Home  •  Forum  •  Blogs  •  E-Mail  •  Support Categories
MyCopper Categories Finance Travel Real Estate Games Autos Entertainment
Nearly Relevant
Nonsense, Fiction, and Miscellaneous Things

Not So Random Bible Verse

Have ye not known?  Have ye not heard?  Hath it not been told you from the beginning?  Have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?     Isaiah 40:21
Regarding Congress and Syria
     Congress is a noble idea.  Representatives - numerous - consider issues which aren't deemed relevant as voting issues.   Contemporary representatives are, also, keenly aware of politics.  The differentiating characteristic between  politics and representation is that politics is the means to representation.  But what happens when the obligation of representation is supplanted by the awareness that being a representative is a wonderful means by which to further the political-self?  If I as a representative use my position, not to consider an issue honestly or fully but rather to advantage my future political career then what becomes of representation?  If instead of spending the effort to consider the issues as fully as I can, I spend the effort to ensure my reelection?  Or to ensure a status leading to an even more prominent office of representation?
     Well, I think this incongruity dilutes the effectiveness of representation as well as tainting the position of representation.
     President O'bama has decided to put before Congress the question of retaliating against Syria for it's recent use of the nerve gas sarin.  I think there is some reason to believe a political motive to this procedure.  By going to Congress some of the responsibility for any decision on the issue is shared even, arguably, abnegated .  But is there a reason by which to claim there is neither sincerity nor value in exercising a shared representational relationship between Congress and the President on this issue?  No; not one iota of a reason.  A decision not to consult Congress would have been abnegating.   
     A certitude of correctness in striking Syria, a knuckling under to insinuations of abnegating the constitutionally authorized power of the office of President, and a continuation of an operating procedure characterized by a group-think rusty with 'standard tradition', all would have been present.  Under these conditions, a continuation of commonplace decision-making would have been an abnegation.   President O'bama had the strength of character to make a turn of course;   A characteristic of his I've, unfortunately, come to take for granted.
     Because the value of the Presidential - Congressional relationship is evident, in this case, I think it important that Congress put politics aside on the issue.  I'm not refering to a Congressional deference to the Presidency such that Congress abnegates it's responsibility thus pandering to the President's wishes.   I am referring to a necessity to admit; 
  1. Doubts concerning the issue - to which doubts President O'bama's consultiveness admits.
  2. A President willing to break from a tradition of a certitude of, both, 'moral superiority' and the 'realpolitik'.
  3. A President willing to put some responsibility on Congress - as a recognition of Congresses share in a somewhat unprecedented issue - which issue should sensibly gather the considerations of the peoples' representatives.
     None of this opinion is designed to decide a military strike as wrong.  In fact, personally, I think a military strike is necessary.  What is not necessary is a continuation of a prideful international stance in an ever-changing world.  Nor is it necessary to acquiesce to domestic politics as a career-game.  Congressional representatives are supposed to be some of are brightest, most able citizens.   I hope they're political advantaging is put aside to take on the task of actual consideration on a demanding and difficult issue.  One of many that has been faced by a strong-minded President.  
More Nonsense
    RE:  'The Party'.  Okay, obviously I'm no playwright.

     Frequently, I'll ruminate upon the Vienna Waltz and thoughts will slip in of Vienna Sausages.

     RE: Shakespearean Research and Academics Institute.  Folks, part 2 of our discussion this afternoon will ask the question, 'Was William Shakespeare's real name Frank Shakespeare;  And, if not, why not'?

     Here is my contribution to understanding the Middle East;

                                      Judaism = The means justifies the end.                            
                                      Islamism = The end justifies the means.
                             
     I know UFO sightings are rare but I recently had an experience of a UFO sighing.  Here's a depiction of it;
234567890.jpg

The Party
     [The room - furnished with 4 ft. tall plants, various sofas, chandelier lighting, and more than one hallway leading away - holds 35 or 40 people.  They're mingling, some with drinks in hand.  Laughter and chatter abound.  Our hero, taller than most, looks over the crowd.]
     [Taking notice of Charlamagne]  "Hi, Charlemagne.  How are you?"  [Vigorously shakes Charlamagne's hand, then turns.]
     "HEY, Joe!  Good to see you."  [Shakes hands with Joe.  Turns again.]
     "Hey, Ed, thanks for coming, nice to see you."
     "Is that Maureen over in the corner?"
     "I think it is." [Comes a voice from behind and to the right.  Turns to see who it is.]
     "HEY!  Whadaya say,  Phil!!!  Boy, wonderful party.  How've you been?"
      [Distracted]  "Good Lord, there's  Samantha.  I haven't seen her in quite a while.  Excuse me."
    
[Shuffling on. ]   "Hello, Alexandra.  Beautiful evening isn't it?"    
      "Yes, it is."
     [Stops.  Tugs at the left label of his not-dark brown, tweed sportcoat which is matched with a yellow, tattersall checked, Egyptian cotton, button-down shirt and a solid color dark brown tie.]
     [Straightens phony mustache which has drooped.]
   
      "Frank!!!"  [Says in astonishment]  "Nice to see you.  How've you been?"
      [Departs.]
     "Hi." 
[Says in passing.]  " Excuse me." 
     "Hi." [Again, said in passing.  Shuffles on.]  

     "
Hey!  How are you?'  [Said to stranger.  Continues on. 
Heads for the corner to chat with Maureen. ]
     
     [As he continues, he pulls to straighten the decorative eye-patch, black in color,  covering his right eye but accidentally tugs so hard the patch covers his right temple.  Quickly, hiding some mild embarrassment, he straightens it back to it's proper position over the eye.]
     
     
[Maureen sees him coming, excuses herself;  Quickly heading for the ladies room.]
Outrage
     Although I'm not entirely updated on the latest Anthony Weiner scandal, I can surmise a few things which seem to me to be an outrage in this day and age:

  1. Mr. Weiner was a not so well regarded Congressman.  Ok, big deal, what       congressman is well regarded?
  2. His flirtations with other women - while being married - are offensive, particularly to women.  Well how, may I ask, is he supposed to find out which woman he truly loves if it's offensive for him to be communicating with other women? 
  3. His resignation from Congress didn't stop the problematic events.  Be reasonable, if a resignation from Congress were the answer to problematic events, then the deficit would be solved by Congresses' dissolution.  When has Congress' dissolution ever been argued as a solution to anything? 

     Now we come to the latest scandal.  Mr. Weiner has sent some very revealing texts and photos to young women.  What is the nature of these texts and photos?  Well, apparently Mr. Weiner, Jewish by faith, has sent pictures revealing of himself - he's dressed in the traditional garb of Islamist males, turban included.  Well, hasn't anyone thought of this.  Maybe the pictures were A JOKE!!!!!!  It DOESN'T mean he's an Islamist terrorist.  Or maybe the pictures weren't a joke but rather a statement that he's a closet Islamist.  In either case,  it DOESN'T mean he's an Islamist terrorist!!!!
     Ok, I will concede this point.  The fact that the photos were sent via Snapchat® - and disappeared from existence within a few seconds of being opened - is somewhat suspicious.   But hey, let's say- for argument purposes - he is an Islamist terrorist.  The use of Snapchat® is only evidence of a sensibleness.  A sensibleness which says, 'hey, guess what I can leave no evidence, none, nada, zilch, zippo'!  I mean, come on folks, instead of that kind of sensibleness what would you rather have;  A politician sending naked pictures of himself to everyone except his wife!?!?  Or even better,  not being able to stop sending naked pictures of himself to everyone except his wife? 
     Please folks, he's running for mayor, not something esteemed like . . . oh, say . . . dogcatcher.

     
Blog Search
Go