As the world turns
Maybe it’s still to come but I find it a little peculiar that we have not seen anything written by the Antelope Valley Press staff regarding Rep. Katie Hill’s relationship status. It has been reported on redstate.com that she has been involved in a three-way relationship with her current husband whom she is currently in the middle of divorce proceedings and a young female staffer. The evidence is irrefutable including photos too lewd to print as well as text messages between them. She has since ended that relationship with the female staffer and has chosen a new male staffer Graham Kelly, her legislative director to have an affair with.
This is the kind of stuff that is used as blackmail against our politicians. She sits on the Oversight and Reform and Armed Service committees. What about the national security implications it brings not to mention the obvious unethical and immoral behavior? How can we believe she is being honest to her constituents when she exhibits such behavior?
It sure seems this is at least newsworthy. Could you imagine the number of columns that would be devoted to this story if it involved former Rep. Steve Knight?
We are often told of the importance of the press in our democracy as the watchdog and that the press is responsible for informing the electorate. Most of which I agree with in principle, the problem is you are not doing your job. Your lack of reporting speaks volumes.
Ha ha ha, etc.
News flash: Scientists have discovered a new fault line. It’s massive and it’s in Sacramento. It is capable of a mega-quake the size of which may be astronomical when it strikes at full capacity.
According to scientists, it will strike, it’s just a matter of when. As a matter of fact, seismologists agree that temblors from this fault have already been felt throughout California. The fault line, which runs the length of the state, is named Gavin Newsom.
Stuart A. Cannold
Cherished military or murderers?
Steve Lockhart: “I’m not sure why it is considered childish and naive to say someone is serving their country (while a member of the military).”
Because there exists a copious amount of information — albeit primarily ignored — that shows us that the U.S. military is nothing more than a multinational corporate protection racket. The cowardliness of, say, our invasion of Grenada, and the Bush administration’s lies about Iraq’s “WMD” should be more than enough to understand that fact.
In reality, the (destruction) of freedom and democracy around the globe at the behest of monolithic corporations is the actual role of the U.S. military. The fact that most Americans are too consumed by this bread and circuses society to educate themselves accordingly changes nothing.
Therefore, no soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine contributes in any way whatsoever towards the freedoms of working-class Americans. Indeed, like the police, they are far more inclined to turn their weaponry against workers than they are to defend the Constitution.
The only people able to affect the freedom of workers are members of Congress, state and local lawmakers, and cops who unquestionably follow the dictates of those who sign their paychecks. And while your cherished military is murdering workers around the world, your Congress, as well as state and local legislators are, in service to capitalism, eviscerating the freedoms of American workers devoid of any intervention by our “defenders” in the military.
Lockhart: “(W)as it those ‘capitalist class economic interests’ that allowed Guy to ‘enjoy economic options which precluded a need to join the military’?”
Yes, it was. Yet that was nearly fifty years ago. Nowadays, with the decline of the capitalist system well underway, a significant number of the opportunities afforded to me as a young man are no longer available.
I’m glad Steve Lockhart enjoyed Ralph Brax’s courses but that doesn’t necessarily disprove assertions of biased instruction. I too took a course from Brax and came away with a completely different view of his instruction methods. And I was not alone.
His revisionist take on history and politics was a common topic of conversation among several other students and myself before class and during breaks. We also found him on the arrogant side and disrespectful of those expressing opposing views. Most of this group was probably 25 or older and had life experience outside academia. Some were bothered by the fact that they would have to answer test questions in a way they believed was wrong in order to get it “right”.
I didn’t believe then he belonged in a position to influence young, eager-to-learn minds and his biased letters to this forum, years later, only reinforce that belief.
For what it’s worth, I did just fine in the course. I gave him what he wanted to hear. I knew the truth and that’s what mattered. Unfortunately, many of his students were too young and inexperienced to do the same.