Friday, September 19, 2014

Ballpoint


Patty Cake


I only ever once had the misfortune of hearing a priest air dirty laundry about other priests. In this case he was conversing with a seminarian. I was the quiet guy in between. It was at the table during dessert.

Once was more than enough. What a stench.

Why then should one heed the same from priests or laymen online concerning bishops and cardinals I wonder? Who am I? Who are you? What is your place? Does Pippin have Gandalf all figured out from head to toe? Was that clericalism I just uttered? Does it mean I'm condoning corrupt priests and bishops if I don't write an open letter? What good does any of this way-up-in-the-echelons hierarchy inside talk wannabe insider talk hashed out online do? I find it hard to believe that it does more good than harm.

Do I have an opinion about Scotland? Do I care? Everything has become so utterly meaningless. B.C. teachers on strike? Where do the teachers get the energy to care about the stupid shit they're willing to go on strike for? The energy to sit there in front of the schools with their stupid sandwich board signs? It isn't the pay. They make decently on that front.

How in the bloody Dickens do tattoo parlors stay in business, and tanning salons?

It seems like everything is up for grabs, and anything you grab must be milked, and nothing you grab matters. Of course, it all matters very much, but it's like people are being hustled along. Waiting is the great sin. Waiting and watching are the unpardonable sins. You remember that passage in G.K. Chesterton's The Everlasting Man in which he is describing the state of the world when Christ came into it?

Go and read it if you can and tell me that's not something eerily similar to the state of the world right now. I say that with joy, not fear and loathing.

Everything is passing away. We're building sand castles online. The grown-ups post-graduates ruin all the fun by holding retarded sand castle competitions and then photograph themselves standing beside their structures about to be washed away by the incoming tide.

There's a meme for you out there whoever you are who makes memes: a picture of some guy standing proudly beside his mind-boggling, professionally perfect sand sculpture with the caption, "Grown-ups: effing things up since post-graduate school."

Or something to that effect.

Here's a term I hope catches on: "Selfied to death." You heard it here first. Here's another: "Meta-retarded". I'm hoping later it will simply become, "Metatarded".

Oh, and I think I may have come up with a poetic term: Jump rhyme. It is for an end-line rhyme that has anything from five to six, seven, eight or more lines between the two rhyming words. Barely registered, an unconscious echo. Jump rhyme.

Why is everyone leaving the Patheos Catholic portal? Dawn Eden, Max, Barnes - vamoosed! Back to individual blogs! Tally ho! Makes me smile. What with all those pornified ads they can't do anything about. Well, except you can leave Patheos. Ha!




"You are not here to verify,
Instruct yourself, or inform curiosity
Or carry report. You are here to kneel
Where prayer has been valid."

--T.S. Eliot, Little Gidding

Foolish Vanity


"You allege that you never invite others to sin. You did not by your tongue, but you have done it by your dress and deportment more effectively than you could by your voice. When you have made another to sin in his heart, how can you be innocent? You sharpened and drew the sword. You gave the thrust by which the soul is wounded. Tell me whom does the world condemn? Whom do judges punish? Those who drink the poison, or those who prepare and give the fatal draught? You mingled the execrable cup; you administered the potion of death. You are so much more criminal than poisoners, as the death which you cause is the more terrible; for you murder not the body, but the soul. Nor do you do this to enemies: not compelled by necessity nor provoked by any injury; but out of a foolish vanity and pride. You sport yourselves in the ruin of the souls of others, and make their spiritual death your pastime."

--St. John Chrysostom on Immodest Women

Thursday, September 18, 2014

Monday, September 15, 2014

Sunday, September 14, 2014

Friday, September 12, 2014

The death of a rat



That trap plumb near cut his head off. You don't need to make a fancy meal. Tostada with a bit of butter. A bit of apple. They're not picky. He had made his way behind the siding of the house and got inside the wall. He couldn't get inside the house, but you know, when you see a rat running along the baseline of the house and you hear scurrying inside the wall, that means death to the rat - and that is that.

Tuesday, September 9, 2014

Appaloosa





These are called appaloosa beans. I bought a packet when I went to a Seedy Saturday event at Van Dusen Gardens a few years back, and I can't remember if I had bought them from Salt Spring Seeds or Full Circle Seeds. I planted that original packet, which yielded a big bowl full of seeds. I saved those and didn't plant any of them until this year. I only planted a small patch, hardly anything. I think the seeds were around three years old. As far as I could tell all of them came up. About half a big bowl full.

So now there's this second generation and the brown bag full of the "first generation". They all have a destination for the dirt.

Aphorism


Bureaucracy is ill-defined as a government begetting too much of itself; it is far more accurately defined as a government becoming more and more quarantined.

Monday, September 8, 2014


Words of Our Lady of Fatima to Jacinta


"More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason."

"Certain fashions will be introduced that will offend Our Lord very much."

"Woe to women lacking in modesty."


--Spoken from between December 1919 and February 1920

Sunday, September 7, 2014


Hyssop!

What is that, around three hundred plants? Rainman estimators eat your hearts out.

Water Money


Paradox: by bonding itself to the public interest a government is getting out of the public's way.

By "bonding" we mean contractual bonding, in the same way that a government bonds itself to private banks through "government bonds". In our paradox the government would be outlawed from bonding itself to private banks, for that is nothing other than to enslave to debt the future (and present) generations of its country.

In the "old days" our paradox was typically referred to as "protection". The protection works both ways. Not only is the public interest protected, but they are protected from undue government interference in the very same stroke, because by "bonding" itself to the public interest, by way of the mutual contract of money issued to the commonwealth through infrastructure, the government is bonding itself away from wastral bureaucratic projects - such as, for instance, wasting 300 billion gallons of water on an endangered smelt (the fish is still endangered by the way). In which case, as we presently see, farmers have to bulldoze half their citrus trees and others go out of business.

And a government comes from a society, even when the electoral process is a mockery.

In other words, a society could function without private banks. They are just a commercial business. One could argue that they are inevitable, sure. But a society could function without them. But to even use the word "society" implies government of some kind. In other words, banks are just banks, but a government is essential.

So when people talk about "big business and big government" like they were just two equal entities merely because they were equally corrupt have not thought things through.

Which means pretty well that all the major Catholic writers out there in internet land are, for the most part it would seem, on this subject, quite content with the wall of "lies and bribes and dead men's bones", as long as their ideas can be kept up as sorts of hobbies without the threat of being translated into reality.

Anyways, one could not come up with a better example of the need for transparently controlled, government debt-free money, spent into existence, than the water system of California.

What is the first result of a government proposing debt-free infrastructure projects as the means of issuing the country's money into existence? That which is most essential in terms of infrastructure for the flourishing and well-being of society come to the fore to occupy the government's energies. Right there, you have broken the back of bureaucratic entanglements. The government is "squaring" with the people. This is actually the only way in which you will ever have less government.

What is the result of the most essential structures (like water systems) being made evident, both in terms of completion and in operating function by way of debt-free government-issued money? The unburdening of productive capacities, which can then transact in an economy that has velocity rather than delay. In other words, by not being burdened by debt. In a debt-money economy like ours, you may not be burdened by debt, but in some convoluted indirect way you are, or will be, because someone else is burdened by debt, and an economy is based upon transaction - far more in fact than it is based upon capital. For capital is based upon the occurrence of transaction. Value is decided via transaction, not vice versa. A transaction completed is the evidencing of value, and thus of capital. You have bushels of wheat you have no intention of selling but you want to know their value? Right there, you have already assessed them according to the incentive of a future transaction - even though you have no intention of transacting with them. Yep.

You see, people just don't seem to get the part about a government spending the money into existence. It's a transaction. It's acutely different to merely giving it out, which is welfare. And far more acutely different to borrowing it at interest and then giving it out, which is plutocracy carried out through a middle-man, the government.

There is something important about it, and I am repeating what I wrote above: because the government spends the money into existence (through, for instance, infrastructure), the government thereby cuts off its own power to dictate to people how they are to spend that money. Because the government has already done that - spent it. (And that is power to the people.) That is the definition of being spent: you received something in return, and what you gave is totally out of your ownership and say. Whereas with welfare, there is no objective sundering between parties. That's not to say that welfare is de facto enslaving of parties; the Church practices the charity of welfare without enslaving. In a government's hands though that just doesn't work so well. And that's because a government has a different purpose, not because a government is de facto enslaving.

The government needs to have an objective end to which the power it exercises by issuing money comes to a contractual breach. There must be a fundamental meeting and sundering. After which there is a mutual contract, the burden of which rests upon the government, and the overseer of which is the public. (The government's end of the mutual contract carried forward and honoured is the transparent control over quantity, which the public oversees. The government is thus rendered vulnerable to the wrath of the public, but also rendering its most positive value: that of protecting and making incentives towards the common good and the commonwealth.) This must be the first primary transaction, or primary transactions, from which an economy proceeds. There is no such thing as an economy not proceeding from a primary transaction. Economies are not based on some isolated, intrinsic value. They are based upon a single, primary transaction.*

Presently, the primary transactions from which our economy proceeds are transactions done in the dark, and not done with the public, in its interest, but are done with private banks, in their interest.

In our truth-bearing paradox of government bonded to the public interest, you would see, very much overnight, a consuming economy becoming a producing economy - that is, producing stuff that people actually need and want, not useless crap. You would also see a booming democracy of innovations, inventions, ideas. And I say "democracy" because those inventions, innovations, ideas would not remain on back-burners but would be self-actively implemented - indeed, practically in the sense that the ease given by monetary lubrication would seem to bring such things out.

Farmers in California are paying astonishing sums of money for...water: something that falls from the sky.

Gold standard, my ass.


*--This is where your friendly major Catholic writers start howling about you being a spawn of the dictatorship of relativism and a child of the Enlightenment. ROFL!

Back on the catch and release system

I'm getting soft in my old age. Plus one that big just makes too much of a mess.


80s Fantasy

They were always interesting when they agreed that a movie was great. They were always entertaining when they disagreed if a movie was bad or good. But they were sublime when they agreed that a movie sucked.











"Instead of Three Men and a Baby you could have called this A Warrior, a Dwarf, Two Brownies and Baby."

"What were they called - the Ewoks..."

LOL!




Of course I disagree somewhat about Krull.

Saturday, September 6, 2014