On occasion I read Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s poem The Rime of the Ancient Mariner which I have in a book that measures 15″ by 10 1/2″. Its size is due to it having the drawings by Gustave Doré whose brilliant illustrations give life to Coleridge’s words. There are certain stanza that I particularly enjoy and will set them out here.
The words Deep State is considered a pejorative especially by Trump supporters. It is defined as: “an alleged secret network of especially nonelected government officials and sometimes private entities (as in the financial services and defense industries) operating extralegally to influence and enact government policy.” Its first known use in America was in 2000 according to the dictionary.
If you accept that definition what do you think of this definition: A Deep State is: “”an alleged network of especially nonelected government officials and sometimes private entities (as in the financial services and defense industries) operating to influence and enact government policy.” Are you comfortable with the latter definition as you are with the first one?
By changing two words does that influence your thinking about the concept of Deep State? Does taking out those two words out of the definition destroy the concept of Deep State? Look at the latter definition. It describes something that we are all familiar with as occurring multiple times every day not only in Washington but throughout the nation. Not only is it well known and accepted it is identified by a street name: “K Street.”
I suppose nothing should shock me about America anymore after recent events. It sure is not the country that I thought I lived in. Maybe during my life I was dealing with a different group of Americans which deluded me into thinking that most Americans were interested in making America a better place for all: rich and poor, black and white, and everyone in between. Although looking back all I can say is I was quite naïve.
There are some really evil forces among Americans. They walk around in their public persona in suits and ties with polished shoes a façade covering their dingy bodies. They are those that walk past as the Kitty Genoveses of the world seek help and smile approvingly at the Winston Moseleys on the way to their next appointment not wanting to get their shoes scuffed. They are those who knowing people are trapped in desperate straights try to figure out how to make money from their sufferings.
They use the freedoms of America in a warped manner: the freedom to make millions helping billionaires profiting from intentional killings. Their soft hands and manicured polished nails help push young people already living lives of despair onto paths that end in their doom and deaths. Not unknowingly do they do this, but with full knowledge that will be the result.
In law school I took a course in Church and State. At the end of it I was as confused about the law in America concerning it as I was before I knew anything about it. There are two major schools of thought as to the meaning of the First Amendment that are absolutely contrary to each other. I wrote in my final exam about my exasperation and my grade reflected the professors exasperation with my writings. That was all right since by that time the die had been cast and it mattered little.
The First Amendment where it is applicable here says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” That to me was quite specifically addressed to one body: Congress. It did not seem to apply to the states. For instance “Massachusetts did not abandon its state support for Congregationalism until 1833.” The Massachusetts constitution required those elected to state office to affirm, “I, A. B., do declare, that I believe the Christian religion, and have a firm persuasion of its truth;” The governor had to be a Christian. Article II provided: “It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe.”
“Yes, Virginia, there is a Deep State.”
“But, but, Matt, you always denied there was one. How can you now , , ,?”
“I did not understand. Viginia. Yes, that’s it did not understand what they meant by the term.”
“You always suggested that it meant there was some secretive sinister force located around Washington that ran the nation as it saw fit. What do you say it is now, Matt? Are you saying it is not something sinister?”
“Yes and no, Virginia. What I know now is the people who talk of it as a dreaded force they believe it is sinister. But other people do not think so but welcome it.”
“Matt, no one would welcome a Deep State.”
“Look Virginia! Here is what happened. I was watching Biden’s introduction of people he wants as part of his cupboard when I realized how those folk who worry about the Deep State understand the word deep. They think of it one way while I thought they were using it in another way.
I always figured they meant it was hidden deeply within the departments or agencies like an underground group controlling things”
No turkey for me this year. But will have all the trimmings with two chickens. Not that I have anything against turkeys but when I got to the store the cupboard was bare of the one I ordered.
We do have much to be thankful for at this point in this year. Up to a couple of weeks ago I couldn’t say that with the virus running roughshod over our land. It’s still ravaging some but thanks to our scientific community a vaccine may soon be here. And thanks to 80 million American voters the sun will again shine on America.
I would be remiss if I did not mention that we must thank our scientists – yes those folk much mocked by some. – for the vaccine.
We must also be thankful for our medical workers, first responders, essential workers, truck drivers, delivery folk, school teachers, grocery store workers, and those that muddled on through despite the danger.
Especially must we thank Teamsters Local 25 – the guys who deliver the beer.
I always kept that quote in mind by thinking the problem with Christianity is that it has never been tried. What exactly does that mean. We have a plethora of folk going around calling themselves Christians. Within that group there seems to be a huge divergence of opinion as how one is supposed to act if one suggests he or she is a Christian. How can that be if they are following the teachings of one man? Would you not expect a close uniformity in behavior of people who profess to belong to a group following those teachings?
I assume the first thing a Christian would want to do is to keep Christ in Christian; in other words to be a Christian you must follow Christ’s teachings. If you say you are a Christian but do not act in a manner commensurate with how a follower of Christ should act are you not undermining the teachings of Christ by giving out a false example of what a Christian is? Are you conducting a war against Christ?
On my post tomorrow about Christianity I came across an article by Kate Bowler who is a an assistant professor at Duke Divinity School. She was born in Canada. She recently became ill with stage four cancer. I went to her Twitter account to see how she was getting along as a happily married mother of a seven year old boy. She tweeted:
“When you worship the economy
When you demonize science
When your God loves “winners”
You will leave the immuno-delicate behind.”
This is why I had to return to Canada. I wish that everyone had a backup plan (sorry for calling you a backup plan I love you please don’t leave me)”
In the article she tells how she grew up in Canada and “I learned at my Anabaptist Bible camp about a poor carpenter from Galilee who taught that a good life was a simple one.” Then at 18-years-old she got caught up “in the prosperity gospel.” She described it as having: “its bold central claim that God will give you your heart’s desires: money in the bank, a healthy body, a thriving family, and boundless happiness.”