oh, there is the little matter of the first amendment i suppose, but i don't think it is much of an impediment to a tyrant seeking to squash me like a bug for saying nasty things about him. say, for instance, a tyrant would get real mad at me for calling him a limp noodled girly man, a sissy. and, he would seek ways to punish me for it.
but, not obama. he will not. it's not that he doesn't have federal prosecutors who have never read the first amendment, ... , for instance, some dip shit of a u.s. attorney in atlanta promised to prosecute people for saying nasty things about muslims. as if. the point is, he's got people working for him now who are stupid enough to try garbage like that. and, willing, and, eager.
but, there are two real constraints working against obama in any effort to muzzle me, or someone like me.
the first is the matter of obama's background. i don't mean that he lived w/ his granny, and his mommy, and that he is a sissy who cannot throw a baseball. i don't know that joe stalin could throw a baseball.
but, joe stalin came up in a rough and tumble world full of revolutionary acts and czarist retaliation, ... , revolutionaries bombed people, and secret police hunted them down and killed them. stalin survived that, and he rose through the ranks of bolshevik internal politics to control the entire apparatus, including party, state and military.
he was the law. and, a genuinely tough and hard man. hard enough to have a rival hunted down in exile in mexico, and an ice pick put through his eye. a very thorough animosity, and a very thorough lesson for others who might have considered taking a run at him. (leon trotsky, btw.)
obama is a sissy, because he is a golden boy who was hand picked to front the operation for others. obama is nothing more than an image foisted upon us by our managers. you might consider obama the steven tyler of politicians, if you wish, he just grabs the microphone and flaps his lips, while others do the work.
he has no substance. he has no toughness. he has no will to dominate. i suspect that alec baldwin is tougher, and he is nothing more than a gone-to-seed suit and an expensive pair of shoes.
the second matter is that i have nothing.
oh, i've got a few material possessions, nothing to get too excited about, and not worth a warm bucket of spit on the scale that obama and his pampered minions would consider relevant. they could strip me bare, and not have much to show for it.
which is not to say that if someone did that, to include obama and his minions, i would not be pissed beyond your comprehension. i would be very angry. and, not inclined to suffer such indignity either intellectually, or physically.
i grew up in a rough world, and not one damned thing was ever given to me. i would not suffer having those things i have retained being taken from me. i earned them. they are mine. woe betide the dip shit that messed with my possessions. simply to mess with me.
and, i have my intellectual convictions. i would know that i was wronged for expressing my opinion. my conviction that this sort of thing impinged upon my liberties would course through my veins. i know in my bones that not to resist such impious tyranny, such arrogance as the big display when they act because they think that the little cannot resist them, is morally despicable. to be afraid is to be culpable in the acts of others who seek to harm you, and it is wrong not to resist.
in short, a man, or a group of men, who have neither wealth nor grandeur to loose by standing up for themselves, their rights and liberties, their heritage, their families and their sacred honor, ... , why those sorts are very dangerous to a person, and persons, like obama and his minions.
i, we, have nothing to loose lose by resisting the impositions of the haughty & arrogant upon what we hold dear in life, and interfering with why we hold those things dear.
obama will not mess with us.
not because he respects the first amendment, or free speech. he does not. he detests it. he sees no place for it in a society run by a government composed of the vanguard of the proletariat and the oligarchy.
obama will not mess with us.--
1.)because he is not tough enough to take me, and others like me, on. and,
2.)even though moral, ethical and political considerations do not constrain him, he still lives in a universe in which cost vs. benefit analysis still exists. and, he will not bother me, or interfere with me, because it simply will not pay him to do so.
always, obama learns, much to his consternation, there is the ledger.
he gains nothing by messing with me. the visible and probable costs of doing so are simply too great.
he stands the risk of loosing everything if he even trifles with me. i am a person w/ a combination of personal attributes, psychological structure, and intellectual conviction coupled with a skill set and friends with interesting skill sets who could harm obama in very fundamental and profound ways.
we could touch him in manners which he fears.
by contrast, i have nothing to loose lose by comparison in a physical and material sense, and to my mind, even a very limited victory in the physical realm would be tantamount to sweet sweet triumph, and the fulfillment and validation of deeply held convictions.
obama does not understand me, as he has led a pampered and favored life, ... , in my opinion, he has lived the life of the golden & chosen boy, whose place in the world have been nurtured and secured by others. he has won nothing by dint of his own effort, nor of his own intellect, and indeed, has left traces of neither in his wake his whole entire life.
he does not respect me, but he fears me in his gut, and he fears me to his marrow. he know that i, and my friends, who have nothing, can take everything from him. everything. all his "attainments." all of his status. everything. he will not risk that.
his whole life is legend, contrived and fabricated. by others.
he quite literally has simply delivered the lines via the intelligence of the teleprompter, which is the only real intelligence he has. but, he is smart enough to know the truth of what i say above.
he fears to loose lose that with every breath.
don't understand me. i fear much, like any man. but, in this context, i fear nothing. i especially have absolutely no fear of obama and his minions. i went to school with them. i worked professionally with them. i know that they are nothing special.
that they are not superior.
because of these factors they fear me, and what i am capable of, if messed with.
this is the reason that they will not mess with me. they hope that i am obscure enough, and small enough, and unnoticed enough that i will make no difference in the expression of my opinions. that my thoughts and words will sway no one.
what they don't understand, and it is a fatal mistake on their part, is that i am simply one of very many identically situated, and identically predisposed to act, and fully capable of acting. at the drop of a hat.
and that we have swayed the multitudes.
think of the contrast between the obama of today, and the obama who took office upon his initial victory. the emperor, the pretender, has been absolutely disrobed, and he stands before us naked, with a limp dick, narrow and stooped shoulders, and skinny, spindly, knobby and pathetically weird legs. we know about his "beard."
and, a stupid grin, and jug ears. an object of ridicule & contempt the world over.
i, and my friends, made him that. with our words. and, he fears us. for, we are legion.
john jay @ 09.20.2013
You need to work on choosing the correct word.
As used here, it's LOSE not LOOSE.
Loose = loose change, loose-fitting clothes,
Lose = the opposite of win, to misplace and not find, as in "we have nothing to LOSE by resisting the impositions..."
Used incorrectly three times here - and in numerous other of your posts. Some lawyer.
Credibility???
Posted by: Rex | September 21, 2013 at 05:31 AM
rex:
"lose" it is, and "loose" was used incorrectly.
even very tedious persons can be right, and you are right, and the corrections have been made.
"some lawyer." fuck you and the horse you rode in on.
"credibility???" typical fucking cheap shot by people who are proof readers.
as to the rest of it, how'd you like it?
john jay
Posted by: john jay | September 21, 2013 at 06:33 AM
p.s. btw, thanks for the read, and the proofing.
how'd you like to hire on.
Posted by: john jay | September 21, 2013 at 06:36 AM
John Jay,
I very much enjoyed your writing. While Rex and some other people are fixated on the 'prettiness' of the writings, I am more concerned with the ideas and concepts behind the writings, and I find your thoughts to be well worth the read.
Thank You.
You have emboldened me to speak more freely, and to fully express my 1st Amendment Right.
Posted by: Dak | September 21, 2013 at 07:25 AM
dak:
thank you for the read, and thank you for the comment.
one thing about rex, ... , he's correct, i am a horrible proof reader of my own stuff. my "mind", such as it is, goes right over the top of my mistakes, just does not see them.
so, guilty as charged.
i don't mind his remarks on "proofing," though he mistakenly calls it correcting my grammar.
he's just snide, which is what pisses me off. laughing. but, he's right.
so, there you go.
you have a good day, and god's protection.
and, again, thank you.
john jay
Posted by: john jay | September 21, 2013 at 08:35 AM
I thoroughly enjoyed this essay and would fire Rex. There was one more "loose" I spotted. (I used to edit publications and proofread for the staff as well.) It's in this sentence:
in short, a man, or a group of men, who have neither wealth nor grandeur to loose by standing up for themselves...
This is my first visit, but I'll be back and will look at some of John Jay's earlier work.
Posted by: silverdust | September 21, 2013 at 04:34 PM
silver dust:
thanks for the read, thanks for the visit, and thank you for your kind words.
i will correct the loosely proofed piece, ... , i am at a loss to explain how i missed the word a fourth time, ... , and i hope i don't lose any readership over it.
laughing.
john jay
Posted by: john jay | September 21, 2013 at 05:00 PM
Although I noticed the grammatical errors too, I still thoroughly enjoyed the article and share the sentiment. Also like the Cummings-like lack of capitalization. Will definitely delve into the archives and add you to the blogroll.
Posted by: da_truth36 | September 22, 2013 at 07:33 AM
da_truth36:
i dropped by your website, and found it a very good place, w/ good articles.
i read your blogroll.
i am in some very fine company, and i cannot tell you how pleased it made me feel to read the name of my blog in that company.
i am not sure that i deserve to be there, but, thank you, very much. it is a singular honor.
thank you.
john jay
Posted by: john jay | September 22, 2013 at 01:24 PM
Rex, what the hell is your problem? if John decides to type as e does, why do you let it irritate you? e is who e is, e types as e does, this is his blog. if you don't like it, don't read it. fuckwad. and if you don't like my usage of irish typing diction, go suck start a harley. assclown. and no, we've never met, but if that happens, I'll be sure to forget the meeting as soon as possible.
John, another excellent tome, thank you. Yes, I chose my typing skills in the reply, the misanthrope should improve his manners, and you certainly don't need me to defend you, but whomever rex is, he gets irritating. I've been reading your words for over four years now, and never considered offering any spelling suggestions, that's near the pinnacle of arrogance in my view. You type as you do, that's how it is.
I watched about 20 seconds of the jugears "speaking" at the memorial for the navy yard dead earlier today, it was pathetic, the false emotion and false interest while uttering the words describing the lives of those now passed on was incredible, how any breathing person could be so devoid of empathy is beyond my skills to figure. And I'm better off not being able to figure that.
Blessings to you, stay safe.
Posted by: Grog | September 22, 2013 at 05:52 PM
As a friend of long standing I wonder how Rex would fare on a "death march" a week of "hell camp". Me thinks we might need to invoke the "head and hands rule.
Posted by: Rollie | September 22, 2013 at 09:01 PM
rollie:
what? 30 years? it has been a while.
perhaps carrying a rain sodden canvas wall tent up the "mule face?" maybe hiking out w/ elk quarters over ground frozen in shadow and congealed mud in the sunlight, in a steady drizzle, all in underwear tops as the rest of the morning's clothing had been shed to cool from the exertion?
ah, makes me want to break out in a chorus of "memories."
laughing.
good to hear from you, as per always. i'll let you know if i think that i can spring the pup, ... , i am having to decide whether i can care for the little guy, don't know if i am suited anymore.
as noted, i don't mind rex pointing out that my proofreading is not the greatest ... so much is obvious, hardly to be denied. even the people miffed at rex have to admit that my spelling is not so great, and proofreading pretty spotty, to say the least.
but, he serves a useful function pointing out my faults.
i don't understand, however, why he has to be so snotty about other extraneous matters, unless that is his real sole purpose. maybe his "soul" purpose, what? laughing.
maybe he'll come around. time will tell.
john
p.s. as to the "head and hands" rule. having some ticker problems didn't stop me from elk hunting for a time, but, it presented a quandary for my camp mates, e.g., what to do with my body if i croaked.
i knew that they would not break camp to haul my carcass in, while on the trail of bull elk. i didn't expect them to, and i certainly would not have had one of them expired unexpectedly.
i didn't want them to roll me under a log, and claim i hadn't come back to camp one evening. heavens, they might have experienced some lingering guilt over that.
but, i wanted to be buried proper.
so, i suggested a "compromise." i made them promise, that if i died, they could set me out to freeze if the weather were cold enough, and then when it was time to break camp, they could just bring out my head and hands. i figured my friends at the mortuary in milton freewater would know what to do, as they would have put the neck in a good shirt, stuffed the suit w/ newspaper, and stuck the hands out the sleeves of the coat, and cowboy boots out the pant legs.
i made corky promise that he would get the "right" and "left" of things correctly, or at least not reverse them on purpose.
corky promised. he tells the story over dice for coffee sometimes, in good high humor.
i like that corky.
think maybe i should ask rex to elk camp, ... , explaining the "head and hands rule," of course.
it would be only fair. or, is that fare? for him?
Posted by: john jay | September 22, 2013 at 09:22 PM
I don't think he could pass the "tepid" test.
Posted by: Rollie | September 23, 2013 at 08:34 PM
rollie:
no, he doesn't strike me as "cold camp" *** material. a bit straight laced for that sort of lunacy.
john
*** rollie and i hunted elk for many years, our camps set up at about the 6,000 foot level to catch the first snows of the season.
sometimes we were just a bit too "lucky" in catching those snows.
one year we spent 5 or 6 days straight in a camp in which every drop of water or liquid was frozen solid ... 24 hours a day. we boiled snow to cook & drink, and didn't worry too much about washing.
not a place for those with a fastidious bent.
i think that i will write a post about the "tepid incident."
you want to write the rebuttal?
Posted by: john jay | September 23, 2013 at 10:59 PM