So now you’re noticing that there is a rot at the core of our democracy? Where the hell were you in 1985 when St. Ronald Reagan was selling arms to Iran in order to fund his illegal war in Nicaragua? Where the hell were you in 1964 when Lyndon Johnson was fabricating us into the mudpit of Vietnam with his Tonkin Gulf lies? Where the hell were you in 2003 when W, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Powell were spouting transparent falsehoods about Iraqi involvement in the 9/11 attacks and their non-existent, completely imaginary, and contradicted by actual observed facts reported by international monitors Weapons of Mass Destruction?

Nowhere, you complicit pricks. You disgust me.

Yes, I give H.W. a pass (though he’s also guilty in the Iran/Contra thing) because we actually have a national interest in maintaining stable borders however arbitrarily drawn unless changed through negotiation. It’s the only level that mitigates LBJ, doesn’t excuse, mitigates.

So the latest Pundit Promoted Paean to Centrist Complicity and Fierce Fecklessness is this abomination by Jonathan Rauch and Benjamin Wittes in the March issue of The Atlantic. They basically admit in the sub head that their object as Conservatives is to save Republicans from themselves.

Boycott the Republican Party

We have both spent our professional careers strenuously avoiding partisanship in our writing and thinking. We have both done work that is, in different ways, ideologically eclectic, and that has—over a long period of time—cast us as not merely nonpartisans but antipartisans. Temperamentally, we agree with the late Christopher Hitchens: Partisanship makes you stupid. We are the kind of voters who political scientists say barely exist—true independents who scour candidates’ records in order to base our votes on individual merit, not party brand.

This, then, is the article we thought we would never write: a frank statement that a certain form of partisanship is now a moral necessity. The Republican Party, as an institution, has become a danger to the rule of law and the integrity of our democracy. The problem is not just Donald Trump; it’s the larger political apparatus that made a conscious decision to enable him. In a two-party system, nonpartisanship works only if both parties are consistent democratic actors. If one of them is not predictably so, the space for nonpartisans evaporates. We’re thus driven to believe that the best hope of defending the country from Trump’s Republican enablers, and of saving the Republican Party from itself, is to do as Toren Beasley did: vote mindlessly and mechanically against Republicans at every opportunity, until the party either rights itself or implodes (very preferably the former).
…
We are not motivated by the belief that Republican policies are wrongheaded. We agree with many traditional GOP positions.

We’re proposing something different. We’re suggesting that in today’s situation, people should vote a straight Democratic ticket even if they are not partisan, and despite their policy views. They should vote against Republicans in a spirit that is, if you will, prepartisan and prepolitical. Their attitude should be: The rule of law is a threshold value in American politics, and a party that endangers this value disqualifies itself, period. In other words, under certain peculiar and deeply regrettable circumstances, sophisticated, independent-minded voters need to act as if they were dumb-ass partisans.

I could stop right there. They’ve admitted they’re Conservatives, have no problem at all with their reverse Robin Hood economic policies, and basically exposed their elitist Neo Liberal position that Voters are Idiots and Democracy itself a Chore and a Bore.

But it continues.

For us, this represents a counsel of desperation. So allow us to step back and explain what drove us to what we call oppositional partisanship.

To avoid misunderstanding, here are some things we are not saying. First, although we worry about extremism in the GOP, that is not a reason to boycott the party. We agree with political analysts who say that the Republicans veered off-center earlier and more sharply than the Democrats — but recently the Democrats have made up for lost time by moving rapidly leftward. In any case, under normal circumstances our response to radicalization within a party would be to support sane people within that party.

Nor is our oppositional partisanship motivated by the belief that Republican policies are wrongheaded. Republicans are a variegated bunch, and we agree with many traditional GOP positions. One of us has spent the past several years arguing that counterterrorism authorities should be granted robust powers, defending detentions at Guantánamo Bay, and supporting the confirmations of any number of conservative judges and justices whose nominations enraged liberals. The other is a Burkean conservative with libertarian tendencies and a long history of activism against left-wing intolerance. And even if we did consistently reject Republican policy positions, that would not be sufficient basis to boycott the entire party — just to oppose the bad ideas advanced by it.

One more nonreason for our stance: that we are horrified by the president. To be sure, we are horrified by much that Trump has said and done. But many members of his party are likewise horrified. Republicans such as Senators John McCain and Bob Corker and Jeff Flake and Ben Sasse, as well as former Governors Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush, have spoken out and conducted themselves with integrity. Abandoning an entire party means abandoning many brave and honorable people. We would not do that based simply on rot at the top.

So why have we come to regard the GOP as an institutional danger? In a nutshell, it has proved unable or unwilling (mostly unwilling) to block assaults by Trump and his base on the rule of law. Those assaults, were they to be normalized, would pose existential, not incidental, threats to American democracy.

Future generations of scholars will scrutinize the many weird ways that Trump has twisted the GOP. For present purposes, however, let’s focus on the party’s failure to restrain the president from two unforgivable sins. The first is his attempt to erode the independence of the justice system. This includes Trump’s sinister interactions with his law-enforcement apparatus: his demands for criminal investigations of his political opponents, his pressuring of law-enforcement leaders on investigative matters, his frank efforts to interfere with investigations that implicate his personal interests, and his threats against the individuals who run the Justice Department. It also includes his attacks on federal judges, his pardon of a sheriff convicted of defying a court’s order to enforce constitutional rights, his belief that he gets to decide on Twitter who is guilty of what crimes, and his view that the justice system exists to effectuate his will. Some Republicans have clucked disapprovingly at various of Trump’s acts. But in each case, many other Republicans have cheered, and the party, as a party, has quickly moved on. A party that behaves this way is not functioning as a democratic actor.

The second unforgivable sin is Trump’s encouragement of a foreign adversary’s interference in U.S. electoral processes. Leave aside the question of whether Trump’s cooperation with the Russians violated the law. He at least tacitly collaborated with a foreign-intelligence operation against his country — sometimes in full public view. This started during the campaign, when he called upon the Russians to steal and release his opponent’s emails, and has continued during his presidency, as he equivocates on whether foreign intervention occurred and smears intelligence professionals who stand by the facts. Meanwhile, the Republican Party has confirmed his nominees, doggedly pursued its agenda on tax reform and health care, and attacked — of course — Hillary Clinton.

You know, which they do not disagree with. Just the consorting with Russians and slandering the FBI (which deserves some slander- CoIntelPro) bit.

Even now, erosion is visible. Republican partisans and policy makers routinely accept insults to constitutional norms that, under Barack Obama, they would have condemned as outrageous. When Trump tweeted about taking “NBC and the Networks” off the air (“Network news has become so partisan, distorted and fake that licenses must be challenged and, if appropriate, revoked”), congressional Republicans were quick to repudiate … left-wing media bias. In a poll by the Cato Institute, almost two-thirds of Republican respondents agreed with the president that journalists are “an enemy of the American people.” How much damage can Trump do in the next three years? We don’t know, but we see no grounds to be complacent.

Oh, I get it. You think Trump is threatening your Phoney Balony jobs. Too bad you overpaid twits.

The optimistic outcome depends to some degree on precisely the sort of oppositional partisanship we are prescribing. For Trump to be restrained going forward, key congressional enablers will need to lose their seats in the midterm elections to people who will use legislation and oversight to push back against the administration. Without such electoral losses, the picture looks decidedly grimmer.

Finally, we might not be talking about just three more years. Trump could get reelected; incumbent presidents usually do. In any event, he is likely, at a minimum, to be renominated for the presidency.

That’s because Trump has won the heart of the Republican base. He may be unpopular with the public at large, but among Republicans, nothing he and his supporters said or did during his first year in office drove his Gallup approval ratings significantly below 80 percent. Forced to choose between their support for Trump and their suspicion of Russia, conservatives went with Trump. Forced to choose between their support for Trump and their insistence that character matters, evangelicals went with Trump.

It’s Trump’s party now; or, perhaps more to the point, it’s Trumpism’s party, because a portion of the base seems eager to out-Trump Trump. In last year’s special election to fill a vacant U.S. Senate seat in Alabama, Republican primary voters defied the president himself by nominating a candidate who was openly contemptuous of the rule of law — and many stuck with him when he was credibly alleged to have been a child molester. After initially balking, the Republican Party threw its institutional support behind him too. In Virginia, pressure from the base drove a previously sensible Republican gubernatorial candidate into the fever swamps. Faced with the choice between soul-killing accommodation and futile resistance, many Republican politicians who renounce Trumpism are fleeing the party or exiting politics altogether. Of those who remain, many are fighting for their political lives against a nihilistic insurgency.

So we arrive at a syllogism:

1. The GOP has become the party of Trumpism.
2. Trumpism is a threat to democratic values and the rule of law.
3. The Republican Party is a threat to democratic values and the rule of law.

If the syllogism holds, then the most-important tasks in U.S. politics right now are to change the Republicans’ trajectory and to deprive them of power in the meantime. In our two-party system, the surest way to accomplish these things is to support the other party, in every race from president to dogcatcher. The goal is to make the Republican Party answerable at every level, exacting a political price so stinging as to force the party back into the democratic fold.

The off-year elections in November showed that this is possible. Democrats flooded polling places, desperate to “resist.” Independents added their voice. Even some Republicans abandoned their party. One Virginia Republican, explaining why he had just voted for Democrats in every race, told The Washington Post, “I’ve been with the Republicans my whole life, but what the party has been doing is appalling.” Trump’s base stayed loyal but was overwhelmed by other voters. A few more spankings like that will give anti-Trump Republicans a fighting chance to regain influence within their party.

We understand why Republicans, even moderate ones, are reluctant to cross party lines. Party, today, is identity. But in the through-the-looking-glass era of Donald Trump, the best thing Republicans can do for their party is vote against it.

We understand, too, the many imperfections of the Democratic Party. Its left is extreme, its center is confused, and it has its share of bad apples. But the Democratic Party is not a threat to our democratic order. That is why we are rising above our independent predilections and behaving like dumb-ass partisans. It’s why we hope many smart people will do the same.

They’re a pair of assholes.

Basically they’re just as racist, bigoted, and misogynous as any Trump supporter, but they think he’s bad for the GOP brand and that interferes with their goal to steal more from the Poor and give it to the wealthiest .01%.

But they are right. The Republican Party is hopelessly in thrall to Trump and the only choice is to fire them all.

That’s right, all.

Democrats need to do the same, but not because our incumbents are too Left or Liberal. They are not Left or Liberal enough. To fail to advance policies supported by 60, 70, 80% majorities of the population is a combination of cowardice and graft.

Welcome to The Breakfast Club! We’re a disorganized group of rebel lefties who hang out and chat if and when we’re not too hungover we’ve been bailed out we’re not too exhausted from last night’s (CENSORED) the caffeine kicks in. Join us every weekday morning at 9am (ET) and weekend morning at 10:00am (ET) (or whenever we get around to it) to talk about current news and our boring lives and to make fun of LaEscapee! If we are ever running late, it’s PhilJD’s fault.

The Beatles arrive in America; Ramzi Yousef arrested for the 1993 blast at New York’s World Trade Center; Jordan’s King Hussein dies; author Charles Dickens and country singer Garth Brooks born.

We must interpret a bad temper as a sign of inferiority.

Alfred Adler

Continue reading

Wednesday, do you think that maybe someday you might want to get married and have kids?
No.
But what if you met the right man, who worshiped and adored you? Who’d do anything for you? Who’d be your devoted slave? Then what would you do?
I’d pity him.
Poor Debbie. She was sick.
She wasn’t sick. She was sloppy.
What do you mean?
If I wanted to kill my husband, I’d do it, and I wouldn’t get caught.
How?
I’d scare him to death.

Anakin! You ruined my life! And what’s worse, my career!

Episode One

An Audience Of One

Weekend Update

Austin & Ally

Ok, that’s a Disney property, but still.

Blink (Not The Doctor One)

You can argue that Joe Manchin is the best Democrat we can expect a backwater incestuous Hillbilly State like West Virginia to produce (personally I think we should be civilizing it, though that hasn’t quite worked out in Afghanistan which we are pounding today with massive B – 52 strikes) and that anyone, just anyone, willing to put a D next to their name is vitally important to breaking Republican control of Congress.

I said you can argue that, not that I agree with it.

What you can’t argue is Joe Manchin barely deserves that endorsement because he’s hardly a Democrat and he is 100% a moron.

Democratic senator pitches bizarre pledge barring senators from campaigning against colleagues
by Alan Pyke, Think Progress
Feb 6, 2018

The U.S. Senate should be a polite membership club rather than a contentious governmental body whose balance of power shapes the lives of millions of human beings, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) argued Tuesday.

Manchin went to the floor to beg his colleagues to sign a bizarre pledge of mutual loyalty to one another. “Washington will be dysfunctional until we all draw a line of truce and say we’re here for the same reason, we take the same oath,” he said. “If you’re willing to serve, you’re my comrade and I’m willing to work with you.”

He decried the endless fundraising that fills politicians’ nights and the vitriolic politicking that crowds their days, before taking out a pen and signing a formal pledge of his own design. “I’m pledging to the people of West Virginia and to the American people that I will not campaign against a sitting colleague,” he said.

Manchin’s document calls for the 100 stinking-rich members of the most prestigious, least prolific legislative body in the developed world to down tools. Pledge signers would give their word to never campaign against another sitting senator, raise money for their opponents, and “not use or endorse social media campaigns that attack them.”
…
Picture for a moment the world Manchin envisions.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R), representing almost 28 million Texans in Washington, would not be allowed to criticize Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D), the voice of some 757,952 North Dakotans, on the internet.

The next time Sen. Joni Ernst (R) votes to restrict abortion rights using the power given to her by Iowa’s 3.1 million people, the women who represent 39 million Californians in the Senate would be barred from helping reproductive rights groups raise money to defeat her.

When Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) leverages humanitarian impulses toward refugees and migrants to swindle colleagues into giving away trillions of dollars to already-rich people, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) would be allowed to say that’s bad on the floor, but never to tweet about #MoneybagsMitch or throw a fundraiser for a Kentucky Democrat who wants to make McConnell prove he’s still worthy of representing their state.

This is a recipe for a dumber, shallower world, perhaps more polite but decidedly less engaged with real and deep disagreements about which policies are good and which are bad.

Manchin’s pledge would also reinforce the core problems of the Senate as a democratically representative institution. This is an organization of 100 rich incumbents — average net worth $11 million — who routinely greet the concerns of the needy with deaf ears even under the current partisanship Manchin ostensibly decries. The federalist design of the body that made so much sense to the nation’s framers a quarter-millenium ago now makes a mockery of democratic ideals. Sens. Mike Enzi (R-WY) and John Barrasso (R-WY) can cancel out the votes of Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and Kamala Harris (D-CA) anytime, giving Wyoming’s 585,000 residents exactly the same representation in the Senate as the one-in-six Americans who live in California.

Preventing any of these people from doing politics to one another just because they won an election once would only make the institution even more representationally decrepit. The Senate only responds to the interests and concerns of the wealthiest people and companies in the country today. That isn’t a matter of Republican control — as much as Democrats like to position themselves as champions of the underclass, the same research finds they’re at least as blind as their GOP colleagues to the needs of the poor and middle-class — but of incumbency. The average sitting senator has been in office for just under 11 years. One in five senators has been in their job for over 15 years, with an average tenure of 25 years in that senior-most fifth of the body.
…
(T)he idea of solving those problems by promising to never go after somebody who fails to represent the best interests of their citizens, simply because they’re already a member of the club, is something out of a 1990s West Wing episode.

In the real world in 2018, the pledge Manchin signed Tuesday put him within a few thousand Alabama votes of promising to never speak ill of a man whose reputation for sexually preying upon teenagers was so well-known that he was banned from a shopping mall.

It is in fact a proposal for creating a hereditary aristocracy. Do we even live in the United States anymore?

Welcome to The Breakfast Club! We’re a disorganized group of rebel lefties who hang out and chat if and when we’re not too hungover we’ve been bailed out we’re not too exhausted from last night’s (CENSORED) the caffeine kicks in. Join us every weekday morning at 9am (ET) and weekend morning at 10:00am (ET) (or whenever we get around to it) to talk about current news and our boring lives and to make fun of LaEscapee! If we are ever running late, it’s PhilJD’s fault.

President Ronald Reagan born; Hillary Clinton runs for the U.S. Senate; Britain’s King George VI dies; baseball legend Babe Ruth and reggae superstar Bob Marley born.

Come gather round people wherever you roam
And admit that our country don’t feel like our home
And that silence speaks louder than those who condone
If a tweet to you is worth favin’
Then lift up your voices and put down your phones
For the times they are a-changin’

Come women and men who hashtag Me Too
And believe me when I say that we believe you
For weak is the man who calls truth “fake news”
Time’s up, our silence we’re breaking
And even though Mel Gibson was in Daddy’s Home 2
Well the times they are a-changin’

Come athletes with platforms throughout the land
Who by taking a knee are taking a stand
And before you shout out that they should be banned
Listen to what they are saying
Perhaps they’d stand up if you reached out your hand
Well the times they are a-changing

Come journalists, writers who report the facts
And brandish your pen to fend off his attacks
Look past what he says and look at how he acts
The fire and fury is raging
For his words can hurt, but your words can fight back
New York Times, they aren’t a-failin’

Come leaders who bully like Internet trolls
We’ll curse you with four-letter words ‘love’ and ‘hope’
For we will go high even when you go low
The order is re-arranging For you have the power, but we have the vote
The times they are a-changin’

Continue reading

You know, in Russia they call it “The Great Patriotic War” and it must be admitted that they pretty much carried our water in blood and soil until we got our act together and opened up that second front they kept nagging us about. It is entirely questionable whether we would have prevailed without their assistance. There could be Swastikas flying from flagpoles today and the City (there is only one) might be a smoking crater devastated by a Heisenberg Bomb fueled by Norwegian Heavy Water delivered by a Horton 229 Stealth Plane.

Hey, it’s on the “History” Channel, it’s probably true. Some of it actually is, especially the Russia part.

Based on popular culture you might have thought that the one thing we could all agree on is that Nazis are bad. Really, really bad. Worse even than Zombies unless they happen to be Nazi Zombies.

Apparently that doesn’t apply to the Republican Party.

Holocaust denier poised to claim GOP nomination in Illinois race for Congress
by Lynn Sweet and Frank Main, Chicago Sun-Times
02/04/2018

Arthur Jones — an outspoken Holocaust denier, activist anti-Semite and white supremacist — is poised to become the Republican nominee for an Illinois congressional seat representing parts of Chicago and nearby suburbs.

“Well first of all, I’m running for Congress not the chancellor of Germany. All right. To me the Holocaust is what I said it is: It’s an international extortion racket,” Jones told the Chicago Sun-Times.

Indeed, Jones’ website for his latest congressional run includes a section titled “The ‘Holocaust Racket’” where he calls the genocide carried out by the German Nazi regime and collaborators in other nations “the biggest blackest lie in history.”
…
“And given the fact that I’ve got no opposition in the primary, OK, I win that one (the primary) by default all right,” Jones said during an interview in a coffee shop in Lyons.

That leaves Illinois Republicans saddled with a nominee who is well known for his racist and white supremacist activities.
…
Jones told the Sun-Times he is a former leader of the American Nazi Party and now heads a group called the America First Committee. “Membership in this organization is open to any white American citizen of European, non-Jewish descent,” he said.

The Anti-Defamation League has been keeping tabs on him for years.

“Arthur Jones, who proudly displays Holocaust denial, xenophobia and racism on his blog and website, has a long history of hateful, extremist and anti-Semitic views,” said Lonnie Nasatir, the regional director of the Anti-Defamation League Chicago-Upper Midwest Region.

“For example, in 2009, he protested the opening of the Illinois Holocaust Museum and Education Center, and continues to espouse absurd conspiracy theories questioning the deaths of millions of Jews.

“He has spoken publicly at numerous neo-Nazi rallies and events, expressing xenophobic policies based in racial and religious hatred. He is, by every definition, an anti-Semite and unrepentant bigot.”

The likelihood is that he sinks like a stone in one of the most Democratic districts in Illinois, but on the other hand, Republicans have not come up with a challenger either.

(h/t Scarce @ Crooks and Liars)

So last Thursday I was writing about the Pennsylvania Gerrymandering case and lamenting it was even considered for review by the Supreme Court.

I was sure Justice Samuel Alito (who is the one who covers that geographical area) would at least kick it up to the full Court because 1) he is a total Republican tool, and 2) it would delay the decision past the deadline required to eliminate continued Republican advantage in 2018. Well guess what…

I WAS WRONG!

Who says I don’t admit my mistakes?

Pennsylvania’s Republican gerrymander is finally dead
by Ian Millhiser, Think Progress
Feb 5, 2018

On Monday, the Justice Samuel Alito rejected an effort by Republican leaders in Pennsylvania to restore a Republican gerrymander that has allowed Republicans to dominate the state’s congressional delegation even in years when Democrats won the statewide popular vote.

Though stay requests such as this one are directed to a single justice as a matter of process, that justice typically refers the matter to the full Court if they believe that the request raises a serious legal argument. The fact that Alito, a staunch conservative, unilaterally denied this request speaks to the weakness of the GOP’s claims.

Last month, the state supreme court ordered new maps drawn for the 2018 election. Now that the Supreme Court of the United States has officially stayed its hand, the state’s gerrymandered congressional districts are all but certain to become a relic of the past.

The Republican leaders’ effort to reinstate their gerrymandered maps was always a long shot. Pennsylvania’s supreme court decision relied entirely on the state constitution, and the United States Supreme Court does not have the authority to overrule a state supreme court’s interpretation of state law. Nevertheless, the Republican leaders raised arguments that conflict with a line of precedents that the United States Supreme Court reaffirmed as recently as 2015 (PDF).

Had the Republicans prevailed, they could have potentially changed the outcome of the 2018 midterm elections. Under the gerrymandered maps, Republicans have won 13 of 18 seats in the state’s congressional district every year since 2012 — even though Democrats won the statewide popular vote in 2012.

Last week, Pennsylvania Senate President pro tempore Joseph Scarnati (R) told the state supreme court that he would not comply with parts of its anti-gerrymandering order. Now that the state supreme court’s decision is officially safe from molestation, Scarnati is likely to find himself in contempt of court if he does not change his tune.

Good. Lock him up. Alito is still a Republican tool though.

Since I’ve actually performed in a Marching Band I’ve known a few and they’re mostly talentless pricks. “Oh, let’s give him a job he can’t screw up. He can’t March and he can’t Play and he can’t twirl a Flag or a Baton or throw a Rifle so let’s just put him out in front with a fancy uniform and a stick where he can do whatever and the Band will follow the Director.” In short the most useless guy on the field.

Some people think it’s a leadership position. Actually it’s a pretty good metaphor for Trump.

Fifty years ago yesterday, shortly before his death, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. gave a sermon titled The Drum Major Instinct that was based on an earlier work by J. Wallace Hamilton, a well known Methodist pastor who happened to be White.

Now this is trending to be a matter of some controversy, at least in the twit sphere, because it was used in a truck ad during the Super Bowl.

I am a White guy (you can hardly get Whiter) and before I became a convinced atheist I was raised Methodist, like Hillary Clinton and W (MLK was a Baptist, heretic).

I didn’t find any problem with that ad. Oh sure, it was an ad, but you know, I got outraged the first time they used a Beatles song and now I’m just happy to remember something I really enjoyed when I heard it originally. The King family has been merchandising his legacy for a long time. That’s not a blame accusation, only an observed fact.

What I’m interested in is that it reminded me of this really good piece by MLK. I’ve read it before of course, but there is a lot of King and I’m not an academic specialist expected to have an instant command of every word he ever uttered.

So I looked it up.

I invite you to consider it, bereft of commercial encumberment. It speaks to me, at this time, despite the circumstances which commanded my renewed attention.

This morning I would like to use as a subject from which to preach: “The Drum Major Instinct.” “The Drum Major Instinct.” And our text for the morning is taken from a very familiar passage in the tenth chapter as recorded by Saint Mark. Beginning with the thirty-fifth verse of that chapter, we read these words: “And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came unto him saying, ‘Master, we would that thou shouldest do for us whatsoever we shall desire.’ And he said unto them, ‘What would ye that I should do for you?’ And they said unto him, ‘Grant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand, in thy glory.’ But Jesus said unto them, ‘Ye know not what ye ask: Can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?’ And they said unto him, ‘We can.’ And Jesus said unto them, ‘Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of, and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized: but to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give; but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared.’” And then Jesus goes on toward the end of that passage to say, “But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your servant: and whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all.”

The setting is clear. James and John are making a specific request of the master. They had dreamed, as most of the Hebrews dreamed, of a coming king of Israel who would set Jerusalem free and establish his kingdom on Mount Zion, and in righteousness rule the world. And they thought of Jesus as this kind of king. And they were thinking of that day when Jesus would reign supreme as this new king of Israel. And they were saying, “Now when you establish your kingdom, let one of us sit on the right hand and the other on the left hand of your throne.”

Now very quickly, we would automatically condemn James and John, and we would say they were selfish. Why would they make such a selfish request? But before we condemn them too quickly, let us look calmly and honestly at ourselves, and we will discover that we too have those same basic desires for recognition, for importance. That same desire for attention, that same desire to be first. Of course, the other disciples got mad with James and John, and you could understand why, but we must understand that we have some of the same James and John qualities. And there is deep down within all of us an instinct. It’s a kind of drum major instinct—a desire to be out front, a desire to lead the parade, a desire to be first. And it is something that runs the whole gamut of life.

And so before we condemn them, let us see that we all have the drum major instinct. We all want to be important, to surpass others, to achieve distinction, to lead the parade. Alfred Adler, the great psychoanalyst, contends that this is the dominant impulse. Sigmund Freud used to contend that sex was the dominant impulse, and Adler came with a new argument saying that this quest for recognition, this desire for attention, this desire for distinction is the basic impulse, the basic drive of human life, this drum major instinct.

And you know, we begin early to ask life to put us first. Our first cry as a baby was a bid for attention. And all through childhood the drum major impulse or instinct is a major obsession. Children ask life to grant them first place. They are a little bundle of ego. And they have innately the drum major impulse or the drum major instinct.

Now in adult life, we still have it, and we really never get by it. We like to do something good. And you know, we like to be praised for it. Now if you don’t believe that, you just go on living life, and you will discover very soon that you like to be praised. Everybody likes it, as a matter of fact. And somehow this warm glow we feel when we are praised or when our name is in print is something of the vitamin A to our ego. Nobody is unhappy when they are praised, even if they know they don’t deserve it and even if they don’t believe it. The only unhappy people about praise is when that praise is going too much toward somebody else. (That’s right) But everybody likes to be praised because of this real drum major instinct.

Now the presence of the drum major instinct is why so many people are “joiners.” You know, there are some people who just join everything. And it’s really a quest for attention and recognition and importance. And they get names that give them that impression. So you get your groups, and they become the “Grand Patron,” and the little fellow who is henpecked at home needs a chance to be the “Most Worthy of the Most Worthy” of something. It is the drum major impulse and longing that runs the gamut of human life. And so we see it everywhere, this quest for recognition. And we join things, overjoin really, that we think that we will find that recognition in.

Now the presence of this instinct explains why we are so often taken by advertisers. You know, those gentlemen of massive verbal persuasion. And they have a way of saying things to you that kind of gets you into buying. In order to be a man of distinction, you must drink this whiskey. In order to make your neighbors envious, you must drive this type of car. (Make it plain) In order to be lovely to love you must wear this kind of lipstick or this kind of perfume. And you know, before you know it, you’re just buying that stuff. (Yes) That’s the way the advertisers do it.

I got a letter the other day, and it was a new magazine coming out. And it opened up, “Dear Dr. King: As you know, you are on many mailing lists. And you are categorized as highly intelligent, progressive, a lover of the arts and the sciences, and I know you will want to read what I have to say.” Of course I did. After you said all of that and explained me so exactly, of course I wanted to read it. [laughter]

But very seriously, it goes through life; the drum major instinct is real. (Yes) And you know what else it causes to happen? It often causes us to live above our means. (Make it plain) It’s nothing but the drum major instinct. Do you ever see people buy cars that they can’t even begin to buy in terms of their income? (Amen) [laughter] You’ve seen people riding around in Cadillacs and Chryslers who don’t earn enough to have a good T-Model Ford. (Make it plain) But it feeds a repressed ego.

You know, economists tell us that your automobile should not cost more than half of your annual income. So if you make an income of five thousand dollars, your car shouldn’t cost more than about twenty-five hundred. That’s just good economics. And if it’s a family of two, and both members of the family make ten thousand dollars, they would have to make out with one car. That would be good economics, although it’s often inconvenient. But so often, haven’t you seen people making five thousand dollars a year and driving a car that costs six thousand? And they wonder why their ends never meet. [laughter] That’s a fact.

Now the economists also say that your house shouldn’t cost—if you’re buying a house, it shouldn’t cost more than twice your income. That’s based on the economy and how you would make ends meet. So, if you have an income of five thousand dollars, it’s kind of difficult in this society. But say it’s a family with an income of ten thousand dollars, the house shouldn’t cost much more than twenty thousand. Well, I’ve seen folk making ten thousand dollars, living in a forty- and fifty-thousand-dollar house. And you know they just barely make it. They get a check every month somewhere, and they owe all of that out before it comes in. Never have anything to put away for rainy days.

But now the problem is, it is the drum major instinct. And you know, you see people over and over again with the drum major instinct taking them over. And they just live their lives trying to outdo the Joneses. (Amen) They got to get this coat because this particular coat is a little better and a little better-looking than Mary’s coat. And I got to drive this car because it’s something about this car that makes my car a little better than my neighbor’s car. (Amen) I know a man who used to live in a thirty-five-thousand-dollar house. And other people started building thirty-five-thousand-dollar houses, so he built a seventy-five-thousand-dollar house. And then somebody else built a seventy-five-thousand-dollar house, and he built a hundred-thousand-dollar house. And I don’t know where he’s going to end up if he’s going to live his life trying to keep up with the Joneses.

There comes a time that the drum major instinct can become destructive. (Make it plain) And that’s where I want to move now. I want to move to the point of saying that if this instinct is not harnessed, it becomes a very dangerous, pernicious instinct. For instance, if it isn’t harnessed, it causes one’s personality to become distorted. I guess that’s the most damaging aspect of it: what it does to the personality. If it isn’t harnessed, you will end up day in and day out trying to deal with your ego problem by boasting. Have you ever heard people that—you know, and I’m sure you’ve met them—that really become sickening because they just sit up all the time talking about themselves. (Amen) And they just boast and boast and boast, and that’s the person who has not harnessed the drum major instinct.

And then it does other things to the personality. It causes you to lie about who you know sometimes. (Amen, Make it plain) There are some people who are influence peddlers. And in their attempt to deal with the drum major instinct, they have to try to identify with the so-called big-name people. (Yeah, Make it plain) And if you’re not careful, they will make you think they know somebody that they don’t really know. (Amen) They know them well, they sip tea with them, and they this-and-that. That happens to people.

And the other thing is that it causes one to engage ultimately in activities that are merely used to get attention. Criminologists tell us that some people are driven to crime because of this drum major instinct. They don’t feel that they are getting enough attention through the normal channels of social behavior, and so they turn to anti-social behavior in order to get attention, in order to feel important. (Yeah) And so they get that gun, and before they know it they robbed a bank in a quest for recognition, in a quest for importance.

And then the final great tragedy of the distorted personality is the fact that when one fails to harness this instinct, (Glory to God) he ends up trying to push others down in order to push himself up. (Amen) And whenever you do that, you engage in some of the most vicious activities. You will spread evil, vicious, lying gossip on people, because you are trying to pull them down in order to push yourself up. (Make it plain) And the great issue of life is to harness the drum major instinct.

Now the other problem is, when you don’t harness the drum major instinct—this uncontrolled aspect of it—is that it leads to snobbish exclusivism. It leads to snobbish exclusivism. (Make it plain) And you know, this is the danger of social clubs and fraternities—I’m in a fraternity; I’m in two or three—for sororities and all of these, I’m not talking against them. I’m saying it’s the danger. The danger is that they can become forces of classism and exclusivism where somehow you get a degree of satisfaction because you are in something exclusive. And that’s fulfilling something, you know—that I’m in this fraternity, and it’s the best fraternity in the world, and everybody can’t get in this fraternity. So it ends up, you know, a very exclusive kind of thing.

And you know, that can happen with the church; I know churches get in that bind sometimes. (Amen, Make it plain) I’ve been to churches, you know, and they say, “We have so many doctors, and so many school teachers, and so many lawyers, and so many businessmen in our church.” And that’s fine, because doctors need to go to church, and lawyers, and businessmen, teachers—they ought to be in church. But they say that—even the preacher sometimes will go all through that—they say that as if the other people don’t count. (Amen)

And the church is the one place where a doctor ought to forget that he’s a doctor. The church is the one place where a Ph.D. ought to forget that he’s a Ph.D. (Yes) The church is the one place that the school teacher ought to forget the degree she has behind her name. The church is the one place where the lawyer ought to forget that he’s a lawyer. And any church that violates the “whosoever will, let him come” doctrine is a dead, cold church, (Yes) and nothing but a little social club with a thin veneer of religiosity.

When the church is true to its nature, (Whoo) it says, “Whosoever will, let him come.” (Yes) And it does not supposed to satisfy the perverted uses of the drum major instinct. It’s the one place where everybody should be the same, standing before a common master and savior. (Yes, sir) And a recognition grows out of this—that all men are brothers because they are children (Yes) of a common father.

The drum major instinct can lead to exclusivism in one’s thinking and can lead one to feel that because he has some training, he’s a little better than that person who doesn’t have it. Or because he has some economic security, that he’s a little better than that person who doesn’t have it. And that’s the uncontrolled, perverted use of the drum major instinct.

Now the other thing is, that it leads to tragic—and we’ve seen it happen so often—tragic race prejudice. Many who have written about this problem—Lillian Smith used to say it beautifully in some of her books. And she would say it to the point of getting men and women to see the source of the problem. Do you know that a lot of the race problem grows out of the drum major instinct? A need that some people have to feel superior. A need that some people have to feel that they are first, and to feel that their white skin ordained them to be first. (Make it plain, today, ‘cause I’m against it, so help me God) And they have said over and over again in ways that we see with our own eyes. In fact, not too long ago, a man down in Mississippi said that God was a charter member of the White Citizens Council. And so God being the charter member means that everybody who’s in that has a kind of divinity, a kind of superiority. And think of what has happened in history as a result of this perverted use of the drum major instinct. It has led to the most tragic prejudice, the most tragic expressions of man’s inhumanity to man.

The other day I was saying, I always try to do a little converting when I’m in jail. And when we were in jail in Birmingham the other day, the white wardens and all enjoyed coming around the cell to talk about the race problem. And they were showing us where we were so wrong demonstrating. And they were showing us where segregation was so right. And they were showing us where intermarriage was so wrong. So I would get to preaching, and we would get to talking—calmly, because they wanted to talk about it. And then we got down one day to the point—that was the second or third day—to talk about where they lived, and how much they were earning. And when those brothers told me what they were earning, I said, “Now, you know what? You ought to be marching with us. [laughter] You’re just as poor as Negroes.” And I said, “You are put in the position of supporting your oppressor, because through prejudice and blindness, you fail to see that the same forces that oppress Negroes in American society oppress poor white people. (Yes) And all you are living on is the satisfaction of your skin being white, and the drum major instinct of thinking that you are somebody big because you are white. And you’re so poor you can’t send your children to school. You ought to be out here marching with every one of us every time we have a march.”

Now that’s a fact. That the poor white has been put into this position, where through blindness and prejudice, (Make it plain) he is forced to support his oppressors. And the only thing he has going for him is the false feeling that he’s superior because his skin is white—and can’t hardly eat and make his ends meet week in and week out. (Amen)

And not only does this thing go into the racial struggle, it goes into the struggle between nations. And I would submit to you this morning that what is wrong in the world today is that the nations of the world are engaged in a bitter, colossal contest for supremacy. And if something doesn’t happen to stop this trend, I’m sorely afraid that we won’t be here to talk about Jesus Christ and about God and about brotherhood too many more years. (Yeah) If somebody doesn’t bring an end to this suicidal thrust that we see in the world today, none of us are going to be around, because somebody’s going to make the mistake through our senseless blunderings of dropping a nuclear bomb somewhere. And then another one is going to drop. And don’t let anybody fool you, this can happen within a matter of seconds. (Amen) They have twenty-megaton bombs in Russia right now that can destroy a city as big as New York in three seconds, with everybody wiped away, and every building. And we can do the same thing to Russia and China.

But this is why we are drifting. And we are drifting there because nations are caught up with the drum major instinct. “I must be first.” “I must be supreme.” “Our nation must rule the world.” (Preach it) And I am sad to say that the nation in which we live is the supreme culprit. And I’m going to continue to say it to America, because I love this country too much to see the drift that it has taken.

God didn’t call America to do what she’s doing in the world now. (Preach it, preach it) God didn’t call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war as the war in Vietnam. And we are criminals in that war. We’ve committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world, and I’m going to continue to say it. And we won’t stop it because of our pride and our arrogance as a nation.

But God has a way of even putting nations in their place. (Amen) The God that I worship has a way of saying, “Don’t play with me.” (Yes) He has a way of saying, as the God of the Old Testament used to say to the Hebrews, “Don’t play with me, Israel. Don’t play with me, Babylon. (Yes) Be still and know that I’m God. And if you don’t stop your reckless course, I’ll rise up and break the backbone of your power.” (Yes) And that can happen to America. (Yes) Every now and then I go back and read Gibbons’ Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. And when I come and look at America, I say to myself, the parallels are frightening. And we have perverted the drum major instinct.

But let me rush on to my conclusion, because I want you to see what Jesus was really saying. What was the answer that Jesus gave these men? It’s very interesting. One would have thought that Jesus would have condemned them. One would have thought that Jesus would have said, “You are out of your place. You are selfish. Why would you raise such a question?”

But that isn’t what Jesus did; he did something altogether different. He said in substance, “Oh, I see, you want to be first. You want to be great. You want to be important. You want to be significant. Well, you ought to be. If you’re going to be my disciple, you must be.” But he reordered priorities. And he said, “Yes, don’t give up this instinct. It’s a good instinct if you use it right. (Yes) It’s a good instinct if you don’t distort it and pervert it. Don’t give it up. Keep feeling the need for being important. Keep feeling the need for being first. But I want you to be first in love. (Amen) I want you to be first in moral excellence. I want you to be first in generosity. That is what I want you to do.”

And he transformed the situation by giving a new definition of greatness. And you know how he said it? He said, “Now brethren, I can’t give you greatness. And really, I can’t make you first.” This is what Jesus said to James and John. “You must earn it. True greatness comes not by favoritism, but by fitness. And the right hand and the left are not mine to give, they belong to those who are prepared.” (Amen)

And so Jesus gave us a new norm of greatness. If you want to be important—wonderful. If you want to be recognized—wonderful. If you want to be great—wonderful. But recognize that he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. (Amen) That’s a new definition of greatness.

And this morning, the thing that I like about it: by giving that definition of greatness, it means that everybody can be great, (Everybody) because everybody can serve. (Amen) You don’t have to have a college degree to serve. (All right) You don’t have to make your subject and your verb agree to serve. You don’t have to know about Plato and Aristotle to serve. You don’t have to know Einstein’s theory of relativity to serve. You don’t have to know the second theory of thermodynamics in physics to serve. (Amen) You only need a heart full of grace, (Yes, sir, Amen) a soul generated by love. (Yes) And you can be that servant.

I know a man—and I just want to talk about him a minute, and maybe you will discover who I’m talking about as I go down the way (Yeah) because he was a great one. And he just went about serving. He was born in an obscure village, (Yes, sir) the child of a poor peasant woman. And then he grew up in still another obscure village, where he worked as a carpenter until he was thirty years old. (Amen) Then for three years, he just got on his feet, and he was an itinerant preacher. And he went about doing some things. He didn’t have much. He never wrote a book. He never held an office. He never had a family. (Yes) He never owned a house. He never went to college. He never visited a big city. He never went two hundred miles from where he was born. He did none of the usual things that the world would associate with greatness. He had no credentials but himself.

He was only thirty-three when the tide of public opinion turned against him. They called him a rabble-rouser. They called him a troublemaker. They said he was an agitator. (Glory to God) He practiced civil disobedience; he broke injunctions. And so he was turned over to his enemies and went through the mockery of a trial. And the irony of it all is that his friends turned him over to them. (Amen) One of his closest friends denied him. Another of his friends turned him over to his enemies. And while he was dying, the people who killed him gambled for his clothing, the only possession that he had in the world. (Lord help him) When he was dead he was buried in a borrowed tomb, through the pity of a friend.

Nineteen centuries have come and gone and today he stands as the most influential figure that ever entered human history. All of the armies that ever marched, all the navies that ever sailed, all the parliaments that ever sat, and all the kings that ever reigned put together (Yes) have not affected the life of man on this earth (Amen) as much as that one solitary life. His name may be a familiar one. (Jesus) But today I can hear them talking about him. Every now and then somebody says, “He’s King of Kings.” (Yes) And again I can hear somebody saying, “He’s Lord of Lords.” Somewhere else I can hear somebody saying, “In Christ there is no East nor West.” (Yes) And then they go on and talk about, “In Him there’s no North and South, but one great Fellowship of Love throughout the whole wide world.” He didn’t have anything. (Amen) He just went around serving and doing good.

This morning, you can be on his right hand and his left hand if you serve. (Amen) It’s the only way in.

Every now and then I guess we all think realistically (Yes, sir) about that day when we will be victimized with what is life’s final common denominator—that something that we call death. We all think about it. And every now and then I think about my own death and I think about my own funeral. And I don’t think of it in a morbid sense. And every now and then I ask myself, “What is it that I would want said?” And I leave the word to you this morning.

If any of you are around when I have to meet my day, I don’t want a long funeral. And if you get somebody to deliver the eulogy, tell them not to talk too long. (Yes) And every now and then I wonder what I want them to say. Tell them not to mention that I have a Nobel Peace Prize—that isn’t important. Tell them not to mention that I have three or four hundred other awards—that’s not important. Tell them not to mention where I went to school. (Yes)

     I’d like somebody to mention that day that Martin Luther King, Jr., tried to give his life serving others. (Yes)
     I’d like for somebody to say that day that Martin Luther King, Jr., tried to love somebody.
     I want you to say that day that I tried to be right on the war question. (Amen)
     I want you to be able to say that day that I did try to feed the hungry. (Yes)
     And I want you to be able to say that day that I did try in my life to clothe those who were naked. (Yes)
     I want you to say on that day that I did try in my life to visit those who were in prison. (Lord)
     I want you to say that I tried to love and serve humanity. (Yes)

Yes, if you want to say that I was a drum major, say that I was a drum major for justice. (Amen) Say that I was a drum major for peace. (Yes) I was a drum major for righteousness. And all of the other shallow things will not matter. (Yes) I won’t have any money to leave behind. I won’t have the fine and luxurious things of life to leave behind. But I just want to leave a committed life behind. (Amen) And that’s all I want to say.

         If I can help somebody as I pass along,
         If I can cheer somebody with a word or song,
         If I can show somebody he’s traveling wrong,
         Then my living will not be in vain.
         If I can do my duty as a Christian ought,
         If I can bring salvation to a world once wrought,
         If I can spread the message as the master taught,
         Then my living will not be in vain.

Yes, Jesus, I want to be on your right or your left side, (Yes) not for any selfish reason. I want to be on your right or your left side, not in terms of some political kingdom or ambition. But I just want to be there in love and in justice and in truth and in commitment to others, so that we can make of this old world a new world.

Well, he’s off a little on his economics and I can’t fathom why anyone would want to be a Drum Major but he’s absolutely right on manipulation of envy.

Welcome to The Breakfast Club! We’re a disorganized group of rebel lefties who hang out and chat if and when we’re not too hungover we’ve been bailed out we’re not too exhausted from last night’s (CENSORED) the caffeine kicks in. Join us every weekday morning at 9am (ET) and weekend morning at 10:00am (ET) (or whenever we get around to it) to talk about current news and our boring lives and to make fun of LaEscapee! If we are ever running late, it’s PhilJD’s fault.

FDR plans to ‘pack’ the Supreme Court; Byron de la Beckwith convicted of killing civil rights leader Medgar Evers; The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour premieres; William S. Burroughs and Hank Aaron born.

After one look at this planet any visitor from outer space would say ‘I want to see the manager.’

William S. Burroughs

Continue reading

I think I’ve mentioned I hate both these teams and I can easily think of 17 different things I’d rather be watching.

Except for the commercials.

Juste à côté. Recognize this one?

Yeah, who’d a thunk?

But it’s all about who you hate the most and it’s definitely the Patsies.

Why Tom Brady’s New England Patriots Are the Most Tainted Sports Dynasty Ever
by Robert Silverman, Daily Beast
02.03.18

I strongly suggest plunking down on your trusty Barcalounger at some point on Sunday and tuning in because finding a true, unambiguous villain—in sports at least—is hard to come by. The best part of it is, it doesn’t really matter.

First, despite all of the despicable things the Patriots are accused of doing, they’re hardly alone. Aside from the aforementioned issues with football itself, every team in every sport has played fast and loose with the rules at some point. That the Patriots are so brazen about it is a difference of degree, not kind. Second, it’s sports. Compared to the rest of the world, their offenses, shady marketing ploys and even lousy politics, are laughable and utterly unimportant. The universe has provided no shortage of genuinely awful and truly frightening people who not only abound, they’ve realized that they no longer need to feel inhibited by a sense of shame. RIP Shame. It had a good run.

Which is all the more reason why pointing a stubby finger and shouting “J’accuse!” at a professional sports franchise, and deeming it the be-all and end-all of awfulness, is so necessary. The Patriots are not the evil empire, to be sure. But they are a collection of miscreants who—unlike actual, real-world malevolent entities that never seem to receive any kind of comeuppance—might actually be pummeled into submission, if only for one glorious day. (Note: This will not happen. They’re going to win. Again.)

With that in mind, here are some of the more unforgivable sins perpetrated by the Patriots, who you should loathe with the fire of a thousand suns.

As previously mentioned, they cheat, and they do it a lot. ESPN’s Don Van Natta and Seth Wickersham took a deep dive into Spygate and discovered that over an eight-year stretch, right up until the moment when the New York Jets set up a sting to catch them, they were secretly recording opponents’ sidelines during games in order to decipher their signals. How often? Forty separate instances between 2000 and 2007, according to ESPN. They also allegedly sent low-level employees into visiting teams’ locker rooms to steal their play sheets, so the Pats would know opposing teams’ first 15-20 plays of the game.

When they got busted, their cozy relationship with Roger Goodell meant that not only weren’t they punished in a manner that might have dissuaded future bad acts; the commissioner tried to bury the scandal, going so far as to destroy the evidence the league had gathered during its brief, three-day investigation—which led to heavy criticism from then-Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA).

So when the Patriots got busted for cheating again, via Deflategate, enough NFL owners were still carrying a grudge that Goodell felt compelled to dole a draconian and kind of ridiculous four-game suspension for QB Brady, docked the team multiple draft picks, and imposed a tidy $1 million fine.
…
Brady also managed to convince a preferred charitable organization to funnel millions into his own foundation, and he ditched his previous partner, actress Bridget Moynahan, while she was pregnant for his current wife, supermodel Gisele Bündchen.

As for owner Robert Kraft, he’s a billionaire sports owner. There are no halfway-decent billionaire sports owners, but this one reportedly stumped for Donald Trump’s regressive tax plan, donated $1 million to his inaugural committee, and gave the president his very own shiny Super Bowl ring last year. He also gave millions more to build regulation football fields in Israel, and dragged NFL legends overseas to serve as unwitting props for Bibi Netanyahu’s political agenda. Needless to say, Brady spent a year playing coy about his support for his longtime dear chum, Donald Trump, after a Make America Great Hat was spied in his locker.

Similarly, Belichick, a humorless and soulless shell of a human being and yes, possibly the best coach ever, sent a letter of support using uber-Trumpian prose that then-candidate Trump read aloud days before the 2016 election. When questioned about his political leanings, Belichick somehow managed to say with a straight face, “I’m not a political person.”

Oh, lest we forget: the whole crazy Aaron Hernandez situation…and the fact that actual Nazis are rooting for the Patriots:

So there you have it. Let us pray that somehow these all-time football legends screw up. If so, joy and kindness, peace and understanding, and flowers and sunshine and rainbows will spread across the globe, because the Patriots are very bad.

Couldn’t have said it better myself, which is why I quoted it.

So it’s the Iggles and the bonus is that they’ll have to figure out what to do with Nick Foles who’s another one of these Colin Kaepernick-type backups made good that Throwball has no place for since they spoil the Pro Wrestling style narrative. Besides, it will be fun to watch crazed Iggles fans scoot up those Crisco coated lamp posts.

In Stars Hollow I have the misfortune to be swamped by Patsie partisans who I can tell you from personal experience are even worse than BoSox addicts (I know, it’s hard to imagine) so I keep to myself, mostly go out at night, and dream about hillside caves and goats.

Hard to believe I have 14 of these things junking up my DVR when I should let them wash over and through me like the adorable animals they are.

Not that I don’t rewatch them sometimes when I’m feeling particularly in need of some cuteness and emotional support mind you, just that they’re all basically the same- puppies randomly wandering around a pen playing with chew toys or each other (I think that Alpha Dog posturing is supposed to be playing), taking the odd leak or dump (it’s what puppies do), and drinking out of toilets.

Ok, so they’re not toilets. They don’t flush and have a camera in the bottom, but still.

The scoring is incomprehensible and this year I’ll try to ignore it entirely because unless you’re in the pool it really doesn’t matter. Randomly they’ll replace the puppies much faster than I can type them up until all 30 or so adoption candidates are displayed.

Oh yeah, that’s what this is actually about, finding homes for orphaned companion animals and if you have room in your life for a dog (they’re very needy and dependent you know, I’ve had girlfriends like that and it was a positive relief when they left me, a dog will never leave you until it dies so you have that gut wrenching emotional disaster to anticipate) they will reward you with unconditional love and devotion. Studies show they’re much smarter than you think and are highly adept at manipulating you.

Don’t worry about this particular lot. They’re already in their new forever (well, for a dog, 15 – 20 years) homes but you could go down to your local shelter and rescue some other one whose only offense is that their previous human hated them (maybe for good reasons, they’re dogs).

Awww… ek, you seem pretty cynical about dogs.

Not really. I’ve had a lot of them, all gone now, and it is in fact a really big deal and commitment.

This is one reason I like the Kittie Halftime Show. It must be hell on the Kitties, dumped in a cage that reeks of Dogs and tortured with confetti and flashing lights and lasers, but ooh… aren’t they cute?

Cats are not cute. They don’t so much need humans (well, outside of that opposable thumb thing) as they tolerate them. Compare and contrast- after a hard day at work a dog will rush you at the door, sniff your crotch (you may like it, I find it kind of icky) and then dance around shouting, “I NEED TO PEE! Please take me outside to pee! Please, please, please, please, please, please.”

Well, you try holding it for 8 to 10 hours and tell me how you feel.

Cats on the other hand may or may not notice your homecoming at all and then with a stare that says, “You? Again?” The only times they are really interested is when their filtered water tastes impure (which is always) or they are out of food for which they will punish you by ignoring it when you prepare it.

Some people claim they desire adoration which they exhibit in actions like getting in between you and your newspaper, book, or TV screen, or tromp on your piano or computer keyboard. This is not true. They do it to punish you for falling short of their expectations, which are not high.

Now, I like pet rocks.