Tag Archives: MC1961

From: Stebbins, Donald M. (MC1961)
Date: Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 7:57 PM
Subject: Judge Napolitano

Dear Jasper John

With your tendency to blame the “gooferment” for virtually all our problems no matter what, there appears to be very little chance of changing your mind significantly or maybe not at all. But I will give myself one more try by commenting on an argument I found in Judge Andrew Napolitano’s latest book “It Is Dangerous To Be Right When The Government Is Wrong”

Like you have in the past the judge lays the blame for Jim Crow Laws in the south on the government and writes that ” Furthermore, it wasn’t businesses that chose to discriminate in the Jim Crow south; rather Napolitano reminds readers that “Jim Crow laws were written, implemented, and enforced by the government.” He adds that “Jim Crow is a clear demonstration that we simply cannot trust the government to decide what discrimination is acceptable and what discrimination is deplorable.”

Frankly I think the judge is either very naive or disingenuous when he writes material like this. It seems to me that anyone with even rudimentary knowledge of southern history knows that the government was not an independent entity when it came to the enactment and enforce of theses terrible laws, which kept African Americans virtual slaves for a century In truth Jim Crow laws were enforced by vigilante groups like the KKK using techniques that could include threats, job loss, beatings, and even murder. Unfortunately most white southerners gave approval to those methods- which were quite popular in churches, citizen’s councils and other civic organizations. The government had no choice but to enact and enforce those horrible laws or face the wrath of the KKK itself.

The government of the United States was indeed failing to meet its Constitutional requirements during that time. The Constitution demands that each and every state has a “Republican Form of Government.” The states of the former confederacy clearly did not meet that requirement and should have been forced to give black Americans full rights or face loss of autonomy

The civil rights movement of the 1950′s and 1960′s finally brought about a great increase in the rights of black Americans via action by the federal government. Without government action we would still have virtual slavery in this country. I say “Thank God for the “gooferment” when it works to help us all.

Sincerely yours,
Donald M Stebbins
BS 1961

# – # – #

JR responds:

Once again, you give credit to the Gooferment for everything good and nothing bad.

The Civil War was fought over the dying institution of slavery. Most modern countries outlawed it without killing a lot of people and creating a permanent scar across the land. Lincoln rejected a proposal to buy out all the slaves. He rejected peace proposals with the Confederacy. He was in the pocket of the Northeastern wealthy. (You can read my blog about why I deem him the worst President. Bill O’Reilly is wrong about him.)

Racists, took over and used State Gooferment, to exert control over the citizens. Bus owners never had segregation until the State Gooferments mandated it. Same with Woolworth’s lunch counters.

(A big point of the gun control laws was to keep firearms OUT of the hands of minorities. Hard for the KKK to intimidate someone who can shoot back.)

“The Gooferment had no choice but to submit to the KKK?” You can’t be serious.

The Civil Rights Movement wasn’t the Federal Gooferment giving minorities their rights back; it was the Occupy Wall Street of its day. More articulate; more focused. The entire weight of the country was coming down on the racists.

And, THEN, when the handwriting was on the wall, the “Federal Gooferment” runs around to get at the head of the parade.

Jaspers, in my cousin’s class, went South to march. I wanted to go, but my Mom wouldn’t let me.

Seriously, did we go to the same school?

# – # – # – # – # 2011-Dec-19 @ 09:33

from Stebbins, Donald M. (MC1961)
to jasperfjohn68
date Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:26 PM
subject Poetry Readers Challenge – Reviews 2010: Bach and a Catbird by John Fandel

*** begin quote ***

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/315226-bach-and-a-catbird-by-john-fandel

message 1: by Donald (new)
Apr 04, 2010 04:13pm

John Fandel’s collection of poems, Bach and a Catbird published by Roth Publishing in 1978 contains 50 poems, mostly short poems in formal meter and rhyme, although a few are in free verse. John Fandel is not a household word. In fact, information about him and his poems is meager, despite the fact that his first collection was published in 1947 and he is now 85 and still writing and publishing. The back cover of this collection states, “John Fandel has published many poems (384) in a number of periodicals (90). In addition, he has brought out collections (4), chapbooks (8), privately printed pamphlets (16), and hand-made brochures (24). “ He now probably has double the amount of publications mentioned above. His lack of recognition among the outlets for contemporary poetry is a mystery to me.

The first poem in the collection, “The Aging Astronomer” – which recalls the famous Whitman poem – has a line that characterizes Fandel’s overall technique: “ He had a windowful of sky..and wonder.” Fandel is a poet of the wonders of the physical world. But he is not a poet of the deep forest, instead the poet of the garden; not the poet of the Windhover, instead the poet of the Cardinal and the Mockingbird; not the poet of the deep sea, but the poet of the Sandpiper along the ocean’s edge. Fandel’s poems have the feel that they were influenced by both Gerard Manly Hopkins and Robert Frost (with maybe a touch of Richard Wilbur and Robert Francis thrown in), and an even more distant influence of Keats and Milton. They are deceptively simple, replete with word play, puns and all the literary devices that makes these poems a joy to read. Fandel’s classical education is obvious though subtle.

The selections I admired most in this collection are: “Mostly about Calendulas.” one of his many Ars Poetica poems; “Laws,” “Lilacs,” “Sandpiper,” “Map Reading.” and “Blessing Them,” a poem about the feminine influences in his life.

Because, as mentioned earlier, Fandel’s poems do not show up on a simple Google search – it is actually easier to locate them at Amazon or Abesbooks than to try to get them from a University or Local library- I will print out “Laws,” “Lilacs,” and “Mostly about Calendulas” below:

*** end quote ***

# – # – #

[JR: I had concerns about Fandel’s copyright status. So I refered it to the “legal desk” and Mike ran over from the “research desk” to answer.]

Dear John,

With the current state of flux over the “fair use” and all of that, it is probably best to edit out the material and just cite it.

This has turned out to be a great undertaking.

Mike

McEneney, Mike (MC1953)

[JR: Thanks, Mike. Much appreciated.]

[JR: He “ran” pretty fast for ‘53 Jasper. So I just took the liberty of editing the text. It’s available at the above link. Discretion is … ]

# – # – # – # – # 2011-Dec-13 @ 17:59

From: Stebbins, Donald M (MC1961)
Date: Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 11:16 PM
Subject: libertarianism, capitalism,[7] fascism, and Nazism have all been condemned, at least in their pure forms, by several popes since the late nineteenth century.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Catholic social teaching is a body of doctrine developed by the Catholic Church on matters of poverty and wealth, economics, social organization and the role of the state. Its foundations are widely considered to have been laid by Pope Leo XIII’s 1891 encyclical letter Rerum Novarum, which advocated economic Distributism and condemned Socialism, although its roots can be traced to the writings of Catholic thinkers such as St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine of Hippo, and is also derived from concepts present in the Bible.

According to Pope Benedict XVI, its purpose “is simply to help purify reason and to contribute, here and now, to the acknowledgment and attainment of what is just…. [The Church] has to play her part through rational argument and she has to reawaken the spiritual energy without which justice…cannot prevail and prosper”,[1] According to Pope John Paul II, its foundation “rests on the threefold cornerstones of human dignity, solidarity and subsidiarity”.[2] These concerns echo elements of Jewish law and the prophetic books of the Old Testament, and recall the teachings of Jesus Christ recorded in the New Testament, such as his declaration that “whatever you have done for one of these least brothers of Mine, you have done for Me.”[3]

Catholic social teaching is distinctive in its consistent critiques of modern social and political ideologies both of the left and of the right: liberalism, communism, feminism,[4][5] atheism,[6] socialism, libertarianism, capitalism,[7] fascism, and Nazism have all been condemned, at least in their pure forms, by several popes since the late nineteenth century.

# – # – # – # – #   

[JR: Sorry for missing this on Sunday. Hectic to reset everything for a fresh week. You should take a "contributor" account on the Jasper Jottings Daily blog, and insert them right into the stream. Avoid the handling.]

[JR: Now I'm just a fat old white guy injineer and not well versed in all this stuff, but, I thought infallibility only applied to "faith and morals"? So condemning "capitalism" is like condemning "gravity". And, "libertarianism" is condemning "free will". No libertarian that I know or have read ever condemns "religion" or "charity". As a matter of fact, Libertarians are very charitable and advocate vigorously for it. It's not "charity" or "liberty" to have the Gooferment rob the people, turn around giving a few crumbs, and exacting a terrible "handling charge". Like to see the Holy Father condemn "Big Gooferment". Back in the 70's when I was big in the tax revolt movement, I had stats that showed roughly that the "vig" for ANY level of Gooferment to handle money was 50%. So we send money to the IRS, the big Federal Gooferment "grants" to the State Gooferment, who in turn "grants" to the County Gooferment, who in turn "grants" to the Municipal Gooferment. SO that's ½ * ½ * ½ * ½ or .50 + .25 + .125 + 0.0625 = .0625 to whatever purpose it was meant for. Like the local Municipal Food Bank (A concept I disagree with.) So you'll see why the Libertarians would rather donate directly to say the Salvation Army, then all those bureaucrats! Charity isn't a proper Gooferment function. ]

[JR: And, you quoting Wikipedia? I thought all you intellectuals from up the hill looked down on Wikipedia. :-) Can't use to quote or cite from it at MC. Argh! And, yes, I'm biased as one of the grazillion "little editors" of Wikipedia. Guess the Pope will be against Wikipediaism next?]

# – # – # – # – # 2011-Dec-12 @ 08:25

From: Stebbins, Donald M (MC1961)
Date: Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 11:29 PM
Subject: Social Justice = a term coined by the Jesuit Luigi Taparelli based on the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas

Dear Jasper John

I have always thought that the concept of social justice was an essential part of Catholicism and helped distinguish Catholics fro some protestant denominations who did not think good works or economic policies to be important A brief look at some web sites seems to indicate I am correct.

The concept can be traced back to St Thomas Aquinas, whose teachings dominated philosophical and morals teachings when I was at Manhattan.

Sincerely yours
Donald M Stebbins
BS 1961

# – # – #

From Wikipedia:

Social justice generally refers to the idea of creating a society or institution that is based on the principles of equality and solidarity, that understands and values human rights, and that recognizes the dignity of every human being.] The term and modern concept of “social justice” was coined by the Jesuit Luigi Taparelli in 1840 based on the teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas and given further exposure in 1848 by Antonio Rosmini-Serbati.[1][2][4][5][6] The idea was elaborated by the moral theologian John A. Ryan, who initiated the concept of a living wage. Father Coughlin also used the term in his publications in the 1930s and the 1940s. It is a part of Catholic social teaching, the Episcopalians’ Social Gospel, and is one of the Four Pillars of the Green Party upheld by green parties worldwide. Social justice as a secular concept, distinct from religious teachings, emerged mainly in the late twentieth century, influenced primarily by philosopher John Rawls. Some tenets of social justice have been adopted by those on the left of the political spectrum.

# – # – # – # – #   

[JR: Hmmm, “social justice”? Sorry, but the term has been assumed by the radical left -ists (i.e., Socialist, Communist, Marxist, Who knows what else ists) to mean “to each according to their needs (as they see them)”. I humbly doubt that Saint Thomas Aquinas, whom the good Brothers in Good Shepherd Grammar school and Manhattan Prep insisted we read, would recognize the “cradle to grave” handouts as his social justice of “equality”. I’d have to go back and refresh my memory but wasn’t he about a “just price” and the immorality of gouging one’s fellow man. I don’t remember him saying to rob everyone so that some might live a life of indolence (i.e., on the dole for generations). Maybe I misread him; I doubt I am misreading today’s Socialists. They want to control the levers of Gooferment for their own benefit. And, soon the productive class will stop producing and everyone will starve. I’m sure that’s not what the Church Fathers — past or present — intended. Shame economics is such a hard subject; with all that math and facts stuff. “The trouble with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” —Margaret Thatcher Charity, of course; forced redistribution of wealth, never!]

# – # – # – # – # 2011-Dec-11 @ 08:00   

From: Stebbins, Donald M (MC1961)
Date: Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:37 PM
Subject: Accomplishments of the United Nations

[JR: Attached a picture.]

[JR: Sorry, but what this article claims as accomplishments, I'd call failures. The Korean War, Human Rights by tyrant regimes, corruption in everything it does, and don't get me started on the IMF. It's a OPEC for "central banking". The UN is an attempt by the socialists and fascists to create a World Gooferment. Luckily, all gooferments are extremely incompetent and totally clueless. Without the stupidest "We, The Sheeple", they'd never be allowed to grow bigger than an angry mob could burn out of a Saturday night. That's "will of the people". "Too big to fail is too big to exist" applies to gooferments as well. Argh! Human beings have to free. They must be free. They will be free. Because if they aren't, they can subvert anything until they are.]

# – # – # – # – # 2011-Dec-06 @ 21:14   

From: Stebbins, Donald M (MC1961)
Date: Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 2:18 PM
Subject: Scrooge and Marriage – Go Together like a Horse and Carriage?

Dear Jasper John

You wrote:

“You are misreading my support for old Eb. He pays his taxes for his Gooferment social programs and then he gets panhandled to support the poor. His rant about “workhouses” is more about having to pay twice.”

You have to be kidding!! Scrooge was the one being subsidized by the existing economic structure. First he was living on the backs of Bob Cratchit and other workers by not paying a living wage. He pocketed his fortune by exploiting workers. Then he was subsidized by the charitable contributions of others ( he did not contribute) which kept Cratchit healthy enough to work at Scrooge’s unheated place. I viewed the George C Scott version of “A Christmas Carol” last night- the best one is the Alistair Sim version which is usually shown on Christmas Eve. and puts more of the fear of God into you.

I am surprised by your attitude toward panhandlers- I’d think you would at least admire their spunk and individual initiative. I remember the techniques used by the needy back in 1957-58 when I delivered inter-office mail for Con Edison via the Lexington Avenue Express. One method was to place two nickels in their hand and say they needed another 5 cents to buy a token. They would of course place the nickels into their pockets until they had enough money for a bottle of Danny Boy. But the most memorable were the groups of young people who would dance and play bongo drums in the subway cars and then pass the hat as we reached a station (During the non-rush hours there was plenty of room).

As far as marriage is concerned I think reading a little about the history of marriage might change your mind about not having the “gooferment” involved. Without a government defining the rules of marriage every culture within our borders and throughout the world would have their own definitions and practices. Chaos would reign in virtually every aspect of our lives.

see http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/arts/books/review-a-history-of-marriage-by-elizabeth-abbott/article1440475/singlepage/#articlecontent for a review of the book “A History of Marriage by Elizabeth Abbott”

A quote fro the review gives some indication of the contents of the book:

“She is also a voracious reader who has dipped into a disparate group of sources. This allows her to challenge the mantra that “traditional marriage has always been one-man, one-woman,” noting the prevalence of polygamy and even, occasionally, same-sex marriages in the past. She observes that marriages were not always even between two living persons, that Chinese parents sometimes conducted afterlife marriages for dead sons and daughters to spare them “the eternal torment of their unmarried states.”

Who is to say what constitutes a marriage if the government does not?

Sincerely yours,
Donald M Stebbins
BS 1961

PS I hope a John Fandel page can be established on Wikipedia – good luck

# – # – #

WRT old Eb: If Bob wasn’t being paid what he was worth, he was free to seek other employment. If Eb was stupidly or malevolently undervaluing Bob’s labor, then Bob would quickly find higher paying work. If Bob was not earning a “living wage”, that’s Bob’s problem. He has to comport his lifestyle to what he can afford. It’s not Eb’s problem. It’s not “society’s” problem. It’s not a problem! Regardless, of what age or era, the individual has to pull their own weight. Everyone has choices. Stealing from one’s neighbors to maintain one’s own “extravagant” lifestyle is just theft. Putting the Gooferment or the Mob in the middle to keep the thief’s hands clean fools no one.

WRT panhandlers: If there’s no force or fraud involved, they should be free to handle any pan they want. There is a small role of an honest small government to prevent force or fraud. Before you can beg by claiming to be blind, you have to be blind. If you’re exposed as a fraud, then you should be forced to make restitution. Charities provide for those who truly need it and have a pretty good record for excluding the thieves or the indolent.

WRT marriage: Once again, the politicians run to the front of the parade and then they claim they are leading. Humans found that, for a bundle of reasons, humans, as a species, survive better when, as many animals, they mate for life to raise offspring. Then the priests and the politicians rush in to claim to have created it. Without churches or Gooferments, marriage would continue to exist and thrive. And, parents and children can do whatever they want. (As long as there’s no force or fraud.) History will tell what worked and what didn’t. The Shakers abhorred sex; extinction. Natural law has it’s own discipline. No Gooferment needed. For example, the “Law of Gravity” was “repealed” by the gang of people calling themselves “The State of Louisiana”. Anyone, who jumped off a roof, found out that the “Law” was still in effect. The people will decide what marriage is. The Gooferment want to control the discussion and the people. And, they use it, in the Tax Code, to pit us against each other!

Thanks for the good wishes on the Fandel page. I was hoping for some help. Anyone have Fandel’s CV? Or other information.

# – # – # – # – # 2011-Dec-06 @ 19:54

From: Stebbins, Donald M (MC1961)
Date: Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 7:19 PM
Subject: Hard Money

Dear Jasper John,

It is not surprising to see you backing hard money and opposing a United Nations takeover of the economy as proposed by Pope Benedict (http://takimag.com/article/truth_charity/print#axzz1bvz5cjBe) given that in the past you have admitted rooting for Ebenezer Scrooge while reading or viewing “A Christmas Carol”. I suppose that you are an Old Man Potter devotee as well after seeing “It’s a Wonderful Life” Actually there are those who argue that Bedford Falls was better off under Potter with a thriving economy based on gambling and alcohol- where I live the local Oneida County economy isn’t exactly thriving, but our largest employer is the Indian casino, which now serves alcohol.

If “hard money” benefits the poor so much why is it always the favorite policy of bankers and other plutocrats?

Do you think those fellows and gals have the interest of poor folk at heart? William Jennings Bryan certainly did not think so

Part of his “Cross of Gold” speech is quoted below from: http://www.academicamerican.com/recongildedage/topics/gildedagepolitics.html

The issue (of hard money) came into sharp focus during the 1896 Democratic national convention. William Jennings Bryan, a populist Democrat from Nebraska, gave a speech which became known as his “Cross of Gold Speech.” In that famous oration Bryan said of the gold backers:

“They tell us that the great cities are in favor of the gold standard; we reply that the great cities rest upon our broad and fertile prairies. Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again as if by magic; but destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country.

“… Having behind us the producing masses of this nation and the world, supported by the commercial interests, the laboring interests, and the toilers everywhere, we will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.”

Sincerely yours,
Donald M Stebbins
BS 1961

# – # – #

JR:

I am surprised that it took you until Wednesday to “fire back”.

With all deference to the Holy Father, taking over of “the economy” by the UN is an absolutely terrible idea. Unless I misunderstand the definition of “faith and morals”, the Pope is offering us a “personal opinion”. Look at ANYTHING the UN has done and tell me that this the path to peace, liberty, or even prosperity? This is the same UN where the Human Rights are preserved by tyrants, “oil for food” after looting is used to buy arms for dictators, or even the unpunished atrocities committed by UN “peacekeepers”!

You are misreading my support for old Eb. He pays his taxes for his Gooferment social programs and then he gets panhandled to support the poor. His rant about “workhouses” is more about having to pay twice.

And, Potter is a creation of the Gooferment. Where does he get an industry protected from competition? And when an upstart S&L starts to pinch, HE calls the regulators to shut them down.

Gambling and booze are “regulated”; no? I’d suggest that Bedford Falls would be better off without the Gooferment’s “help”.

You have to be joking? What “plutocrat” advocates for “hard money”? Central bankers (including Wall Street), and their corrupt politicians and bureaucrats, want Gooferment to escape the chains of “hard money”. Inflation is the Gooferment’s tax on dollars, and dollar denominated assets. It allows Gooferment spending without debt or taxation. This silent hidden tax has eroded the dollars purchasing power. Remember Ron Paul’s three silver dimes comparison? Three silver dimes in 1960 bought a gallon of gas; those same three silver dimes would buy about THREE gallons today! The gas “value” didn’t change; the value of the “dollar” did! And, don’t you see how the little guy is being cheated?

And, WJB, that you’re citing, wanted “cheap money” from the Gooferment to make the “Farmer” rich at the expense of the “City Dwellers”. Unfortunately, EVERYONE wants to control the Gooferment so they can FORCE others to do their will.

“Money is a matter of functions four, a medium, a measure, a standard, a store.” He repeated that four times like poetry. “Six Characters in Money: Portable – Durable – Divisible – Uniformity – Limited Supply – Acceptability.” — CHURCH 10●19●62 (Vol 1) 978-0-557-08387-9 page 110

Arguing against “hard money”, as opposed to “faith-based money”, is like arguing against the kilogram, meter, and the second. An ounce of something (i.e., copper, silver, gold, palladium, platinum) as money is merely that measure, standard, or store.

And under the Federal Reserve System of “funny money” and all the Gooferment help (i.e., the War on Poverty), how has “the poor” made out?

Four generations of “welfare farmers” is my proof of the “impoverishing” effect of Gooferment, enabled by the “funny money” that allows “guns and butter” spending.

Could we maybe try something else?

# – # – # – # – # 2011-Nov-30 @ 22:33

From: Stebbins, Donald M (MC1961)
Date: Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 10:00 AM
Subject: Poet-Bashing Police – Movement started by Mario Savio, one time Manhattan College Student

Mario Savio went to Manhattan for one year (1960-1961) at his father’s request according to his bio.

Don

# – # – #

Reprints

This copy is for your personal, noncommercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers here or use the “Reprints” tool that appears next to any article. Visit www.nytreprints.com for samples and additional information. Order a reprint of this article now.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/20/opinion/sunday/at-occupy-berkeley-beat-poets-has-new-meaning.html

November 19, 2011
Poet-Bashing Police
By ROBERT HASS
Berkeley, Calif.

*** begin quote ***

It is also the place where students almost 50 years ago touched off the Free Speech Movement, which transformed the life of American universities by guaranteeing students freedom of speech and self-governance. The steps are named for Mario Savio, the eloquent graduate student who was the symbolic face of the movement. There is even a Free Speech Movement Cafe on campus where some of Mr. Savio’s words are prominently displayed: “There is a time … when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can’t take part. You can’t even passively take part.”

*** end quote ***

Robert Hass is a professor of poetry and poetics at the University of California, Berkeley, and former poet laureate of the United States.

# # # # #

[JR: I'm far from a "liberal" (in today's vernacular) and, although accused, also far from being a "conservative". As a little L libertarian, I prefer to think of myself as a "classical liberal" who favors "the people" over "the King" or "the Church". Maybe that's a paleo-liberal. All that being said, the Gooferment is out of control with its use of force. And, while I think the Occupy folks are counter-productive, one can't help but be shocked at how "the Man" is treating them. Interesting to see this MC connection. Dona Nobis Pacem ]

# # # # #

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Savio

[JR: Kudos to Jasper Stebbins for a good find and remembering the MC connection. Although he probably shouldn't be reading the lame street media. He's already got too many liberal tendencies. LOL! Serious, thanks for the detective work and the report. Power to the people! Or maybe just Dona Nobis Pacem?]

# – # – # – # – # 2011-Nov-21 @ 07:17