Tim Cahill, Independent Candidate for Governor of Massachusetts

I am starting my research, a bit late but still in time, into the candidacy of Tim Cahill for governor of Massachusetts. I started this research by typing "Tim Cahill" into the Google search bar. Of course, his forgovernor website was at the top of the list.

So this is how Mr. Cahill would like to be seen. His website is easy to navigate, I find. His position as an independent is not one of the little guy, but as the only one who understands the little guy. In addition to his terms as Massachusetts State Treasurer, he has been a small business owner and maintains a middle class life. In a climate of tax increase and unemployment, he promises to focus on small businesses, the taxpayers, and government fiscal responsibility. He aims to accomplish these goals by navigating his agenda above party politics.

To spur small business growth, he will lower the cost of doing business in the Commonwealth. My investigation into the how of his plan is forthcoming, but he promises to cut taxes and eliminate fees and otherwise water and give good light to the Commonwealth's small business base.

Being of the middle class, I'd like to see taxes cut. But also for what government spending remains, I'd like to know that programs were being developed to protect jobs in the Commonwealth. That when the government spends, the expenditure spreads throughout the ground level. Small business growth, I think, better helps circulate wealth throughout a locality than big business growth. For 100 jobs created by small business is 100 jobs but also is local money that remains local money, and so small business growth keeps a local flavor in the air. With this flavor a greater sense of community and pride in community is achieved.  The community flourishes, the flourishing is palpable and so the community's happiness factor then rises, optimism rises alongside, and with these positive energies in the air anything is then truly possible.  Local small businesses, more so than big business centered out of town, are willing to participate in community events and planning.  The good times are then shared by all. 

Indeed, Mr. Cahill promises he has and will continue to make communities a priority.  I encourage anyone reading this, from Massachusetts or elsewhere, to read Mr. Cahill's statements, or at least the excerpt I provide below. I am intrigued in this hour by the role an Independent can play in the shaping of a fiscally responsible, community driven government.  For surely such a government is needed in these times of economic recession. And if you give eye and ear to Mr. Cahill's words, you may also become intrigued by the role only an Independent can play. 

For the troubles we are facing now, on local, state and national levels, we can surely point the figure to both Democrats and Republicans. Their fighting for power has gotten in the way of their doing a good job. And while the voices they embody and represent do constitute a part of our electorate, these individual voices are not the collective whole, their individual plans do not treat the whole problem. And the whole is not well at the moment.  An Independent candidate, the very meaning of what it means to be an Independent candidate in this political atmosphere, can surely be the only candidate qualified for a leadership position in this economic climate, where that leader's job is to make well the whole, and not merely represent one of its parts.

What follows is an except from Mr. Cahill's website, under the section "Why I'm Running."  I think you may find, as have I, that his well-crafted message points to the type of candidacy that is much needed for gubernatorial leadership, not just in Massachusetts, but throughout this country.

There has been much speculation since I announced my candidacy on what it means to run as an independent. Last year, when Deval Patrick chose to raise taxes during a struggling economy, I knew that I could no longer remain a member of the Democratic Party.

This election requires an honest discussion on the issues and problems that face the commonwealth, not the typical back-and-forth between Republicans and Democrats. That is why I am running as an independent.

I believe that leadership should always transcend party. The issues facing our commonwealth do not discriminate on the basis of political party, and the solutions to building a more secure future will not be achieved without a bipartisan effort.

Time and time again, Democrats and Republicans turn to their worn-out party agendas to feign change and reform. Republicans oppose ideas from Democrats and Democrats oppose ideas from Republicans — this has led to nothing more than gridlock.

Whether you're talking about the Democrats or Republicans on Capitol Hill or Beacon Hill, their shortcomings are one and the same. The Democrats' idea of "good government" is fairness, transparency and accountability, and the Republicans always talk a good game about "fiscal conservatism" — preaching small government, affordability and individual responsibility. Yet, both parties financed earmarks, big-business bailouts, and the Big Dig; neither side has dealt with our state nor our country's mounting debt and deficits.

There are ideological issues on which the parties fundamentally differ, but the overall success of our future should not depend on adherence or disagreement with those beliefs depending on who wins an election. When the election is over, we must work toward a consensus on the challenges that divide us, while remaining committed to those that unite us. This is not something either party has had the willingness or ability to do.

I am running for governor because the middle class is getting overlooked and there is no longer anyone representing our interests. Look at your choices this year: a Democrat who raised taxes and sent much of our state's decision-making power to Washington, and a Republican who saddled taxpayers with billions of dollars in debt by concocting the financing scheme for the Big Dig. We have to do better than that.

I understand the struggles of the middle class because I share those same struggles in my own life — unlike the other two candidates in this race. As a former small-business owner, I am the only candidate who can truly appreciate the value of every dollar. I am the only candidate who has a proven record of responsibility and results in government, and I am the only candidate who will look out for the citizens whom special interests and party agendas have left behind.

In the past 50 years of campaigns, we have been told that only a Republican can cut taxes and only a Democrat can fight for the middle class. But the two parties have strayed from those ideals. Democrats focus on big government and Republicans focus on big business — and that must change.

I am running for governor to improve our state's business climate by shifting the focus back to small business growth, to make government function in a more fiscally responsible way — just as I have over the past seven years as your state treasurer — and to restore the voice of the middle class in government. It is time to stop worrying about moving Massachusetts to the left or to the right; it is time to move the commonwealth forward.

across national, religious and familial borders

we are much older now
   our kids are grown
      and they are friends.

we have had more than
   one conversation
      concerning our children.

unspeakable now, but we still imagine
   how these particular lives
      would together blended be.

our lines together always
   added up nonsense
      but that is what we are.

knowing this with full acceptance
   how can we continue
      to sleep in separate beds?

our children will learn
   to take our nonsense language
      and become our poetry.

The God Bolt NPR Podcast

Featuring political, economic and spiritual selections from NPR

Pigeon Pomp

“Pigeon Pomp”

The park and bus platforms are, at midday, same
as a walk by the seaboard rushed with breeze,
or the cranny grandstands hours after a game.
There, where hunger begets the fever for seed,
you find my head, sullen, with social ease,
chomping, stomping, pigeon pomping through need.

Man asks Pigeon: How does pomping suit your need?
Pigeon tells Man: Suits are pompous, needs are same.
You and we, bound by blood, cloaked with disease,
envy and pride, form graceless chords to the breeze,
mar the tokens of Regality’s seed,
and rake life’s contract with our pompous game.

By our sails, we are greatness in sport, a game
we love and hate. We fly and fie by need.
We take by want. We rape to spread our seed.
Dear murderous man, our pomp suits you the same.
Yet we are innocent when we yield to the breeze,
Juxtaposed, fat bellies of crumb fed ease.

If these pigeon thoughts offend your Gentle ease,
perhaps you ignore the pomp of man’s game,
where pride, envy and other chords hang the breeze:
man wakes to tame the day, anticipates need
and takes without remorse or shame. This same
taking is as common to hand as beak to seed.

We come to the ripe ground to eat the seed
en masse. Tireless at work, but sporting an ease,
in Congress we hoot, peck, hoot. While sesame
slips from our tongues, we’re coy to rethink this game—
“Could life, without competing, unscratch our need?”—
but the words taste dry as cotton-curled breeze.

Will we forever fly in a waking breeze?
Will we yield to the best the ripest seed?
Are we damned to hoot and peck the pomp of need?
An unsettled beak and neck finds no ease
competing in an uncompleting game:
these pompous virtues make man and pigeon, same.

At ease, my sweet, fat, pigeon man, you need
the man-bird to study its game and learn, same
as I, how pompous seed breeds a foul breeze.

The Broken Window Fallacy and Bastiat's Parable

the following is an excerpt from 19th Century French philospher Frederic Bastiat's essay collection That Which is Seen, and That Which is Unseen known as The Parable of the Broken Window.

I. THE BROKEN WINDOW

Have you ever witnessed the anger of the good shopkeeper, James B., when his careless son happened to break a square of glass? If you have been present at such a scene, you will most assuredly bear witness to the fact, that every one of the spectators, were there even thirty of them, by common consent apparently, offered the unfortunate owner this invariable consolation - "It is an ill wind that blows nobody good. Everybody must live, and what would become of the glaziers if panes of glass were never broken?"

Now, this form of condolence contains an entire theory, which it will be well to show up in this simple case, seeing that it is precisely the same as that which, unhappily, regulates the greater part of our economical institutions.

Suppose it cost six francs to repair the damage, and you say that the accident brings six francs to the glazier's trade - that it encourages that trade to the amount of six francs - I grant it; I have not a word to say against it; you reason justly. The glazier comes, performs his task, receives his six francs, rubs his hands, and, in his heart, blesses the careless child. All this is that which is seen.

But if, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion, as is too often the case, that it is a good thing to break windows, that it causes money to circulate, and that the encouragement of industry in general will be the result of it, you will oblige me to call out, "Stop there! your theory is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen."

It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent six francs upon one thing, he cannot spend them upon another. It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace, he would, perhaps, have replaced his old shoes, or added another book to his library. In short, he would have employed his six francs in some way, which this accident has prevented.

Let us take a view of industry in general, as affected by this circumstance. The window being broken, the glazier's trade is encouraged to the amount of six francs; this is that which is seen. If the window had not been broken, the shoemaker's trade (or some other) would have been encouraged to the amount of six francs; this is that which is not seen.

And if that which is not seen is taken into consideration, because it is a negative fact, as well as that which is seen, because it is a positive fact, it will be understood that neither industry in general, nor the sum total of national labour, is affected, whether windows are broken or not.

Now let us consider James B. himself. In the former supposition, that of the window being broken, he spends six francs, and has neither more nor less than he had before, the enjoyment of a window.

In the second, where we suppose the window not to have been broken, he would have spent six francs on shoes, and would have had at the same time the enjoyment of a pair of shoes and of a window.

Now, as James B. forms a part of society, we must come to the conclusion, that, taking it altogether, and making an estimate of its enjoyments and its labours, it has lost the value of the broken window.

When we arrive at this unexpected conclusion: "Society loses the value of things which are uselessly destroyed;" and we must assent to a maxim which will make the hair of protectionists stand on end - To break, to spoil, to waste, is not to encourage national labour; or, more briefly, "destruction is not profit."

What will you say, Monsieur Industriel -- what will you say, disciples of good M. F. Chamans, who has calculated with so much precision how much trade would gain by the burning of Paris, from the number of houses it would be necessary to rebuild?

I am sorry to disturb these ingenious calculations, as far as their spirit has been introduced into our legislation; but I beg him to begin them again, by taking into the account that which is not seen, and placing it alongside of that which is seen. The reader must take care to remember that there are not two persons only, but three concerned in the little scene which I have submitted to his attention. One of them, James B., represents the consumer, reduced, by an act of destruction, to one enjoyment instead of two. Another under the title of the glazier, shows us the producer, whose trade is encouraged by the accident. The third is the shoemaker (or some other tradesman), whose labour suffers proportionably by the same cause. It is this third person who is always kept in the shade, and who, personating that which is not seen, is a necessary element of the problem. It is he who shows us how absurd it is to think we see a profit in an act of destruction. It is he who will soon teach us that it is not less absurd to see a profit in a restriction, which is, after all, nothing else than a partial destruction. Therefore, if you will only go to the root of all the arguments which are adduced in its favour, all you will find will be the paraphrase of this vulgar saying - What would become of the glaziers, if nobody ever broke windows?

Wikileaks: Afghan War Diary

Wikileaks is a controversial source of leaked information, an international transparency group that makes confidential information, across a wide spectrum available to the general public.  The information includes military action data, confidential government documents, financial statements of Church of Scientology, etc..  Among the category topics of "leaked" information that can be found on this site are:

• Afghan War Diary 2004-2010
• Sarah Palin's Hacked Email
• A Confidential List of U.S. Nuke Sites
• UK Church of Scientology Financial Statements
• World Health Organization Blackmail Scandal
• Bank Fees PR Scandal
• Guantanamo Bay SOP 2003-2004

Want to really know the world you live in?  Make a a weekly check-in date with Wikileaks.

Pyongnang, Excuse Yourself and Go To Bed---No Dessert for You

When I finally hit the Powerball jackpot of $250 million dollars and after I take the $187 million dollar cash out prize and after I pay the US government $60 million dollars for taxes--I will devote a portion of what is left toward being an intolerable and unkillable bug on the skin of the North Korean government.

If governments of nations are like family members sitting at a Thanksgiving dinner table, trying to get along, North Korea is the petulant little bastard spoiled asshole kid everyone wants to send to bed early without dessert.  There is conclusive evidence that the March 26th sinking of the Chenoan, a South Korean naval vessel, was caused by a North Korean torpedo.  You can read about it in this Washington Times Report

The attack on the Cheonan killed 46 South Korean sailors and injured dozens more.  On top of the death caused, this attack constitutes an elevated act of aggression by one nuclear state upon another nuclear state. It also marks a shift in North Korean's aggression towards its southern neighbor from passive to active.  A swift and unified response from the international community must be decided upon and enacted. This incident is nothing like North Korean diplomats walking away from a negotiation table. This incident is torpedoes in the water; this is warring behavior and must be curbed immediately.

"We cannot allow this attack on South Korea to go unanswered by the international community. This will not be and cannot be business as usual. There must be an international, not just a regional, but an international response." - Secretary Hillary Clinton, (from The Guardian)

The official U.S. response does not appear to be formulated as yet, however, Secretary Clinton has gone on record saying severe economic sanctions must be taken.  Whereas this attack was taken against a military naval vessel and not a civilian vessel, the state department is reluctant to classify the attack as international terrorism.  North Korea will, for the time being, not be put back on our terrorism blacklist.

Calling North Korea the petulant child at the dinner table is not unreasonable or outlandish.  While an international team was conducting its investigation into the sinking and while evidence was surely ruling out internal explosions and sea mines, North Korean officials furnished an indignant response to the allegations of their involvement.

"If the South puppet group comes out with 'response' and 'retaliation', we will respond strongly with ruthless punishment including the total shutdown of North-South ties, abrogation of the North-South agreement on non-aggression and abolition of all North-South co-operation projects."

As evidence from the sinking investigation seems now to be conclusive, North Korean now stands alone.  Even China, a key North Korean ally, seems ready to stand with the United States, Japan and South Korean in formulating a harsh response.

Severe economic sanctions must surely be in order against North Korea.  Economic stability for the greater international community must always take precedence.  If the U.S. State Department plays its cards right, they could successfully recruit China, North Korea's patron, as a fellow in issuing the sanctions and punishment.

It seems to me that, when it wants something, North Korea "acts out", and uses the negative attention as a platform to advance its agenda.  Perhaps a win-win scenario would be that both the U.S. and China cooperate in a measured out set of economic sanctions, creating a healthy, hard to ignore slap on North Korea's wrists.  In exchange for enduring the punishment and admitting to being caught red-handed in the attack, North Korea may be allowed to publicly explain why they had initiated the attack and obtain a hearing by the U.N. for mediation of whatever dispute about which they'd like to be vocal.

All in all though, this particular incident has the upside of being an opportunity for China and the U.S. to work together, as they should, in keeping their international economic partners in check, keeping the undeserving child's hands out of the cookie jar.  Afterall, if there's going to be any significant international fighting its going to be the Autobots vs. the Decepticons----not Stupid-Dumba- North Korea vs. Completely-Cool-and-Always-Innocent- South Korea.

chalice aflood

Ramses II, pharoah god, was a little man.
Napolean the French, even smaller...
Neither Pere Stalin nor Herr Hitler knew,
but our dear Fidel Castro was taller—
only George W. Bush had the wherewithal
to keep his statue neither short nor tall.
Khomeini, bin Laden, Milosevic,
                               and Sharon,

bloodshed to bloodshed, brothers to the bone---
where a savior to bind them all by turn,
where is this malycon for whom I yearn?
If she'll dance with me, I'll play her a song,
a Volta! Strike it----here comes Mao Zedong!
I've sung your name before, Mistress Malice---now,
wring their hands bare of blood, drink the chalice
                                                  aflood

Ideal Realism and the Pro-Modern Era Defined (First Draft)

So then, what is Ideal Realism?

Almost exactly how it sounds. i could write a thousand poems on one particular subject.  Half might be created with an array of traditional forms handed down to me from writers and critics spanning the ages.  Half might be hit or near hit attempts at verse or prose free of these forms. all would likely be singular, differing in appearance, rhythm, tone and conceit. all would be me, the ideal. Ideal only because i am the originator of the poems, i am the instrument of my ideas.  all would also be that one particular subject, the real. And i have to believe any subject, animate or other, myself or other, is equally an instrument of its own ideal form. The process of being me is real. The process of formulating who i am, by thought or action, in relation to a subject, ideal. If you give enough thought to these past two statements, you'll eventually emerge, as i have, with an understanding that as we exist, Ideal Realism is a constant.

Within the canon of western literature, the movement of realism was an attempt to deliver an objective view of reality by portraying it in an unadorned but accurate fashion. This to say that it is possible to consider a subject without bias or interpretation and also to then present it as it is on its own, without adornment. To leave to it to the viewer or reader to discover a romance or an enlightenment.

In the contemporary world, journalism and its style of writing have supplanted the realist movement with its ambition to deliver a 'faithful representation of reality.' Literary movements have since moved both up and down this ladder. And still neither realism nor journalism has been able to bypass two glowing ailments of their cause.

The first ailment is bias.  Bias in its simplest form is, at least here, defined as the real true and maybe hidden reason the writer picked that subject at all. Bias is motive. Perhaps yes, the subject as expressed by a realist, is apparently the real thing, appearing beforehand for the realist's consideration.  Perhaps also, and likely, the subject did not simply appear in vacuum and the realist likely did not just happened to have on hand the means to record exactly who or what that real thing is.

Practically speaking though, realists and journalists venture out looking for real things, using their own judgment to determine what to capture and what to leave off the page. In cinema and photography, this is called framing. Since the advent of these latter forms of art, writers also utilize framing. And this choice or framing, made by journalists, writers, artists, etcetera, is called bias.  Bias is inescapable and subsequently the undoing of the realist intention. 

The second ailment is called observer effect or observer-expectancy effect, which is similar to bias in that the realists' or journalists' goal of actual representation is automatically thwarted.  Observer effect is a concept discovered in physics first, then applied to psychology and information technology (the real world, the mind world, and the e-world) whereby the behavior or attitude of the subject is affected by the observer. Some will claim this effect only occurs when the observed is aware of their status as such. However, it may be true (and I believe it is) that if an atom in a petri dish behaves differently when observed, then so must an atom in the sun. Of course, discovery of universally applicable laws comes perhaps only after discoveries of the exceptions to universality.

Journalism has accounted for its failings by embracing them. Professional journals will announce unabashedly what their bias is, they will behave in a biased manner because that is truthful and also lucrative.  In western literature, realists similarly accepted their bias when they ceased to announce themselves as realists and started to embrace the Modern Temper, calling themselves modernists.

The Modern Temper was a sawing off of the muzzle belonging to the traditional literary canon. There were rules comprising the literary tradition, yes, but showcasing the rules being broken was what modernism was all about. To present a thing not as it is, but as it is shocking! Such was modernism.

There came another sea change halfway through the 20th Century and, tada, Post-Modernism was born. Post-Modernism was not a rule breaker but a rule questioner.  Where the Moderns looked to their forefathers and said, "this was you and THIS IS ME!da da da $&^*(BLAST)!!", the Post-Moderns asked and answered, "so, where were all the females and homosexuals and brown and yellow people in the last thousand years? hiding out and forgotten about!" The Post-Moderns were unfazed by rule breaking, that was their birthright. They were preoccupied with redefining the rules of tradition to allow for an all-inclusive literary canon.  

And here we return to Ideal Realism and the Pro-Modern Era we hope to furnish by it.

So what is Pro-Modernism?

Well in this Pro-Modern Era, we are like our Modern brethren where we believe in shock, but rather we say "everything is always shocking," and thereby hope to do everything proper justice. And like our Post-Modern brethren, we accept in our regard the precious multitude of everything and realize, or rather try to, all the many spokes that run center to the wheel. And Ideal Realism is the tool that allows us to be both selfish, starting with ourselves as subject, and selfless, allowing the outside world to subject us as much or as little as we would subject it.

Pro-Modernism, when it is at last widely understood and practiced, will be seen as a handshake between all that is best of Modernism and Post-Modernism, giving these movements full credit for each being half of the crowning achievement of a thousand years of art and literature.  Pro-modernism is a forsaking of angsty tract and depiction, an embracing of positive thought energy, and perhaps also a catalyst for a new wing in the Great Library we are ever achieving. If it ever boils out from the arts and into the sciences, social and economic in particular, it should be like an agent that encourages pro-activity in means and pure self-renewing excitement in ends.

And that is all i have to say about Ideal Realism and the Pro-Modern Era for now. I may someday revise or amend this treatise, so to better impress the points herein, or to further develop the concept.  For now, my long sentences of succinct rhythm and my own meager understanding of Ideal Realism, as it occurs in the body of my work, will have to suffice.

i should very much like it and would be honored if you would further consider the greater conceit of this writing, and accept this one challenge in your own daily chore---acknowledge yourself as both origin and endpoint, but do so knowing that your subject is equally the same.  Therein, if you can imagine a line of sight as a thread, you shall be witness to and part of the formation of infinity in art and, really, all things tying together and, dare i say, at last! ........^...*...

how do i deconstruct thee

"how do i deconstruct thee"

consider a world of female rule---
the laws of those nations would
have evolved from a set of
circumstance that did not
rightfully sanction chaos in
the mind to assert one's claim
of his need to purge
and assert his image on every rock.

there would be no highway roads
blasted through mountain trees,
no stream held back by foreign
sediment, no beach house
teetering on the edge of doom,
no cities built on fault lines,
no wastelands oozing gas,
no grasslands gone to waste.

our school days and church hours
would be consumed by good chore
and driven by fit duty,
our choices at the crossroads
would never cause the palms
to look sweaty or raise
eyebrows from our neighbors' glances
or incite our reckless abandon.

the leviathan would swim at bay
and never surface upon the land
of Cain, for the effort to strike
at gravity would seem too great
measured against the rewards of
touring a barren land as a sower
of the seeds of mean, just to see
the drones all happy with their queens.

what would rise in the stead of
doom treaties, not the fish with teeth,
not the owl of the hour glass,
not the riler of nostre pater,
not even the singer of con,
but a pure stream of mist,
hot to the stars and cool at port,
anamolously leading storm from shore.

---there would be no care
for the fountain or its source,
the stars above could tell you
the queen of drones is love,
what more could be played by the
hand of fate when chance folds,
what lady is luck when all heads
in the room are cool, but queen today
                      and god tomorrow.

"Now in the Hour of Our Death"

"Now in the Hour of Our Death"

And there passed in one flash the end of the world,
and its blue-green skin burst into char,
and its light sweet air turned rank as sulphur;
there even one's own thoughts were a poison,
one's own memory, premeditation,
and one's own cry for help, the sweat of fiends—
and there,

there stood I, the quiet watch of a child
before his abused mother; her limp body
draped over the well-worn ill-crafting hands
of his God-forsaken father, smothered;
and I immolated by thought, anxiety,
emotion, inert gases that rose up
in me.

Her face, bright as dew in day's thirsty light,
arose like fume from her bare tortured corpse,
this time for the last, to smile judgment
upon her idle boy—that flash, that instant!
My hands uncuffed from the pockets, I fell
prostrate and prayed "O forgive me, Mother,"
and wept.

She gave to me in my instant contrite act,
her benediction—my first and last chance
to wield a manly sword, and to do good,
to renounce my father's work, that I might
stare eyes steam-white at the world's final glow,
and, with a blanched clean conscience, have the right
to die.

Audio File - Now in the Hour of Our Death

Sects within Sextus

For it may have seemed a palpable good for some members of our country, who are right now scattered throughout this nation, well deployed within its public and private sectors, enjoying the comforts of employment by the many key positions of its economy and government, firmly holding custody of its highest offices, happily sharing power within its lower offices---

For these some, who are often prone to ride like friends
or angels on the wings of military chariots
and charitable endeavors, and trade our secrets
by the symbols on their rings; to

Take advantages of the bottles they soak and can,
on the back of good chores, cloaked
as the spoils of foreign and domestic wars, and
dole out a tithe or tenth of every dollar claimed manifest;

Play then the host and just, to be the guest,
and bend the patriot to mask the treachery test,
that today was made better than yesterday’s best,
and flourish to show off unbridled audacity; they

Dub themselves captains and admirals of our industry,
pioneers of new frontiers, researchers and developers of useful technology,
teachers and preservers of progressive and traditional schools of thought,
defenders of faiths & liberties & freedoms that serve the machinations of their will & choice;

To be as wolves in our dens and lions to our pride,
swans in our lakes, turtles for our ponds,
and eagles amidst our friendly skies, and then only
to occupy the lumen of the cutin around the apple of our eyes;

Whereby to play shepherds of our herds,
command the leviathans of our deep,
awake the dragons of our quiet mysteries,
and incite the keepers of our keep;

To agitate the guardians of our grace,
dim the light upon the ministers to our chaste,
only to impersonate the scales and the tape
that measure our weights and gather our waste;

So then to better approximate the well form good neighbors make, indeed,
and render a ten per cent effort they apply toward our need,
to fuel by riddle and clue the Who and the What in what to do to who,
and the How of how to say what will become of the next garbage day;

Thereby the sharing of these wares comes the Where of the where
to place that looming black smoke---at the butt of a joke,
near the Wake of an Isle, by a ship with no rudder,
which they trade for the lordship of a fast Coast Guard Cutter,

Then lot out some nickels and slot in some dimes,
which collectively gather to buy three stitching lines,
and together so rhyme in the voice they define
all at once to unlock Eastern Standard Time;

All for the wagon and none for the yoke,
to port of the whale comes the harbor of coke,
and through the marshland’s brown reed come the great poppy seeds,
a boon of vice to a land once pure---for sure, ashore!

By the well practiced lure of a warm gentle hand,
held outward as friendship for the seal of a plan,
all appearances good, all assumptions true,
all secrets kept hidden in the soul of a shoe;

Great care to paint masks on an innocent child,
lulled in to confidence by a wink and smile,
to put Clock Makers back in the Great Crocodile,
let out of its cage for the Great Meanwhile;

To part lover from lover, and woman from man,
take the sweet baby boy from the dear baby girl,
and cut loose the Anchor under weigh to its Pearl,
all to force scan on a singular brain;

In deck cards, we know, stack the Kings of Pain,
who mix shots of real blood and treat lots of real urine,
with drams of sweet fluoride and drops burning chlorine,
to fester a jester in the Royal We, and topple the steeple watching over the sea;

Hold black operations by white knights of an order
who, remembering the codes of a long line of fathers
who first brandished the sword that shall never rust,
now wield it uncanny in the break of all trust;

And the ruse of the many are the bruise of the one
turned father from mother, and brother from sun,
and for a while, at least, all may seem good to this Some,
come cost to the many, a rapture for fun; but

To have held the Truth many years by positive checks,
Means the Piper comes calling to speckle the Nexus
In pentacle puzzles on the horizontal hexes---
Now the Some who had Many reason fear of the One
rising up as foretold ending sects within Sextus.

White Phosphorous Use In Gaza

White Phosphorous is an incendiary weapon that has been used in military operations since World War I. In recent times there has been controversy over its use as an "anti-personal" weapon. White Phosphorous, or "Willy Peter", is not unlike a slow burning destructive napalm that when it touches flesh it burns in the hottest degree---white hot.

In its recent campaign to neutralized perceived threats from Hamas, Israeli Defense Forces have allegedly used White Phosphorous on its military targets. The severe civilian casualties that are mounting from the Israeli military campaign have included burn markings that suggest not only White Phosphorous use, but also that the IDF is not aiming all too well when they fire at military targets.

The most recent reports from the BBC World News tells that while Israeli forces feel they are near completion with this military campaign, they are also fully aware that some of their military targets are closely placed with civilian buildings. Rather than draw out a truce, the Israeli military has instead dropped leaflets asking the Palestinian civilian population to leave their homes so they came be bombed in order to eradicate whatever Hamas presence remains.

A Defense for Hamas

The United States Coverage of the current conflict between Palestine and Israel is skewed at every level, including the word choice of the reporters and editors covering the conflict. In CNN's most recent article from Jerusalem, titled "Israelis, Hamas clash near Gaza City, witnesses say," the skewing of Palestinian intentions begins in the first sentence:

"Clashes between Hamas militants and Israeli soldiers raged to the north and east of densely populated Gaza City early Sunday, the 16th day of an Israeli offensive, witnesses and medical sources said."

What is the difference between a militant and a soldier? I ask, before asking why the need to apply such a distinction. From Dictionary.com we get some impartial answers:

Militant
–adjective

1.	vigorously active and aggressive, esp. in support of a cause: militant reformers.

2.	engaged in warfare; fighting.

–noun

3.	a militant person.

4.	a person engaged in warfare or combat.

---

Origin:
1375–1425; late ME < class="ital-inline">mīlitant- (s. of mīlitāns), prp. of mīlitāre to serve as a soldier. See militate, -ant

Soldier
-noun

1.	a person who serves in an army; a person engaged in military service.

2.	an enlisted man or woman, as distinguished from a commissioned officer: the soldiers' mess and the officers' mess.

3.	a person of military skill or experience: George Washington was a great soldier.

4.	a person who contends or serves in any cause: a soldier of the Lord.

5.	Also called button man. Slang. a low-ranking member of a crime organization or syndicate.

6.	Entomology. a member of a caste of sexually underdeveloped female ants or termites specialized, as with powerful jaws, to defend the colony from invaders.

7.	a brick laid vertically with the narrower long face out. Compare rowlock (def. 2).

8.	Informal. a person who avoids work or pretends to work; loafer; malingerer.

–verb (used without object)

9.	to act or serve as a soldier.

10.	Informal. to loaf while pretending to work; malinger: He was soldiering on the job.

—Verb phrase

11.	soldier on, to persist steadfastly in one's work; persevere: to soldier on until the work is done.

–noun

---

Origin:
1250–1300; ME souldiour < class="ital-inline">soudier, so(l)dier, equiv. to soulde pay (< class="ital-inline">solidus; see sol ² ) + -ier -ier ²


The lines here, by CNN reporters are drawn with specific reverence of the men and women who are fighting in the Israeli Defense Army. Yet there is no true difference between a militant and a soldier, except the implication that the militant fights willy-nilly without organization while the soldier is a member of an organized army.

To address the skewing, we need only understand its source. Palestine does not get recognized anymore as a legitimate nation, nor does Hamas, its democratically elected executive branch of government get viewed as anything other than a terrorist organization. In most cases that Hamas shows its militant desires, it has been prompted to do so by the constant passive aggression of the Israeli Regime that hordes its water supplies and interferes with the United Nations and other Arab countries trying to get fresh food and medical supplies to the sick and dying population of Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip.

Gaza City itself has now been called a Ghetto and the treatment it has received from the Israeli military is a strong reminder of the Nazi Army's occupancy of Poland and its cruel treatment of the peoples living in the Jewish Ghetto. History does repeat itself. Shame on the house of those who do unto others what was done unto them.

With that skew aside, the CNN coverage does fairly assert that the instigators of this conflict are, in fact, the Israelis:
"Israeli shelling north of the city killed two people, sources at Shifa hospital told CNN.
Sunday's fighting came after one girl was killed and 49 other people were severely burned by fires caused by Israeli shelling in southern Gaza on Saturday, local hospital sources said. The shelling ignited several buildings, including a U.N. school, near the city of Khan Younes."
Israel denies that its attacks were upon these civilian targets. Nonetheless, civilians were killed and injured by the Israeli Defense Force, a force by the way which has state of the art weaponery provided to them by the United States to ensure that they could be more "surgical" with their military strikes.

Israel maintains that it is only defending itself against the rocket attacks of Hamas. According to CNN, which, despite my opening lambast is still one of the most impartial sources of news coverage that we can get in the United States---more than 3300 Palestinians have been wounded since the Israeli campaign to neutralize the "threat" of Hamas began on December 27th. Over 800 Palestinians have been killed, 235 of them were children, Gaza City has been bombed by Israeli F-16s, United Nations aid workers have been killed and injured and even a United States naval vessel carrying supplies to Palestine was sunk when it was "accidentally" rammed by an Israeli warship---all in the name of preventing Hamas rocket attacks. Since this conflict began, 13 Israelis have died and of that number 10 of them were militants.
Do the math, its not about numbers, its about life and the sacrifices that are being made every MINUTE! How many more people need to sacrifice their lives in the name of Israel's Defense? My suggestion is to write a word or two to your congressmen to get some action taken on behalf of the dead and dying---on behalf of the children who are suffering in ways you cannot imagine. If this all seems over the top, it is. There's only two choices---remain silent, or silence the violence. Not to be cute sounding, but to take right action for a good cause---Life and Peace.
What is the road that must be paved toward this good cause. Borrowing again from CNN:

Exiled Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal said during a televised news conference Saturday night that his followers will consider any proposals to stop the violence if conditions are met: the Israelis stop their "aggression" and all crossings between Israel and Gaza are opened.
"These are our just demands, and with an open mind we will interact with any initiative," Mashaal said.

They just want some basic human freedoms. Let's give it to our fellow humans while we still have it in ourselves to give.