Past Opinions

Here are some of the things that have appeared in the past on Rev.Jim's rant page.
Serious, thoughtful replies are encouraged and may be published here.

Click on a link to go to past rants.
What a minor-league asshole.
I didn't inhale....George Bush Style....
Look at the mess we are in in Yugoslavia.
Better than sniffing a dog's ass?
Is the dog and pony show finally over?

What a Minor League Asshole!

George W. Bush's recent faux pas in front of an open microphone just goes to show how minor league Dubya really is. To quote Ann Richards at the 1984 Democratic Convention, about his father George I, "Poor George! He can't help it. He was born with a silver foot in his mouth!" Apparently, George II has the same problem as George I. A candidate who is trying to pass himself off as a "compassionate conservative" should just plain have better sense than to make such a comment in a public place, microphone or not. This proves once again that Dubya is nothing more than a West Texas redneck engaging in politicians' favorite game: lying to try to get your vote. Between this and the RATS debacle (Come on Dub, first year film students know better!), Dubya is showing that he and his lack of a sense of judgement are completely MINOR league. As he stands in front of various crowds proclaiming that Al Gore keeps trying to re-invent himself, one has to wonder if he is not confusing Al Gore with his own reflection in the mirror. Which George are we supposed to believe is real? The one who says he is trying to create the "big tent" where all are welcome, or the one who went to Bob Jones University; the "compassionate conservative" or the one who called a reporter a major league asshole?

Former Texas Agricultural Commisioner Jim Hightower hit it on the head when he said "George W. Bush was born on third base but keeps acting like he hit a triple." To most thinking people, Dubya seems much more like he got to first on a beanball and has advanced as far as he has on a series of not so comedic errors. The Republican party does not seem to think that the average American has sense enough to remember why we elected Bill Clinton and Al Gore over George Bush Sr. eight years ago. Dubya has surrounded himself with the best and brightest of the old guard (read too conservative for the average American) Republicans whom the electorate soundly trounced in the last two presidential elections. Dubya's pick of Dick Cheney as his running mate proves that Dubya recognizes himself as a political lightweight. Picking Dick Cheney is yet another example of his poor judgement and shows again how out of touch Dubya and the rest of the Republican Party is with the American electorate.


I didn't inhale....George Bush style...

George Bush seems to think that whether or not he participated in possibly felonious criminal activity in the past is not relevent to, or even the business of the voters. Mr. Bush seems to think that his possible past criminal activity is part of his "personal life", however commiting a felony is a public act, and whether or not a presidential candidate has engaged in felonious activity is a relevent question with many implications. The FBI background check drug use questions on which he is basing his answers are designed to find out if a candidate for a position in federal govenment is hiding something that could possibly make him a candidate for blackmail,-or worse. Mr. Bush's blustering on the subject only serves to fuel speculation that he DOES have something to hide.

The Republicans on this morning's (Sunday Aug. 22) talking heads shows all seem to want to claim that because Mr. Bush was never arrested, tried for or convicted of drug use or trafficking, that the whole issue is one being generated by the press to discredit Mr. Bush. Their assertions that a person is "innocent until proven guilty" is a poorly masked attempt to cover a major strategic blunder by the candidate the Republican party has annointed as their saviour before even one vote has been cast. The ever-extending period that he claims he has not used illegal substances has become a sad joke very much akin to Bill Clinton's "I didn't inhale" denial of marijuana use. Does past drug use disqualify a candidate in the minds of the average voter? For some yes, but for the majority, I think that Mr. Bush's arrogance on this subject is much more of a turn-off than the possibility that he partook of cocaine in his younger years. Mr. Bush's reluctance to give a straight-forward answer to "The Cocaine question" shows again how far out of touch he and the Republican party leadership is with the average American.

Look at the mess we are in in Yugoslavia.

My first question is when did this stop being a European problem best handled by Europe?

I could understand our European allies asking for our help under the auspices of NATO. (We do have the coolest toys.) But the focus here has shifted in a manner that worries thinking Americans. Do we have a real national security concern here? Yes. Is a peaceful Europe in our national security interests? Of course it is. But, that said, is this still a European problem probably best solved by Europe? Yes.

People too lazy to think for themselves try to point to the history of the region as a reason to call the whole exercise pointless. But if that were a valid argument, there would be no point to intervention in any case, in any place. One could point out that over the course of human history there are very few places on this Earth that have not had some sort of conflicts. When you consider this part of the world, where many contend that human history began there has naturally been more conflicts than in places where there was noone to fight.

Should we be worried that we are starting World War Three because World Wars One and Two started in this region? No. Should we be worried that we are starting World War Three because there was a war started here obviously without much forethought to what would happen if 10 days of bombing did not convince Milosevic to change his ways as it did in Bosnia? Yes.

Why in the world would the leaders of NATO promise Milosevic in advance that they would not use ground troops? This is like me telling you that I am going to kick your ass but that I will only use my right hand. If I promise you in advance that I will not use my left hand or my feet, you will circle around to my left side and beat the living crap out of me. Any nine year old that has been in a schoolyard fight recognizes the folly of this policy.

Better than sniffing a dog's ass?

I caught a commercial on the idiot box the other night for an online purchasing service (which for reasons soon to be revealed will not be advertised here), The ad in question had a man on his knees giving a dog's ass a loud SNIFF SNIFF. For the rest of the commercial this idiot followed the dog around trying to stick his nose in the poor dog's ass.

After this message filled up its allotted 30 seconds of my life, I began to ponder what it was I had just seen. The announcer may as well have been speaking Martian, because I never heard a word he said. What was the message they were trying to convey to me? That their service is better than smelling a dog's ass? That their service would make me want to smell a dog's ass? Neither is exactly a ringing endorsement, and it left me feeling as bewildered as that poor dog looked.

Is the dog and pony show finally over?

Now that the official impeachment trial is over,
all that there is left is to guage how John Q. Public perceived the whole mess and then the jockeying to try to come out associated with the "right" side of public opinion. The average Joe, contrary to the opinion of many pundits, is plenty bright enough to see through to the simple nitty-gritty which was that the Republicans did not have enough votes to throw Clinton out, and the Democrats did not have enough to stop this ridiculous crap.

Polls said around two-thirds of the country wanted the whole thing to stop, they did not want the president impeached. What did our "representatives" in Washington do? They put on a multi-million dollar extravaganza to prove that 55 does not equal 67, nor does 45 equal 51.

Back to Rev.Jim's Homepage
Thoughtful Replies

All responses become the sole property of Rev.Jim
And may or may not be published here or elsewhere
in whole or in part at the sole discretion of Rev.Jim.

Contents Of This Page İMIM-MMIX Rev.Jim
This Page İMIM-MMXI Rev.Jim