|
Thomas Elias Weatherly
I am happy to introduce all to the writing of Weatherly, he has been a close friend for years and I thank him for helping me with this site. He is a published writer and poet splitting time between New York and his home town in Alabama. I hope all readers enjoy his writing and wit. Look for more of his work to be on his own link in the future, here's a little more about him for now;
Proud GrandPa Thomas Proudly Welcomes Shelby Virginia Laws and Taylor Mary Laws !!!
WHY I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN ANYMORE AND WILL VOTE FOR OBAMA  Allow
me to rationalize, offer an implied apologia along with the apology. I lived to see a man not because he's black
or white win an election to the presidency. I thank the holy one that I lived to see this. There is a black man who
is the new president. Okay, that's cool. I didn't vote for Jesse Jackson, even though some friends black and white
assured me that it's only a symbolic vote, he couldn't possibly win. I don't do symbolic votes. I
vote for the person that I deem qualified. Jesse, my frat brother, has done some good, but he ain't presidential
caliber. Mr. Barack Hussein Obama is presidential.
I Owe Steve Salinas and his Generation an Apology,
But; Today is 08:30 Monday
November 3, 2008 the anniversary of my birth date, the day before election day. I have traveled from conservatism, with libertarian
influences, to full blown libertarianism in the Republican party. Most of my friends in Greenwich Village are liberal Democrats
or farther left; they consider my conservatism a goof on them until they got to know me. How could a black man born in Alabama
follow conservatism. They like most people do not know the ideas within each of the political ideologies. Many of the people
who say that they dislike socialism do not know the tenets of socialism. The same applies to conservatism. Most people decide
how to vote according to their image of these and other ideologies, whether these images are spurious or half known. I always
believed in life of brain; ideas were something palpable to examine, question, and expand. This explains my move from conservatism
to libertarianism; it, the latter, was more in synch with the U.S. Constitution.
Wisdom and Experience I guess that you've figured by now that I'm opinionated, but one of
the advantages of old is you've tasted the bad, mediocre, and the good, and the mistakes, wise assed moves, and wise decisions.
You even throw in a zeugma or two to prove that the high opinion you have of yourself is not spurious. You have earned the
privileges of taste, decorum, and wisdom. You make judgments based on experience. You see experience is really not wisdom. Wisdom, true wisdom, is not creation of mistakes and then doing
it right; wisdom is avoidance of mistakes without the hard lessons that failure teaches. It is learning from the mistakes
of others present and past. But experience fraught with missteps, mistakes, and wrong headed decisions is a valuable brain
tool too. So most of the time experience passes as wisdom in the old. Listen to us, the old,
about everything except for when to go to war, economic policy (though examine our mistakes), who you should or should not
marry, or whether the players of yesteryear are better than the ones today. Although the sports figures of yesteryear were
better! Everything else we are as infallible as the Pope, either Alexander or the guy in Rome.
Experience Food for Taste I have battered down your general distrust
for the opinions of the old in a previous essay. Now to a few food notes for those who live in NYC, especially those who live
and work in the Village, or for those tourists who may need a guide to palatable food. Please understand that I and my lady
(a lady of taste and refinement and older with more experience) are extremely narrow brained about the places we eat; we eat
in the same couple of baker's dozen restaurants in the city, and we tend to eat in each the same meal we consider the
best in each restaurant. I will note three such restaurants in the Village on Greenwich Avenue within a block of where we
live. First, there is "tea & sympathy" an English
restaurant at 110 Greenwich Avenue in which you can eat authentic English food and custard. My lady is adventurous and varies
what she eats, and completely happy with the fare and custard. I, narrow, always eat the "stilton and walnut salad,"
sometimes though I get adventure in my soul, feel radical, and have the "stilton and walnut salad with beets" and
custard. Be warned, the place is tiny, and custard, so weekends there is a crowd of people who wish to eat English good food
and custard. I advise you to go during midweek. The waiters are beautiful, friendly, English, and serve custard.
The second place is Funayama Japanese restaurant (24 Greenwich Avenue) wherein my lady and I eat exactly the same entree each
time that we go there. We eat Salmon Teriyaki with a glass of Takara Plum wine (all others are bland by comparison); she orders
Miso soup and I the house salad with their house dressing (it is a pleasant surprise.). We would not eat in any other Japanese
restaurant in New York. They also have excellent Sushi I am told, but I don't eat raw fish. I also don't eat rare
meat. I don't want the steak to moo at me. The waiters are friendly, the service great, and the food is good. I can testify
under oath that the Salmon Teriyaki is great. I assume that the other entrees are great too.
The third place is the Village Den, 46 Greenwich Avenue, a good place especially for the veggies who love good veggie food.
I always eat Enchiladas and hope that my lady orders something with cucumbers. She doesn't eat them and gives them to
me. She is more adventurous than I am and can testify before a Senate Committee under oath that all the menu is good. I can
testify that the Enchiladas are superb. Friendly waiters are important to us and the ones here are helpful and friendly. These are three good places to eat and all are on Greenwich Avenue near
each other. If you only eat in these three places you will have pleasant memories of New York City. NYC Dies a Fun Death New York City is a mausoleum and amusement
park. When a simple stone marker and inscription will do the families of the people who died on 9/11 want something more.
More people than just the families have impeded the rebuilding of downtown. Allow the real estate folk to build the ugly replacements
for the fallen towers and get back to business. The ground of the former towers is no more holier than the whole earth. Folk
have died violent deaths everywhere on this planet. Get over it and move on. Celebrate life instead of death. We have too
many monuments to death already. The other side Manhattan an amusement
park for the entertainment of the national and international tourists, so the workers are priced out of the housing market.
There will one day soon only the rich, diplomats, and corporate flunkies who can afford to live in Manhattan, and in public
houses their lackies probably separated from the affluent by a fence. These last will be issued national ID cards and allowed
into the Amusement Park to work menial jobs in the tourism biz and cleanup. The The middle class will have moved to eastern
Jersey, upstate, and the few places on Long Island that they can afford. Look at mid Manhattan, especially Fortysecond Street
now; it is what more of Manhattan will become. I liked it better when inhabited by prostitutes, pimps, and drug dealers. It
had more life than the sterile Disney like bland scape. The Village,
Greenwich Village has not been completely bohemian since the 20s, becoming less so through the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s. Now
it is Greenwich "Amusement Park" Village for the pretenders to bohemianism who crowd in from the metro area, the
rest of America, and international environs. That hippie that the tourists gawk at is probably a banker, lawyer, or visiting
tourist who tries to fit in. So Manhattan is becoming an "Amusement
Park of Entertainment and Death" (APED), so that death and mourning has become entertainment and entertainment has become
death of life seeking. I will mourn the passing of New York City.
Olympic Gold Standard I don't call events that require a panel of
judges to determine the winner a sport. You have winners
and losers in sport, objectively decided by the fastest, strongest that day. Swim races are sport, but diving and synchronized
swimming are not. They are art. The former sky dance then splash, and the latter water ballet. Figure skating requires agility
and strength; it is dance, ballet. You may as well call a ballet troupe a sport team. It is not the amount of training, hand
eye coordination, strength, or stamina, but whether the winners, runners up, and losers are clearly and objectively defined.
If diving, figure skating, and gymnastics are sports then
ballet, beauty pageants, and cheer leading are sports. I am willing to change my opinion. They require training, strength,
and stamina, and their winners are determined by panels of judges or reviewers. The standards used to judge are subjective
as with figure skating, diving, and gym exercises. I believe that ballet should be included in the olympics; it is at least
as demanding as gymnastics. Try to dance in positions that are not easy for the design of the human body. And ballet easily
damages knees and ankles like basketball. So I will agree
with the majority that diving, synchronized swimming, boxing (regulated combat? it's like duelling to the first cut.),
BMX, figure skating, ski jumping, and snowboarding are sports. I believe that sculpture, painting, and poetry would be worthy
additions to the Olympic lineup. John Ashbery could win gold. Julia Kasdorf could win gold. My Grandpa Visited Brooklyn My grandpa visited Brooklyn when the ship that returned him from WW 1 docked
at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. He adored the Brookyn Dodgers though he never saw them play in the flesh. When they moved from
Brooklyn he never listened, watched, or wanted to mention them again. He was fierce in his opposition to their move. It was
as if the Brown Bomber had become a Nazi. You didn't have to live in
Brooklyn to like the Dodgers; they were associated with baseball beyond geographic borders. They were a team that lived in
the spirit of baseball. When you think of baseball you think first, Yankees, the champs, then the Brooklyn Dodgers, the eternal
scrappy underdogs, and the Cubs. These images belong to the family of metonymy
and synecdoche to represent something beyond them. Basketball: Celtics,the
Seltiks, not the misspelling of ignorant scholars as Keltiks, and the Brooklyn Dodgers. The Bears, Packers, and Cowboys; Canadiens,
Bruins, and Redwings: they belong to poetry and to sports. There are individuals
with similar poetic energy as with the Babe, Jack Robinson, Sugar Ray (the original one), Say Hey, Y.A.Tittle, Gretzky, and
for mumblypeg in Scottsboro, Junebug. I understand my grandpa. Basketball: Celtics,the Seltiks, not the misspelling
of ignorant scholars as Keltiks, and the Brooklyn Dodgers. The Bears, Packers, and Cowboys; Canadiens, Bruins, and Redwings:
they belong to poetry and to sports. There are individuals with similar poetic
energy as with the Babe, Jack Robinson, Sugar Ray (the original one), Say Hey, Y.A.Tittle, Gretzky, and for mumblypeg in Scottsboro,
Junebug. I understand my grandpa. THE NEXT PRESIDENT WON’T BE OBAMA !I was talking to two friends the other day about the Democrats’ nomination race and the result—Barak Obama’s win. One of the friends, a historian, said that Senator Obama would be the next president. The other friend, a retired F. B. I. agent, assented. Though I have the reputation among my friends as one who disagrees with the prevailing opinion as sport, to introduce the opposing viewpoint simply to introduce it though I know that it’s wrong, I state that Senator John McCain will win the presidency. No, no, they said, the country is thirsting for change. The country is ready for change. I am happy that a major party is nominating a black man, specifically Senator Obama, though not my first choice. My first choice, not because I’m a Republican, is Representative Ron Paul. I am also a libertarian. Apparently a black candidate, in either party, has a better chance than a white libertarian, and a black libertarian would have less chance, I believe. The major parties want to control and employ the instrumentality of governance, but libertarians want to dismantle much of it and employ the remainder under the constraints of the U. S. Constitution. My two friends, no radicals, have, as far as I know, led exemplary lives, and have fewer radical acts in their personal histories than I have with my participation in anti-segregation demonstrations and anti-Vietnam War demonstrations. I merely note here that my personal life has events many would consider bohemian, even immoral, although I believe that I have as moral a life as possible for a human. They believe that the country is ready to elect a black candidate to the presidency. I add that they do not support Senator Obama because he is “of color” as my F. B. I. friend says. He, I, and my other friend, the historian, did not support Jesse Jackson. We did not support him because he lacked even the minimum qualifications that I believe the job requires, and I suppose they also would agree with my definition of the minimum. I question the specific qualification of experience, as usually cited against Senator Obama. I look back at the founders who were president, the men who began to define the presidency, and their lack of experience did not prevent some from illuminating the presidency within the social and political strictures of their times. I reject intelligence to a degree because the arguably smartest president, Thomas Jefferson, lacked the moral intelligence to free his slaves. I list the greatest presidents during my lifetime as 1) Harry S. Truman, 2) Franklin Roosevelt, and 3) Dwight Eisenhower. Many members of his own party did not believe Truman to be qualified for the presidency; the better candidates for Roosevelt’s vice president would have splintered the party, they thought. Truman was the bland compromise. Though some believe that Roosevelt was the greatest president of the twentieth century, I say that it was Truman. Senator Obama is uniquely qualified for the presidency. The president does not need to have several hitches in the military, or terms in the House or Senate, or to have been a governor. What experiences out here qualifies someone for the unique position of president of the United States of America? If intelligence alone is the criterion, then Jimmy Carter would have been a great president. If lack of moral turpitude is a hindrance, then Thomas Jefferson would have been a mediocre president. How to choose? I don’t exactly know, but I know and feel the right woman or man exhibits judgement, concern for the country in a non-partisan way, and has the wisdom to win wars without first resorting to force. In 1964 Senator Margaret Chase Smith would have been the right one. Senator Obama will not ascend to the presidency. He has intelligence and experience working with politicians of differing views and ideologies and achieving agreement. He is not beholden to any special interests, though he listens to all of them, and he has the charisma to inspire and lead. He will not be the next president of the United States of American. He is black. Many of the whites, working class, who supported Senator Clinton, have vehemently proclaimed their opposition to Senator Obama. They can support Senator Clinton, who supports many ideas that they oppose, but they cannot support Senator Obama, who supports more ideas that would address their pocketbooks, daily struggles, and hopes. They have grasped the weakest of excuses to oppose him, like somehow tying him to the statements of his former pastor, spurious rumors of Obama’s homosexuality, and his, as they perceive, Muslim name. Some even believe that he is a Muslim. American whites cannot convince themselves to vote in the majority for a black candidate. Obama will lose every state, except for New York, South Carolina, North Carolina, Vermont, Colorado, Maine, and Alabama. Senator Clinton would have won every state except for Arizona. You may call me fool now, but after November you will call me prescient. I will see the shame of America. We are a racist nation, and become
more so each day subtle and devious ways, and we hide it in irrelevancies, a police state. We fear terrorists more than highway
accidents. We are terrified by headlines more than by daily facts. John McCain will be our next president. Where is Canada
should I move? I Like C-Span !
I watch C-SPAN regularly.
I remember Senator Ted Stevens, the Commerce, Science, and Technology committee, representatives from various media companies,
associations, and retailers, and advocacy groups religious and non-partisan try to define Decency (The quality of conforming
to standards of propriety and morality; the quality of being polite and respectable. WordWeb). Nope, I don't want to live in a decency dictatorship.
I tried to list
the deaths of American military in each of the wars, but something restrained me, a feeling of revulsion for such dispassionate
listing of casualties. I don't feel casual. One American soldier dying in a war is the death of a whole world of
his or her life, relatives, friends, and the people who will never him or her.
You read the statistics. Perhaps you will share my revulsion.++ I will not give an opinion of whether their deaths were in vain or whether they were justified. That is an argument for the policy-makers, which you may say are the president, the congress, but really the citizenry of this country. We, the citizens, make the policy by willful decision or by not resisting strongly enough. Men and women serve in the military because they feel a call, they are patriotic; although some for less loftier reasons such has a desire for an education, cannot find a job, or, maybe a desire to travel and find adventure may enlist. In some previous wars they were drafted. Whatever the reasons, they desired life, as some of the less loftier reasons prove - a higher calling. "What passing-bells for these who die as cattle? - Only the monstruous anger of the guns. Only the stuttering rifles' rapid rattle Can patter out their hasty orisons. No mockeries now for them; no prayers nor bells; Nor any voice of mourning save the choirs, - The shrill, demented choirs of wailing shells; And bugles calling for them from sad shires."* We should honor them not for the abstraction patriotism; we should honor them because they were our surrogates on the battlefield. We, in the safety of our homes, religious halls, pubs, dance halls, and streets, in congress, and in the White House say patriotism, wear flag lapel pins and have never served on battlefields, cannot know the patriotism they practised buddy to buddy. The lofty abstractions do not matter. What matters is that they fought and died for us; whether we were right or wrong to send them to their deaths, they fought and died for us. We should honor them or our lives have no worth. [++ http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004615.html *from Anthem for Doomed Youth Wilfred Owen (1893 - 1918; killed seven days before the last battle of WWI.) http://users.fulladsl.be/spb1667/cultural/owen/anthem-for-doomed.html] DRUG PEACE FOR THE SPORTIN' LIFE Fellow druggies
we tend to impose on our celebrities, especially the sportin' ones recently, standards, moral and ethical, that we find
onerous if self-imposed. Look in the medicine cabinets of, say, a dozen of your friends and relatives; the anti-depressants,
anti-psychotics, stimulants, diet pills, and other mood altering drugs there would make the stoners of the sixties seem quite
straight. Look in your own.
I must have my morning Sidamo, and a shot of Knob Creek, and mid afternoon and evening at least one pot of Chun Mee. My friends and family often hear - their eyes go glaze - my assertion that if caffeine is outlawed I will become the largest drug dealer in North America. I thought today about my drug use, then my opinion that cyclists, baseballers, trackers, and all other athletes should not use performance enhancing drugs. Truth pierced my brain like an errant javelin. Hypocrite! If you want to know the evil that lurks within the hearts of other humans, look within. Keep the government out of outlawing drugs in sports and in the general society. If the sporting organizations want to outlaw drugs, they may. I say they should not. To the commissioners and committees which govern all sports, I say allow drug use. There is no unfair advantage if each athlete may choose to use drugs openly. The integrity of past records is a spurious gallop of a riderless pinto. The strength and performance athletes has increased because of better diets, training regimens, and now, better drugs. Don’t be Luddites. We have to bring athletics into the mainstream of American life. It is the patriotic slamdunk. DEAR SENATOR SPECTER
A belated Merry Happy to you, family, and staff. I do not live in your state, but you are the ranking member on Judiciary from my party. I began activity in politics in support of Senator Margaret Chase Smith for president. She would have been a great president. Senator Goldwater got the nomination, and because of his libertarian, constitutional positions I felt no great reluctance to support him. I was chairman of George Schuyler chapter of Young Americans for Freedom. I was introduced to Mr. Schuyler by Mr. William F. Buckley, Jr. This history to give you some sense of my political biases. We cannot condone torture. In any kind of statute we cannot legalize water boarding, or any torture. That oft quoted circumstance of what if a captured terrorist knew the location of a nuclear weapon due to go off in two days. I place myself in the hypothetical role of intelligence or law enforcement. I am sure that this terrorist knows where the bomb is placed. No speculation, not even any short of fact. First I would try all of the deceptive tricks allowed by the courts to obtain the information; I would try bribery with money, or moving his or her family to this courtry and bettering their lives. Understand that it is probably true that any human mad enough to place a nuke in civilian population is crazy and fanatical enough to withstand even a threat of death. After I tried all legal means, they failed, I would order all my subordinates out. I would with sadness and reluctance torture the terrorist. Afterwards, even if I obtained actionable, save the day, information, I would surrender to federal law enforcement. I would get a lawyer and allow the legal system to work. I would hope that a jury would say not guilty, even though I am not innocent. If not, I go to jail. I hope the judge would be lenient, but I accept the consequences. If young men and women can risk and lose their lives in combat, I can risk and lose my freedom for the same cause. I DO NOT WANT A LAW PERMITTING IT, OR ALLOWING THE PRESIDENT, CONGRESS, OR THE COURTS TO DECIDE TO ALLOW TORTURE. It is not our way. I am listening now to the Attorney-General testify to the Judiciary Committee and such answers from lead me to believe that federal law officials can't be trusted; I can only trust local law enforcement. I am beginning to feel that we may not be able to restore the Constitution without violence. I do not feel this lightly. I marched and demonstrated for civil rights, against the Vietnam war, but government officials tried to hide their misdeeds. This administration is brazen; their actions, inaction, tells the congress to go frack themselves. They act above the law, and you, the congress, do nothing.
Some folk seem hell-bent on the enslavement of everyone. If you voted for Bush and his Democratic rival the first time, you were a fool; if you voted for Bush a second time, you are a fascist. I don't suffer fools and some of my political ancestors shot fascists. I am an intellectual wimp because I still believe that truth talk can convince fascists in training to read the U.S.Constitution and follow it. Liberal ain't a bad word, especially if public liberals practice that humane art in private. Conservative ain't the way it's practiced today; it's properly an admix of living the ethical life and the the libertarianideal of not fracking with other folk. It certainly ain't the use of the government to to frack other folk. Most folk today who call themselves conservatives - mostly Republicans, and some Democrats - live something else, lie to us, lie to themselves, and endanger the republic. You know in your brain that this is true, unless you share their delusion. You know that we have a problem when the only senators I trust completely are Bernie Sanders, Barack Obama, and Susan Collins, the only representatives I trust are Ron Paul and Barney Frank. I know that most of you cannot see that this is not a contradiction or paradox. In case you want to know, I am a Republican. I evolved from conservative to libertarian. I believe in simplicities and the acts of many today confirm me in my simplicites. Liberals want to force you to spend your money their way and conservatives want to control how you have sex and with whom. Except today there is an anomaly, the Republicans, especially ones called to conservatism, have spent our money like it was theirs, and spent it with their business partners. They will ignore a true sexual crime to retain a seat. Representative Tom Davis what in the living hell is wrong with you? Your statement at the CIA Leak Investigation and questions later are a brain fart that defies rational examination. How about a fusion ticket? Ron Paul and Bernie Sanders? Either way. Or if you really want to retain the Republicans and Democratics, how about Senator Susan Collins and Representative Ron Paul versus Senator Barack Obama and Senator Bernie Sanders (If elected they must nominate Barney Frank for Attorney-General, later to the Court). These are my picks for 2008. With these we win either way. I don't expect the parties or electorate to behave rationally and humane. I plan to seance with Tom Paine and clean my ancestor's flintlock. If I can't have my tropes, I've been sold a bill of rights rotted. (Originally appeared on blog, eclectic git) Data Minds If our government does not play by the rules (the Constitution and laws) and we sit and watch sports all day, we wrap ourselves in self-delusion. Any spectator who understands the subtleties of baseball is capable of understanding governance; yet we assume that our leaders have special talents, and we must trust them without referees (state and federal judges) to know what’s foul or fair. Take, for example, data mining, a dubious game which this administration believes will protect us from terrorism. The idea is collect all the personal data about all of us, intercept our phone calls, emails, and instant messages, then put this in a huge database. They believe their software can predict who the terrorists are and what their plans are for devilment. We can collect the stats of all the players on a team, on all teams, but we still can’t predict which team will definitely win the world series, the Stanley Cup, or Super Bowl. If we went by the data on each player’s talents the Yankees would win the World Series every year. The stats don’t take in consideration the undefinable events which render stats irrelevant sometimes. Even though they win on paper or in some computer simulation, the Yankees may still lose the real game. No analytical software will tell us that Joe Blow may wake up one morning peeved off, and drive a van loaded with explosives into his perceived object of hate. Data mining cannot predict intent. Terrorists, without criminal records, will appear innocent and non-threatening. You can’t read their intent. The U.S.
Constitution is our rule book for how we live together; the Bill of Rights says what government can’t do to us, the
state and federal courts the referees. Data mining American citizens is foul, not fair; it is unconstitutional. Poems
by Weatherly
|
