Poetry: "Loudmouth Drunk"

Poetry: "Loudmouth Drunk"

           Loudmouth Drunk

           Why did we ever put up with your bunk?

           Just have another drink

           So then you won't have to think

           Loudmouth Drunk

           Why did we ever put up with your junk?

            Have yourself another beer

             And act just like a horse's rear...

Poetry: "Drip, Drip, Drip"

Poetry:  "Drip, Drip, Drip... "

        Drip, Drip, Drip

        Your sink it leaks

        Been wasting water for many weeks

        You could always call a plumber

         But you'll be incensed by the pricey number

        Drip, Drip, Drip

        The blood it seeps

         Attracting monsters from the deep

         Or vampiric creatures as they creep... (tbc?)

      

   

Poetry: "Steal, Steal, Steal"

Poetry:  "Steal, Steal, Steal"

       Steal, Steal, Steal

       For your next meal

       A felon don't care how you feel

       Even if you call the cops

       Doesn't mean they'll ever stop

       Even if they rot in jail

       Another crook will pay his bail

       If a felon has a gun 

       Often means you better run

       If he wields a real sharp knife

       You just may lose your wretched life... (tbc?)

    

Poetry: "Take, Take, Take"

Poetry:  "Take, Take, Take"

       Take, Take, Take

       Their Remorse is Fake

       Toward commoners it's  "Let them eat cake".

        At the public trough they feed

        Can't satisfy their unbridled greed... (tbc?)

Poetry: New and Improved "Spend,Spend, Spend"

Poetry: New and Improved  "Spend, Spend, Spend"

               "Spend, Spend, Spend"

           Spend, Spend, Spend

           That is the trend

           Bankruptcy's around the bend

           Credit cards are to the max

           And the taxman's on our backs

          Don't pay your bills on time?

          They'll try to take your every dime

            If you can't pay off your loan

            Repo-man come(s) to your home.

          Are you spending all your money?

          The IRS won't think it's funny.

          If you don't have spending cash

          Best set aside a monthly stash

          Or your future will be trashed

          It ain't no fun to be in debt

          But if your rich you are all set.

            Spend, Spend, Spend

            That is the trend

            Bankrupty's around the bend

            Credit cards are all maxed out

            And your future is in doubt.

             In winter's cold and summer's heat

            It really sucks out on the street.

            

 

 

           

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 19

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 19 of 19

       Since moralists are vastly outnumbered, it is about time that counter-fanatic and anti-censorship groups be formed. Until people finally stand up against these self-appointed morality police, freedom of action and choice will always be in jeopardy. To curtail censorship, boycott any company, politician, or whoever gives-in to these anencephalic moralists . It would also be a wise idea to let the Federal Communications Commission (the FCC), editors, publishers, radio/tv station owners, etc. kno that you hope they will not give-in to any pressure or threats exerted by these morality groups. But, if we remain complacent and do nothing, we will all deserve to lose our freedom and rights.

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern   student newspaper in the early  '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript  "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 18

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 18 of Several

  What can you do?:

       It is about time that people stop tolerating these so-called self-appointed  'moralists' and morality groups. If I won  $10 million from Ed McMahon, I would be willing to buy one-way plane tickets to Iran or other backwards theocracies for any pesky moralists, provided they promised to never come back again. As far as I'm concerned, most of these moralists qualify as terrorists, since they often hold Freedom of Speech and the Bill of Rights hostage. For the most part, these piss-ant moralists are like mosquitoes. If we let them run amok, they can wreak a lot of havoc on all our collective rights. On the other hand, if you step on them, they are likely rendered harmless.  (to be cont'd)

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern student newspaper in the early  '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript  "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 17

Essay:  "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 17 of Several

  In Defense of Decadence: cont'd

       I'm sure that there are more people who have a religion than those who do not, but I'm also sure that most people would rather make their own choices and decisions than to have would-be despots in and out of the Church coerce how people live and act.  Although too much decadence can be very harmful, I believe that very few people could stay sane for long without at least a little bit of revelry.  (to be cont'd)

 [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern student newspaper and as part of my unpublished manuscript  "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 16

Essay:  "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 16 of Several

   In Defense of Decadence:

       Censorship is almost always more dangerous than its intended target(s). Personally, for the most part, I agree with what nineteenth century philosopher Frederick Nietzche wrote about morality in  Beyond Good and Evil :  "There is no such thing as moral phenomena, only moral interpretation of phenomena."  I sure am glad that televangelist pat Robertson was not elected President when he ran for that office in 1988. If he were elected, we very well could have ended up with theocratic morality fanatics like the late Jerry Falwell advising his decisions.  Decisons made by unelected moralists restrict and curtail all of our rights and freedoms. (to be cont'd)

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's student newspaper in the early  '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript  "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 15

Essay:  "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 15

    In the late eighties the Italian film  "Cinema Paradiso" depicted a young boy who loved movies who grows up to be a famous director. In the main character's youth, a priest would ring a bell at  'objectionable'  scenes or dialogue and the projectionist would edit the film accordingly. As time went by the standards were relaxed and eventually almost anything could be shown.  According to Wikipedia, in America, around the beginning of the 20eth century, the Hays Code  resulted in  "self-censorship" [from Wikipedia]. The Hays Code was apparently not government enforced, but was related to Catholic ideology and the so-called  "Catholic Legion of Decency" [from Wikipedia] (a forerunner of the Religious Right and the so-called  Moral Majority). Eventually the influence of these Catholic prudes waned and was replaced by the rating system of the  "Motion Picture Association of America". [Wikipedia] (the MPAA) with their G, GP, PG, PG-13, uncopyrighted X, and NC-17 ratings.  Unfortunately,  "Showgirls" and other movies released with an NC-17 rating suffered box office oblivion. Ratings systems, whether religious or government enforced, have a chilling effect on freedom of speech and self-expression for artists, writers, viewers and listeners.

 [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's  Campus Lantern student newspaper in the early  '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript  "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 14

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 14 of Several

    

       Power definitely corrupts many of these moralists. J. Edgar Hoover, former head of the FBI and self-proclaimed moralist (long deceased) abused his power so thoroughly that it was necessary for the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The Reagan and Bush administrations were dedicated to skirting or trying to repeal FOIA. Under Reagan disgraced Attorney General Edwin Meese was a prudish moralist. John Keating, of Keating 5 infamy (the guy who caused the Savings & Loan debacle about two decades or so ago was a prudish moralist.  Ex so-called  'Drug Czar' William Bennet was another soon-to-be disgraced self-proclaimed moralist, who put his hopeless quest to rid the U.S. of narcotics above everyone's Constitutional, civil, and individual rights. John Ashcroft, George W. Bush's first disgraced Attorney General, was a self-proclaimed moral pitbull. Ashcroft was so prudish that he decreed that a statue of justice depicting anatomically accurate female breasts be covered in drapes. The odious Ashcroft also authored the egregiously draconian USA PATRIOT ACT, which allows the government to snoop on our library records, among other fascistic abuses of our Constitutional and civil rights. The PATRIOT ACT was passed with only Senator Feingold having the courage and the foresight to vote against it. Hopefully, with Obama in office, the PATRIOT ACT will oneday be repealed, but don't hold your breath.  As for the religious moralists, they try to justify all of their meddling with everyone else's rights with myths of irreproachability and infallibility. They also attempt to evade criticism by claiming nobody can criticize them unless: "those without sin may cast the first stone." If, according to their standards, I cannot  "cast the first stone", I'll settle for a Molotov cocktail.  (to be cont'd)

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern  student newspaper and as part of my unpublished manuscript  "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

  

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 13

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 13 of Several

       

       There are only two things I might tend to agree with the moralists on. For instance, if it can be proved that voyeuristic smut can negatively affect the minds of young and impressionable children who might happen to get ahold of it; I would have no problem with parents or others trying to ban or limit it, provided they can get enough voters to go along with their wishes.  However, I believe the written word should be exempt from censorship, with the possible exception of any  'Soldier of Fortune' guidebook or website, which instructs people how to kill or seriously harm others. Likewise, directions for making nuclear weapons or dangerous/deadly explosions should also be restricted. The most unfortunate thing about morality groups, who often use sleazy or underhanded tactics to try to accomplish their goals, is that parents of young children and so-called  'Pro-Lifers' find these groups seductively appealing.

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern student newspaper in the early  '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript  "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

   

       

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 12

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 12 of Several

        TV and Radio: cont'd

       I recently glanced over a list made up by a morality group, the American Family Association. For tv shows they didn't like, they had such headings as:  "Unfavorable Christian Stereotyping", "Illegitimate Children as Acceptable", etc. It is fairly obvious that there isn't a rocket scientist in the entire group. I must say it's interesting, the Orwellian double-speak in the names of many morality groups, such as  "Pro-Life" and  "Moral Majority".  A few better names for so-called  'Moral Majority' types are  "Ludicrous Lunatics" or  "Insidious Idiots". These type of people protest or boycott all kinds of shows, like  "L.A. Law", "Saturday Night Live", and even  "The Wonder Years". What could possibly offend anyone on  "The Wonder Years"? It just goes to show that morons are easily offended.  (to be cont'd)

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern student newspaper in the early  '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript  "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

 

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 11

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 11 of Several

  TV and Radio:

       Television shows are frequent targets of morality groups, and they always seem to target my favorite shows. Former Presidential candidate, the late Senator Paul Simon sponsored a bill to encourage a decrease of violence on tv. So much for the First Amendment!  As far as I'm concerned, violence on television has a very small effect on actual violence. I think it was ridiculous that a Mormon housewife, Terry Rakolta, intimidated many large corporations to stop advertising on the Fox network while  the sitcom  "Married With Children" was on. She apparently lacked the common sense to just change the channel. It is frightening that this lone person could have caused this show's demise. Admittedly, "Married With Children" was a risque, bawdy, decadent, and arguably even a voyeuristic program from time to time and it wasn't for everyone, but it harmed noone and added a lot of needed laughter to the world. Besides which, I'd rather laugh with the Bundys than cry with the saints any day of the week. Personally, I don't care much for the risque humor of the animated comedy  "Family Guy", but I wouldn't want to try to cancel or censor the show for those who enjoy it.  (to be cont'd)

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern  student newspaper in the early '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript  "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 10

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 10 of Several

    The F.C.C. in the 21st Century:

       In the 20eth century the Federal Communications Commission would regulate communication on radio and television. For a long time as George Carlin called  "the seven words you can never say on television" (and radio) could only be heard on pay cable. As a result, to supposedly protect children from violence and sexuality, many movies and other programs had to be as they say "edited for television" with the possible exception of news or medical programs. In the 1970s the miniseries  "Roots" and  later  "Shaka Zulu" showed bare female breasts in a historical context.  Progress was starting to be made during the eighties and early nineties with "NYPD Blue" featuring both profanity and partial nudity at its 10 p.m. time slot. It seemed these ridiculous restrictions on language, violence, and maybe even nudity were

starting to be relaxed or even done away with. Unfortunately, with the appointment of George W. Bush by the Supreme Court in the 2000 election the country's politics shifted rightward. I'm not a big football fan, but when so-called  "Nipplegate" occurred live during the Superbowl the F.C.C. became a right-wing Gestapo against free expression over the airwaves. Within days after Janet Jackson's breast was unintentionally exposed on national television, for political expediency Congress demanded that for even slight infractions of profanity, sexuality, excessive violence or nudity on television or the radio there would be crippling fines of hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. Before the notorious "Nipplegate" occurred any fines would only be in the thousands if anything. I can imagine what Andy Sipowitz (Dennis Franz), the profane police detective from "NYPD Blue" might say about those A-holes in Congress and the F.C.C.  Hopefully under Obama this heavyhanded censorship will be relaxed or abolished, but I heard that Congress wants the F.C.C. to have the power to censor pay cable and satellite television as well.  

  In addition to imposing censorship  on viewers, radio listeners and writers, Congress consolidated media control so there are fewer owners of radio and television stations. The fewer owners there are the more likely certain voices will not be heard. Corporate-controlled media has a conflict of interest to not present information which could hurt their own bottom line or benefit the general public.   

 By the way, I reached the milestone of my 200th post.

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern   student newspaper in the early '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript  "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 9

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 9 of Several

   Movies:

       What angers me most about arrogant and dubiously ethical moralists is that they love to judge things sight-unseen (or sight-obscene). Naturally, for instance, most people who condemned  "The Last Temptation of Christ" did not watch or send one of their right-wing moral pit bulls to screen the film for alleged improprieties. By the way, director Martin Scorcese stood trial in Florence, Italy because the film was considered to be violating a rule against  "contempt for religion".  If the Church learned anything from the Inquisition, any blasphemy laws should be abolished.  Come to think of it, it would have been worth the price of admission to watch prudish moralists locked in a theater watching the controversial Cannes festival winner  "Sex, Lies, and Videotape", the Oscar-nominated  "Dangerous Liaisons", and The critically acclaimed "Scandal".  If an individual or group doesn't like a movie, just don't see it. Don't try to deprive others the choice to see it.  (to be cont'd).

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern student newspaper in the early '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript  "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 8

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 8 of Several

  Literature:

       Many books have been targets and casualties of morality groups. I read The Satanic Verses by Salmon Rushdie. I'm not a Moslem, but as far as I could tell, there was very little, if anything, taboo in it. Given moralists' beliefs, it isn't surprising that they would decry voyeurism, from skin mags to lingerie ads. Less sensible though, is the way they are itching to build a Fahrenheit 451 bonfire for some of the literary classics, such as Huckleberry Finn. Some moralists still want to ban the teaching of evolution, even though genetics and the fossil record all but prove its validity. All-too-many of these moralists are examples of retrogression, the reverse of evolution. What really gets me is that many of these narrow-minded moralists frequently try to ban certain books from classrooms and libraries. Also, to this day these Harper Valley Hypocrites even pressure publishers not to publish the works of controversial artists and authors.

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 7

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 7 of Several

      Music:

       Rock music has always been the target of morality groups, from alleged hidden messages, to the antics of that minimally talented strumpet, Madonna. In Alabama, some time ago, a record store owner was arrested for selling a rap music record deemed offensive by certain moralists; after selling the record to an undercover cop.  

       Someday, perhaps record and CD buyers will one-day risk arrest for buying music someone else deems offensive. Personally, Barry Manilow and Julio Iglesias do to my ears what Chinese bamboo torture do to fingernails, but I wouldn't want to ban them for those who enjoy such noise. It is true that if everyone could ban one thing there would soon be nothing left to ban. (to be cont'd)

       The PMRC or the Parents Music Resource Center was a group of unelected Washington-connected wives, Including Tipper Gore, wife of fromer veep Al, who succeeded in getting record labels on music with violent or sexual lyrics. Due to this group a lot of musicians lost business because kids could no longer buy their records and stores like (according to Wikipedia) Wal-Mart refused to carry their music. The PMRC claims they are not practicing censorship, but if it walks and talks like censorship, then it is censorship. Next thing you know, novels will get labels and who knows what will be available for the general public to read, watch, listen to, or even write about. (to be cont'd) 

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern student newspaper and as part of my unpublished manuscript "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 6

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 6 of Several

   Self-Appointed Moralists:

       The Christian Khomeini's, or more specifically, the dubiously ethical, usually conservative morality groups and their members, get away with a lot of things  that they should never get away with. Sometimes I wish that whoever bore these so-called  'Born Again' moralists a second time around would get post-partum depression, and smack these people around and back to reality. Many of these groups and individuals, including many conservative politicians, believe they have the Divine Right to meddle with everyone else's freedoms of action and choice. Funny thing is, the French aristocracy once pretty much believed the same thing, and look what happened to them.

       Many of these moralists like to try to ban, burn and censor any and everything that might offend, contradict, or refute their own beliefs. Nazi-style book burning is just the tip of the iceburg with many of them. As I see it, if the beliefs of moralists cannot co-exist with other beliefs, then something is obviously awry. These people would like everyone to conform to a very narrow-minded lifestyle. They would likely try to banish or punish any dissidents to their narrow-minded beliefs, if they could. (to be cont'd)

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern student newspaper in the early '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 5

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 5 of Several

    Judicial Censorship: SLAPP Lawsuits:

       Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) are a disturbing trend generally used by large corporations to suppress freedom of speech, assembly and other rights. According to Wikipedia half the United States, including Massachusetts have laws on the books protecting citizens against such abusive legal maneuvers. For those unprotected states and for loopholes to protective laws, any industry that carry out any unpopular practices could prevent bad publicity by filing a SLAPP suit against any would-be protestor who may cause the company to lose business or revenue. These companies may file ridiculously exorbitant slander suits to try to intimidate and silence any would-be critic or protestor. Since these lawsuits are often for millions of dollars, many people quickly become too intimidated to continue protesting. In fact, the experience of being 'SLAPPed' may be enough to make many people think twice about speaking up or acting in the face of injustice or dissatisfaction for the rest of their lives. Imagine if these suits existed in the Civil Rights era. Luckily some gutsy people have countersued due to these groundless slander or nuisance litigations, and many such individuals have received handsome rewards. I think SLAPP suits should be illegal nationwide and internationally, plus any attorney who litigates SLAPP suits should be immediately disbarred and fined.  (to be cont'd)

 [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern  in the early '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 4

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 4 of Several

    The Freedom From Religion Foundation:

       Asking if freedom of religion for the faithful includes freedom from religion for the faithless is a good question to ask. I personally think it should. Members of the Freedom From Religion Foundation want to have  "Under God" removed from 'the Pledge of Allegiance', and  "In God We Trust" from money. I absolutely agree with them. Perhaps this would be a gesture of good will for atheists, Buddhists and religions that do not involve a god. However, these same people also would like to ban free Bibles from hotel rooms. I'm sure that religious people could give scores of reasons to read the Bible, but with illiteracy so widespread in this world and in our own nation, anything that might encourage reading should be allowed. I feel the same way about the works of Nietzche, the "Egyptian Book of the Dead", "Playboy" and other controversial works of literature.  (to be cont'd)

  [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern student newspaper and as part of my unpublished manuscript "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.] 

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 3

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 3 of Several

 More about that later.

        A ludicrous cause bordering on censorship:

       Banning War Toys: 

       With all the problems we have with our economy, the environment, America's infrastructure, etc., why do certain people waste their time? The idea that the youthful use of war toys has anything to do with violence or aggression later in life is absolutely ridiculous. It is especially an absurd cause when the very kids they are trying to deprive of war toys can easily get ahold of a real firearm if they wanted to. While they're at trying to ban war toys, these people would probably try to ban boxing, football, karate, ice hockey, or even  "The Three Stooges." (to be cont'd)

 [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern student newspaper in the early '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]

  

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 2

Essay: "The Insidious Threat of Censorship", Part 2 of Several

       I am not so much concerned with these broadcast preachers as I am with their gullible, brainwashed and lobotomized followers who like to form so-called  'morality groups'. With the possible exception of certain dangerous cults, I have no problem with freedom of religion; provided that nobody is forced to accept or practice someone else's beliefs (except of course for laws). If these people want to change things in a legitimate way, that's fine; but unfortunately members of morality groups and the so-called religious right use all kinds of underhanded schemes to try to impose their will and nonbelievers and others.  (to be cont'd)  

 [The original version of this essay first appeared in Eastern Connecticut State University's Campus Lantern student newspaper in the early '90s and as part of my unpublished manuscript "In Mediocrity We Trust... In Debt We Die" And Other Essays.]