a situation that the interviewee is immediately aware of, but most often, because of the listening audience,  will refuse to acknowledge the stupidness of the question.  It is the opinion put forth here, that the acknowledgement of the stupidity of the question and refusing to answer such a stupid question, would enhance the reputation of the  person refusing to answer such a stupid question significantly.  And, in addition, it may have the effect of  slowing the incidence of future stupid questions by equally stupid interviewers.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

We're Against It

 WE'RE AGAINST IT

We really need to be against more stuff, is what I say. I know I've got quite a list already and am ready to reach out to others to find things to be against. Right now I have what might seem to be quite a list but it feels incomplete. I'm always ready to add to it and am looking for candidates.

Right now my list includes muslims, buddhists, hindus, South Americans, Central Americans, Asians, lilliputians, anarchists, feminists, environmentalists, libertarians, gays, lesbians, LBFTQs, meth heads, other junkies, Marxists, communists, socialists, atheists, and whoever else doesn't vote Republican. Democrats and liberals are a suspect class, but grudgingly I will acknowledge they have a right to exist in a pluralist society such as ours. But not the others. Like we used to say about draft dodgers, if you don't want to be here and be a proud American and fight for your country and freedom, go live with people of your own kind; nothing's keeping you here. Good riddance.

The reason for this appeal, again, I'm wanting to add to the list - - it just doesn't feel complete. Maybe Zorastorians - - are there any of those left? There's got to be more people that I can be against and wish to disappear and if any of you have any good candidates let me know. We know who belongs and who doesn't here in middle America. You just can't be against too many people. It's a lack of character not to be against as many people as possible. After all, America was not made great by muslims, buddhists, hindus and other oddities of human nature and weneed to keep it that way or we will surely decline as a civilization and quickly.

And what's more, we need another really good enemy so that we maintain our military as the biggest and the best. That's why I'm happy to see that our elected representatives have decided China is an enemy. They declare it so. You only have to say someone is an enemy, and voilá, they are an enemy. Just about every other tweet (Star I should say) is giving us more reason to claim China as an evil doer - - and a really big one. Now they are buying up farm ground and rich Chinese are buying residences left and right and flying here to give birth of all things. It just isn't right, is what I say. We just have to be against Chinese specifically, not just Asians. (Mainland Chinese not Taiwanese.)

So in closing, give it some thought so I can add to the list. Maybe we can even get someone to pass a resolution - - make it official.

                                      Richard E H Phelps II 

Mingo

We Care!

 WE CARE!

Representative Dunwell has struck again.  He has now explained the importance of the Fetal Heartbeat Bill recently passed in the special legislative session.  Apparently, the three reasons for passage of the bill are:  (1) She has her own unique DNA, (2) She is not just a clump of cells, (3) She deserves to live.  And, it is all because we believe in "valuing and protecting life".

I simply would like to point out that according to recent accounts, thousands of Iowans are now being dropped from Medicaid coverage.  Of course, this is a good thing because we care and we value and protect life wherever it may occur.  We actually need more of this concern.  Surely we can kick off more people if we set our mind to it.  And at the same time, let's reduce unemployment benefits again.  We don't want people sitting around in urgent care facilities pretending to be sick or injured.  That will not do.  They can at least be serving up delicious burgers at McDonald's or Burger King.

It's very simple really:  Poor people do not need health care or a decent place to live and to raise their children.  It's simply not necessary.  Hovels are good enough for these people and if some of them get pregnant, so be it.  They can't get around having another mouth to feed by getting an abortion and terminating a heart beat.  The more poor people we have to do the work none of the rest of us want to do, the better.  If these people all of a sudden were to have decent health care or a decent place to live, we never would find enough people to work at Walmart or the local Dairy Queen.

It's clear that Representative Dunwell cares and cares deeply about the people of his district, especially those yet unborn - - even if they can't vote.  Ironically, these are the only people for which Representative Dunwell apparently cares - - oh, and those who own fast food businesses.  You can't really call them restaurants.  He cares about them.  I'm assuming, but could be wrong again, because they are the people who contribute to his campaigns.  I'm certain that the employees of McDonald's or Burger King don't vote for him and probably don't vote at all thinking correctly that it doesn't make any difference whether they vote or not, their lives will suck regardless.

So let's give two hurrahs for Representative Dunwell for looking out after our best interests; we couldn't be more proud of our elected officials in this state.  Our legislators spend their legislative time restricting our activities as much as possible.  More crimes, more injunctions, more book banning, more denial of health care and unemployment benefits, more denying women control over their bodies, more restrictions continually - - here in the land of the free and the home of the brave.  You just have to give credit where credit is due.

Richard E H Phelps II
Mingo

The Market

 

THE MARKET 

Whenever one discusses the economy, one's job, what one buys, one's well being, more often than not the term "The Market" is inserted somewhere in the conversation.  "The Market" is apparently in control of just about everything worth anything and it is godlike.  It is godlike for the fact that one can not define "The Market" any more than one can define "God" as the term is used by almost everyone in any context whatsoever; but it is everywhere.  

It would appear to me that the two terms "The Market" and "God" are so similar in their use, that they could very well be synonymous.  One simply can't avoid the inherent mystery of "The Market" as it is currently used.  It apparently controls everything "God" doesn't.  I think this a fair assumption to make.  Accordingly,  I believe, one ought, in showing the proper respect due to it, always capitalize it as we do when referring to "God".  It is "The Market", not the market.  

"The Market" has mystery, it has omnipotence; it has absolute authority over every aspect of our lives.  Some might say that it has actually replaced God; some might say they are competitors rather - - who do you serve,  God or "The Market"?  Can you serve both?  Of course, the answer to this is quite simple:  to most serving either has one and the same positive result:  if you endorse the market, wealth will follow; if you endorse God, eternal life will follow.  It appears to be a win-win situation all around.

And all you have to do is believe - - so simple really.  It is amazing how "belief" insures your current and lasting relationship with the universe.  Consequently, it is not only normal, but universally encouraged - - belief that is.  If you believe, you will be saved.  How many times have you heard this?  Probably from birth to demise; your acquaintances, your friends, your employees, your bosses, your everybody will tell you to believe and all will be well.  And so you do.  It applies to "The Market" as well as God.

It is difficult, but one should, if not totally unaware, actually give all this some thought.  Unfortunately, thought is not what is rewarded - - neither "The Market" nor God rewards thought.  Thought leads to unbelief and hence not acceptable.  But I suggest that one give it a try; you can always return to belief at any time your thinking scares you a little.  Belief is your safe haven, your reward for compliance, your feel-good state of being.  It is a state of non-thought which is the most comfortable state to be in.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

The Ark

 THE ARK

Now I'm sure you have all heard there is a replica of the Ark in Kentucky.  I've not seen it, but it is on my bucket list.  I was recently engaged in a discussion of the ark, more pointedly, was there such a thing as the great flood and Noah.  I will have to admit that I'm skeptical.  It seems rather far-fetched to me.

My understanding from reviewing the current literature on the subject, the earth was covered in water.  Now I know that Mt. Everest has been measured at 29,031.7 feet.  This is feet above sea level.  This means according to my calculations there would have to be 5 ½ miles of water in addition to what is already here.  That is a lot of water which raises several issues.

Where did this water come from?  Did it just appear?  And where did it go?  It didn't just subside.  5 ½ miles of water just doesn't subside; it has to go somewhere. Evaporation simply causes water to change form; it is still around.  It would be interesting to calculate what our air on this planet would be like with 5.5 miles of water having evaporated into it.  And just how long would it take 5.5 miles of water to evaporate?  Or, could air actually hold that much water?

Now there was also mention that it rained for 40 days and 40 nights.  True, that is a lot of rain - - but 5 ½ miles of it?  Not so fast Kemo Sabe.  This doesn't compute.  Also I've seen pictures of that boat and it does appear to have a partial roof.  But that is a lot of water gaining entry.  Who is going to be down in the hold with buckets?  I'm assuming the Ark didn't have a bilge pump.

Now from what I see in the available photos of the Kentucky Ark, there is no steering mechanism nor means of propulsion.  One would think these items to be necessary  on the way up and on the way down.  And the biblical passages are silent as to whether there was any wind associated with this storm of storms.  Maybe there was no wind; but one can't just assume  the Ark went straight up and came straight back down in the same spot and if it didn't, how did it get to where it ended up on land once again.  But in the photos I've seen, it did appear that there were considerable creature comforts and plenty of women folk to prepare meals. 

More questions come to mind.  For instance, once the Ark landed, what was there to eat.  There would have been only dead and rotten animals floating around and no vegetables, fruit, or grain.  Did Noah put plenty of apple (by then you could eat apples) and other fruit tree saplings in a cooler somewhere on board; did he provision the Ark with seeds?  We just don't know.  The biblical info is a little sparse in detail in this area.  Maybe they were going to live on fish, but I'm not sure cows and such would eat much fish.

There are some serious gaps in the story. It's all a big mystery and one that causes some hesitancy in giving it much credence.  But I would be happy to be better informed.

Richard E H Phelps II

Mingo

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