ONLY A PAWN IN THEIR GAME

You know upon the death of President Kennedy I looked upon him as sort of a Christ figure, who died for the sins of the country, or at least the sins of the South. In the second year at a church my parents would be members of for almost thirty years, we had a congragational dinner at Peter Marshal Elementry School, because they had the facilities for it. They don't do congragational or "Stewardship" dinners now, because they're too tight. But even before JFK's assasenation, in mid November of 1963 I watched the Christian propaganda film, "The Gift". Actually there had been a sneak previewing of it ahead of time at my house with friends of my Father, so I got to see the film twice. It kind of covered the structure of the Apostle's Creed and talked much about Christ's dying for the sins of mankind. The memory of Medger Evers would not have been far from my mind as I watched the thing. Bob Dylan wrote a song about Medger Evers called "Only a Pawn in their Game". The title refers not to Medger Evers himself but rather those guy gunned him down as he was returning to his own house, shot in the back. You see the racists who shot him thought it was their own idea but they were only a pawn in the hands of the shaddowy people who really run the country behind a veiled curtain. And so it is today. People, and most troubling of all, young people are taught to hate, and ignorance of the past seems to be the trait those behind the Veil seem most want to instill in our young people. So if you have lost your job or don't get the pay you used to, blame integration and the Negroes or else the wet backs coming in over the border. Don't you know that the gays out there are out to destroy your marriage? I listened to both the Presidential address, and the republican response the old fashioned way this morning, over the radio on KNX at 7:05 and 8:05. The Oregon congressman spoke for the republicans. He says the Obama administration is out to kill job growth by big spending of thousand page bills, and hiking taxes. He would have you to believe that taxes somehow have ALREADY been hiked lo these past ten years of stagnation (with only the briefest of economic respits from mid 2004 to mid 2007). He uses the old chessnut about "You have to cut back expenses. Therefore your government needs to cut back expenses too, and if you would just let the Republicans have an up or down vote on these vital economic issues, all your economic problems would be solved". Of course the problem is that these Republicans DON'T allow up or down votes on these issues and that's the problem with getting needed measures passed. As to President Obama's speech, I thought this mornings was one of his better ones, because he came out swinging. He issued a "Clarion Call" (and yes I know that's also an O Henry novel) to action to oppose the Citizens United ruling. Our President warned us against the unleashing of the propaganda machine and political adds for which we don't have a clue who is really behind them. The President didn't quite come out and say the big moneyed corporate interests are running the country, but he came pretty close. Since that supreme court decision - - all sorts of evils have been unleashed over the air waves in this fall campaign. That's why we have been seeing such screwy election results. But now even people like Scott Brown are under attack by Rush Limbaugh as not toeing the line on the conservative agenda. Even Karl Rove is said to be uncomfortable with certain election results last week. It is said that perhaps when all these tea party people actually get into Washington that the beltway will change them. Others invision them floundering around not knowing the ropes and "all they will do is be able to make a lot of noise but get nothing done". I wouldn't count on this. If you liberals didn't like the lurch to the right in the 'nineties when Newt Gingrich took power, you are positively going to be climbing the walls these next two years. That's why it is essential for Democrats to unite and tell all their friends to get out and vote on election day.

You know the whole thing about "When to pull the plug" on a dying relative in a hospital bed is a tough moral issue for anybody. How much more so if you have been left with the sole responsability of that awesome decision and you are the estranged wife of the dying man, with whom you have had two children. But you also are the one who put him in that hospital bed by firing a .22 at his brain and leaving him for dead. You certainly must have conflicting emotions. On the one hand if you opt to save him and keep him on the machines he may come around, and you may get the sympathy of the jury if they see your remorse. On the other hand you're not sure how drunk he was when you shot him, and whether he can identify you at all. On the other hand if you let him die, you know he won't live to finger you. But you also know that now it's Murder One and you'll lose the sympathy of the jury if they know you also pulled the plug on him. The victim's father made a poinient remark. "Despite what he said when he was healthy about not wanting extrordenary measures being taken, you have to ask yourself what he would do now if he could rise up out of that bed. What if he were listening to our conversation right now, what would he say?" You know it's all a question of choices. If it's a choice between being a vegetable and being in some paradise on a balmy day sailing down a river of champaign in a canoe being fanned by young virgins- - well that's a choice. But what if you see it as being a choice between Life - - and permanent non existance, period. What would your choice be then? In the Bible there is a saying, "What would a man give in exchange for his life?" Luckily this situation never came up with my own father in a hospital. The hospital screwed up in so many other ways he was already as good as dead. It was never a case of "to pull the plug or not to pull the plug". I would not presume to offer anybody advice on this subject.