Love Hurts, Especially When it's Your Family

Okay.

Let me state first and foremost, for the record, that i am extremely grateful to my parents for providing for me after the "economic downturn" (which the economists refuse to call a Depression despite the fact that it is), and for everything they've done since then.

NONETHELESS . . . .

I am repeatedly chided by my Mom . . . to wit, i'm "too extreme," i'm "paranoid," i don't take enough initiative (which is her excuse to nag me about anything that springs to mind), and various other comments in reference to my clothes, my attitude (she often says i get a "tone in my voice," and when i FINALLY responded the other day that she gets a tone in HER voice, her response was "maybe you should think about WHY i get a tone in my voice), and anything else that springs to mind. She doesn't start the day off with "good morning . . . ." Instead, 4 out of 5 mornings, she begins with a complaint. Something i did, something i didn't do, something i did wrong (and, believe me, she can always find something WRONG about what i did, no matter how much initiative i took or whether or not it was done well). Just now, i received information from the Labor Department in NYC. It's just the same information i get every week . . . this propelled her into a mini lecture about how i should be calling every third day (regardless of what the instructions say), to go over the internet to find out if i'm "approved" rather than use the phone (she never uses the internet for anything that she can get Dad, me, or Jordan to do for her), and on and on and on and . . . .

Basically, i'm almost to the point of chucking it all, shoving a few belongings in a backpack, and living on the road. I'd probably starve to death or die from exposure, but at least i'd die in relative peace. I think the basic problem is, while i was away in NJ and NYC, i GREW UP. A LOT. I managed to survive on less than anyone in my family does (with the possible exception of Mom before she was married), and had my own mind about things, and was a LOT closer to God during those hard times than i am here . . . how strange it is to think that, while anyone else would have thought that i was in dire straits, my relationship with Christ was much stronger, and i spent a lot more time in prayer. And perhaps, to anyone who's firmly entrenched in the status quo (and, God help her, Mom is), a lot of what i perceive and believe is "extreme," although i have a hard time believing that it's "paranoid," because a paranoid person believes that __________ is out to get HIM, because he's somehow special . . . i know better. I'm only a threat to the status quo in my poetry and Life-Path, and as long as that's generally ignored (and it is), no "great conspiracy" or whatever is going to regard me as a threat!) It's been on the tip of my tongue to tell Mom that all the Prophets, and Christ Himself, were regarded as "too extreme" by the status quo of their times. And a lot of modern figures who were regarded as revolutionary, even pacifists like Gandhi and MLK, were also considered extreme (extreme enough for someone or a group of someones to kill them). This, however, would just ignite a veritable powderkeg. My mother is, after all, getting on in years, and she's entitled to her beliefs and feelings, and she's probably too old to change. But by the same token, i should be entitled to my beliefs and feelings, and not immediately "given in" to her way of thinking just because i'm living here. I don't want to start a fight . . . but i can't speak about Faith, religion, politics, philosphy, or most of the stuff i write poetry about, around her, because that simply turns into another thing on the "List," which is apparently a page in my Mom's mind she turns to for her nagging. I'm sure that in some regards, she's right . . . i've not been the most exemplary human being, and i've fallen short of my own goals (let alone hers, which are apparently on a completely different track than mine), and as long as this situation maintains, it's only going to generate more antipathy. I avoid her . . . and i hate feeling that way. My Dad remains, for the most part, neutral and uninvolved . . . although he's been chiding me about a few things now and then. I CANNOT LIVE HERE MUCH LONGER AND RETAIN MY SANITY.

I'm now praying for patience, and for an open door that clearly marks a direction. I can't believe, at this point in time, that thinking about a "career" (in the terms the status-quo uses to describe that hell of ladder-climbing and struggling to make ends meet while you're stabbing your friends in the back to gain access to the next rung--my parents were never back-stabbers, but they didn't "love" their jobs, and the way they--Mom in particular--talked about their co-workers, bosses, etc., didn't exactly encourage me) is going to be in any way viable. The ways of this world are foolishness, and even people who should know better seem to think that acquiring more material things is what success is made of. Success at what? The things you own end up owning you. I'm getting too used to having all this space, TV, computer access, snacks, and all the "benefits" that go along with it. My writing has suffered. The funny thing is, if i'd remained in NYC, i'd have more access to "help" (as loath as i am to lean on the government for support) and to things like food-stamps and job programs than i have in Roanoke, and i would have more access to the Spoken Word scene that still calls to me every living day. I know i'm supposed to do more there than i did. I pray God will forgive me for not pursuing that more aggressively even when i had the opportunity. My dependence on Christ and my poetic endeavors both were stronger and more whole-hearted when i had it "rough" than now. I've come to understand the concept of "suffering" better . . . God doesn't "inflict" suffering or hardships on His people as PUNISHMENT, but rather as TRAINING, character-building . . . as the Message translation puts Christ's words, "using every adversity to stimulate you to creative survival, so you'll live, really live, and not just get complacently by on good behavior." That last part stings, because in this day and age, it's too easy to just be a middle-of-the-road, "law-abiding," church-attending person, and to think you're doing pretty good when all you're really doing is going through the motions, creating a microcosm in which you can exist without thinking, where everything can be a reflex rather than the result of an actual active thought-process, and where you can be "comfortable" and "succesful" without stirring up waves or making anybody else "uncomfortable" in the process. But doing the right thing, if other people can see it, is bound to make some of them uncomfortable . . . either because they just don't like it, or because it makes them feel guilty on some level, or just because doing the right thing is DIFFICULT, and requires EFFORT, and a lot of people get confused when someone would struggle to do the right thing when it's so much easier to "go with the flow." Despite the fact that you're just as likely to get ignored for doing the right thing, or snubbed, or out-and-out hated, i want that. I want whatever God is pointing me towards, no matter what kind of crap i have to wade through to get there. I'm not giving up just because i'm surrounded by people who already have, and i'm not going to let my love and thankfulness for my parents mislead me into thinking that i have to BELIEVE and THINK the way they do. No free-thinking, independently intelligent individual should ever try to force or compel another person to do that. And that goes double for Christians . . . if--by the way you're living, the courageous and bold speaking of God's truth, and the compassion and giving that you show towards others--people aren't going to be convinced, then they're not going to be any more responsive to browbeating, nagging, pushing, or bullying.

God, please keep me together until something better comes through . . . .

New Poem: If Gemstones Had Voices

If Gemstones Had Voices
***
if gemstones had voices,
how many of them would scream
when the jeweler's hand
sliced off a piece of them
to better display their beauty?
part of the craftsman's duty
is to decide which parts are unnecessary
and remove them,
and what once looked
like an ugly rock
becomes a token of burning joy.
yeah, i'm sure if rocks felt pain
they'd surely complain
when a chunk of themselves
got sliced off, like an amputation . . .
"hey, that might be ugly, man,
but it was CONNECTED to me!"
if they had some idea
of the end result, i still believe
that the faceting would be uncomfortable--
or worse--
but they might be less inclined to curse
the hand that did the carving . . .
or would you tell the doctor and nurse,
"oh, just leave that old tumor there,
it's been there so long,
it's kind of grown on me."
we're not rocks. when you cut us,
we bleed, and even if it's surgery we need,
pain is usually part of the price we pay
when a deformity
is sliced away . . .
but we've been given a glimpse of glory,
we already know
that at the end of the story, we'll be
crown jewels,
our price beyond the riches
of any earthly king.
yes, this is going to hurt.
the operation isn't exploratory,
and some of us worry so much
about the pain, we'd rather
remain lying in the dirt . . .
but the craftsman isn't careless,
his skill is divine, and
when the cutting is done
we will outshine any jewel
mankind has ever dug
from the earth.

Bashers, Whiners, Subscription-Cancel-Threateners: An Overview of the Editorial Section

Reading the editorial section of our newspaper, "The Roanoke Times," and on Sundays the larger "Horizon" section, is an action fraught with peril and despair. It isn't so much the difference of opinions, or the supposed "liberal" bent of the paper's editors (which, to someone who's experienced life and literature in NYC, isn't all that "liberal"), but the bizarre way mountains are made out of molehills (and, the reverse, molehills are made out of mountains). There are several modes that these things follow, and i will attempt, in the following, a discussion of a few of these modes (and why they i find them irritating).

1) The "I'm Gonna Cancel My Subscription" Mode: This is typically expressed by an individual who has been "offended" by something in the newspaper. It could be anything . . . i've seen this expressed over general content, suspected or real bias. specific editorial columns, lack of focus on local issues, and even comic strips (one was over the comic strip "Boondocks," which the newspaper eventually struck . . . apparently, more than one reader was "offended" by a couple of Black kids in a comic strip dealing with socially relevant issues). First of all, if the readers "cancel their subscriptions," they've pretty much cut themselves off from the only large newspaper that covers Southwestern Virginia. Perhaps they're better served by the numerous smaller newspapers in the area which tend to cover mostly local events, and whose attitude could best be described as "HOORAY FOR OUR_______ (insert town, county, neighborhood)." Naturally, the strictly local focus and attitude certainly limits the number of potentially "offensive" subjects. The next thing to consider is whether or not the Roanoke Times is going to be really concerned over one individual threatening to cancel their subscriptions (apparently, there was a great enough volume of "offended" people to warrant pulling "Boondocks"). I mean, COME ON. Get a grip. If you want to protest something in the paper, don't resort to such childish tactics, acting like a kid who owns the Monopoly board threatening to take the game home if everybody refuses to play by his rules. All you're really doing is revealing your own childishness and taking up space that could be relegated to people actually attempting to DEAL with the issues at hand (i suppose the paper feels some obligation to reprint SOME of these letters). Grow up, people.

2) The ______-Bashing Mode: There's an overabundance of individuals who write in this mode (you could say that i'm writing in this mode now, which is why i'm not going to send it to the editors of the newspapers), and you all know the drill. The targets are numerous: conservatives, liberals (or "lib'rals"), Muslims, Christians, secular people, or other large groups that are easily lumped into one category that can be vilified by focusing on the negative aspects of a few representatives of the group. Uh-huh, that's what it is. Actually, i'm not "bashing," because in singling out a few modes, i'm actually indicating that there are other letters to the editor and editorials who use other modes, such as reasoning, statistics, appealing to common decency or compassion, etc. At any rate, i've read enough of these to know that most of them are written out of vengeance, or out of ignorance. Sometimes both. Now, to be fair, there are certainly members of all these groups, and others, who have traits that are unattractive, criminal, "offensive," repulsive, or frustrating. No sub-category of humanity is entirely free of these elements . . . they are part and parcel of the human condition. It is a mistake, however, to take a few examples from a group (particularly those "examples" which justify a person's pre-existing bias) and use their negative qualities to condemn the whole. One might just as well, on the basis of encountering a few apples with bad spots, declare that all apples were bad. (Even an apple with bad spots can be improved by cutting the bad spots out, but that's a topic for another rant). When you write a letter for the purpose of "bashing" one group or the other, you not only paint yourself as a prejudiced individual, you paint a target on yourself for somebody else's "bashing." If the intent of your letter is to point out a flaw (and a way it can be corrected), well and good. If your only focus is "those _______s are BAD, BAD people," you deserve to have a target painted on yourself, and have no right to complain when you become the focal point of somebody else's "bashing" letter.

3) The "Department of Whining" Mode: These letters may resemble either (or both) of the previously named modes, but their identifying quality is tonal. The complaints (and they are always complaints) have an unmistakable effect in that, if one imagines them read aloud, they would sound much like a spoiled child whining when something they feel they deserve is denied them. A lot of these letters are complaints about the lack of focus on some local event, or the conclusions made in such a report. Granted, the larger the newspaper, the less coverage is given to specific local events. I was once appalled when i lived in the Bronx by the fact that a young man was gunned down at the end of the block where i lived (the fact that i heard this go down may have added to my emotional response), and nothing was said in the paper in the following days (i referred to several newspapers, but saw no mention of it, not even in the "Police Blotter" section). I would argue that the death of a teenager should certainly take precedence over the latest Hollywood scandal . . . but i didn't express my distress in a letter to any of the newspapers, especially after some of my more streetwise friends pointed out that kids being shot was just another fact of life in the city). This event resulted in several poems, and i could advise those who write the "whining" letters to take up poetry as a way to express their frustrations . . . but such an exhortation would undoubtedly fall on deaf ears, since society at large tends to ignore poetry, and those who write these letters undoubtedly would quail at the thought of being ignored. Their issues are IMPORTANT, they would tell me. Why isn't more attention being paid to their pet subjects? A more enlightened approach might be to simply write a letter to the editor ABOUT the subject, without any of the "i-don't-know-why-you-didn't-report-more-on-this" blather that just takes up extra space. Or start your own newspaper.

These are 3 of the modes that seem to irritate me the most, perhaps because it takes the least amount of focused thought or imagination to write them. When i write, i like to focus all my intellect and imagination in what i'm writing . . . to invest less than that is to insult my readers. One could say i'm investing TOO much time an energy in a blog that's only read by a few, but a few is enough. ONE is enough. If something i wrote was going to be read by the readership of the Roanoke Times at large, i would certainly invest the whole of my thought and imagination in writing it . . . and not worry one bit about the whiners, bashers, or people who cancelled their subscriptions over what i wrote.

New Poem: Path to Freedom

if there's a path to freedom, put me on it.
not the kind of self-serving egocentric striving
that only confines,
defined by the status quo and possessions
that end up possessing,
where greed and appetites bind me
and blind me to what i need
and what's required of me.

if there's a direction towards truth, set me free to follow it.
like a tiger burning bright whose stripes
match the patterns of my scars,
forward through the darkness towards
that galactic centrifuge where stars
begin and end,
and no bars or barriers designed
by mankind can limit it.

if the truth leads me into mystery, let it be my destiny.
let it grab me by the scruff of my neck
and with a strength that defies
the tides of the times
carry me,
eyes wide open in fearful joy and expectation
to wonders unfolding before me,
microscopic to cosmic,
a dangerous uncharted land
where only the visionary can stand.

if that doesn't sound like freedom to you,
don't stand in front of me . . .
because the force of what drives me on
might realign your gravity,
tug you into an alternate reality
that mocks the tawdry baubles you've used
to decorate your soul,
and that fog that clouds your vision
might be torn to tatters, and freedom
shatters the walls of the prison
you took for granted.

freedom
is never selfish,
for it knows no mortal master,
and the pursuit of freedom is a head-on, headlong dash
into a Mystery
whose arms are open wide
to receive those who perceive it.

if the truth will set us free,
it is always fraught with the unexpected,
the inexplicable coloring-outside-the-lines
of the tunnel-vision that freedom's call has rejected,
a process, a yearning
that's burning all bridges behind us,
and all forces that would divert us
are deflected.
we'll ring like bells, and peal like thunder,
scattering seeds of wonder,
and those who've yet to come will reap it.

so if your definition of freedom
keeps you locked inside yourself,
you can KEEP it!

Necessary Poetry

I've just spoken via FB Chat to Elysee Thomas, who is back home! Fellow poetic associates in the NJ/NYC area are posting like mad, pictures and comments, about this. For those of you who don't know, Elysee Thomas is an incredible young poet, a friend of mine whom i met during my time as MC/host of the People's Open Mic, "back in the day." Although i don't know all the details of his arrest and imprisonment, a great many people that i personally know and respect vouched for his innocence, and a massive campaign of the spoken word was undertaken by the poetic family to demand his release. I extracted a promise from him to "tell us all about it," which he will no doubt be doing in his poetry.

Right now, my life is pretty much on "hold," but even in times like these, i can rejoice for my brother, and can practically feel the waves of relief and happiness, as if it was a channel that the radio in my skull was tuned to. It reaffirms my commitment to poetry . . . because if Thomas can weather these troubles and come out stronger, then my meager problems are certainly no threat. I keep remembering what Paul said, in Romans, "The One who died for us is standing at the right hand of God, sticking up for us!" and "If God is for us, who can be against us?" Paul, by the way, was in PRISON when he wrote that. God was certainly with Thomas during this time, and He is the author of perfect and true Justice . . . God hears the prayers of the oppressed, and is responsive to their needs.

But this is no time for idleness, no time to rest on our laurels. I'm speaking both to my Christian family and my poetic family. We are weathering great storms here in our own nation, and at the same time reaching forth to those in Haiti who are in such pain . . . and it is my firm belief that if God is going to bless this nation, it is our actions and attitude towards those in Haiti, to ALL who are oppressed or burdened, that is going to create the necessary channel for those blessings. Even in an economic catastrophe, we are one of the wealthiest countries in the world, one that has been so gifted with freedoms, and it is an abomination that we've become complacent, haughty, and selfish. So many in America seem to assume that we are somehow "morally superior" to those who are oppressed, that "it's their own fault" for not embracing the WASP middle-class (a rapidly dwindling middle class at that) "virtues" that are--at their root--Mammon worship. And the freedoms we claim to love? Their being etched away, by an acid compounded of ignorance, greed, bigotry, and political sleight-of-hand.

And why is poetry so important? I've expounded on this plenty of times, but at the risk of being redundant, here it is: poetry, in particular the spoken word, is the native tongue of the human soul. It is the freest of free speech, often the only way the poor, oppressed, outcasts, and outsiders have of expressing their emotions that are probably more real, raw, and honest than anything any of us have come up against. But just because you're "safe" right now, don't think that you're invulnerable to the horrific types of misery and injustice that thousands, millions of individuals you regard as "those OTHER people." The oldest example of the written word we have is a Babylonian epic poem about the hero Gilgamesh. That alone should stand to represent the importance of poetry in history . . . and even if it didn't, pick up your Bible and check out the Old Testament prophets, as well as Psalms and Song of Solomon . . . poetry. Every epoch in history has had plenty of poetic voices to speak for it, and the great shame is that the contemporaries of those voices didn't listen very well (and didn't like what they heard). Poetry IS the voice of the oppressed, the cry of the outsiders, the howl of the prophets, and the echo of the Universe. It's not a plaything . . . it's a weapon of war, a way of cutting our way clear through the wilderness of the banal, the boring, and the mass of red-tape and doublespeak that pervert our language, as well as the supidity of most television and movies and radio talk-show hosts who dumb it down. Speech, and the ability to use it, holds us accountable for the ways in which we do--or don't--use it. Freedom of Speech, like a muscle, must be exercised regularly, and in the right way, in order to remain strong.

And that is another reason for my gladness at Thomas' release: we need all the good, strong voices we can get.

A Dose of Reality for Reality TV

With all the new "reality" television shows today, the ideas must be running a bit thin. I'd like to propose an alternate concept that would inject some hard reality into these shows, which would also coincidentally make them more gripping, and thereby more entertaining. Here are a few suggestions:

Ubiquitous Disclaimer: To those of my readers who might not be aware of such obscure concepts as "parody," "satire," and "irony," this is not meant to make light of the subjects involved. Consider it, instead, as a contrast of what REALITY means as opposed to "reality television," as well as an opportunity to flex one's mental muscles by assuming uncomfortable positions not generally accepted or promoted by the status quo, which generally involves the least amount of effort combined with the greatest amount of ignorance. You have been warned.

SURVIVOR: BEDFORD-STUY

Take 10 average middle-class white American citizens, drop them in an area like the Bedford-Stuy, or perhaps Flatbush, clad in nothing but their underwear, and tell them that there are subway passes and McDonald's food coupons hidden in locations within a 10-block radius from their drop-off point. The drop-off time will be at midnight. They will, of course, have to "survive" the night (during this time, an arrangement could be made with the local police precincts to avoid any intervention . . . a sufficient cash donation, or perhaps an arms deal, would facilitate this). Part of the contract for the show's participants would include a codicil that indemnifies any of the local citizens from any actions that might result in bodily harm to the participants--after all, the point is SURVIVAL, which always entails a risk of physical harm. As far as advertising and sponsorship, which is always vital to a show's continuation, i have already mentioned McDonald's, and even the NYC Police could use commercial time to run recruitment ads (because, even in this massive recession, it seems like the police force is always hiring). In addition, having the participants clad only in underwear would be a prime opportunity for manufacturers of those apparel to prove how tough and resistant to damage their garments are . . . "And as this Survivor shows, a night on Flatbush Avenue and several assaults by the locals haven't managed to damage Fruit-of-the-Loom's super-tensile waistband!" The prize for the winners (if there are any who truly survive) would be . . . drum-roll, please . . . TO CONTINUE TO LIVE! Yes, the true meaning of survival would hit home to these middle-class Americans who are so bored with their hum-drum existence of shopping malls, cheerful kitchens, tranquil bathrooms, and 500+ HD channels of bullshit.

IRON CHEF: SOMALIA

A true "iron chef" must make the most from his or her supplies, no matter what they are, and serve them with flair. What better place to put those skills to the test than a third-world country where starvation is rampant? Of course, these chefs would have the most advanced cooking equipment (although finding power sources for this equipment would be part of their challenge), and they would have any food-like substances that the local inhabitants had access to. On a positive note, the judges would be the inhabitants, who could possibly benefit from having a few top-notch chefs to prepare their food and make the most out of their meager rations. Again, contracts would have to be drawn up to indemnify the locals, because the presence of so much American "culture" could easily cause riots, thefts, and other events (which viewing audiences in America appear to appreciate so long as they themselves are not involved).
The prize, of course, is to be able to return to their lives and jobs in America, where they'd have a greater appreciation for ANY food they are able to get.

REAL WHITE TRASH HOUSEWIVES

How can one truly appreciate the drama of cat-fights and estrogen overload in a location of relative wealth and comfort? Such conflicts could be shown to greater effect if the attractive denizens of some upscale neighborhood were transplanted in some out-of-the-way, poor, and less "enlightened" location. Each houswife would be assigned a trailer or shack, and their families would be portrayed by casting a group of the locals in those roles. Shopping trips would be occasions of great drama, considering that the housewives in question would be given a stipend roughly equivalent to the average wage in that region . . . a trip to the local "____ mart" would be quite grueling, especially with half a dozen kids and an alcoholic husband in tow. The housewives themselves, of course, would receive no prizes at the end of the show, but the families that they lived with would receive stipends based upon what the "housewives" had before the show . . . including real estate and personal property. And all of America would have a chance to view a show that involved REAL people who aren't coached or refereed by directors and actors and makeup artists.

It's easy to see how these shows could become part of a real improvement in the "reality" part of "reality tv," contrasting the "values" of WASP middle-class America with what it truly takes to survive . . . things that seem to matter so much would take on an entirely different light when survival, sustenance, and relationships are not mere buzzwords, but are the very things that one's life hinges upon.

Deals With the Devil: The Church in Bed With Politics

Recently, Pat Robertson, who is one among many individuals who are more interested in acquiring capital and entrenching themselves in politics (what i call "politichristians"), had the utter lack of sensitivity and compassion to say that the recent tragedy in Haiti was caused by their "pact with the devil," referring to a historical event centuries ago. Regardless of whether or not the event occurred in the way it was construed, the statement itself reveals the actual extent of Robertson's "compassion," which is about as deep as a mud-puddle. When an opportunity arises to come alongside another individual or nation, out of compassion and love (true expressions of Christ's presence in a person's life), this little bit of caustic fare is nothing more than a political statement wrapped in sanctimonious garb.

The Christian church, by and large, seems to believe that political power and standpoint are more important than spiritual power . . . it's a deadly poison that's spread through all denominations. Once an event or issue becomes politicized within the church, it creates dissention and division, which is exactly what it's intended to do. Any person in a position of leadership realizes the power that comes from associating himself or herself with God, or gods . . . regardless of whether the person in question shows the qualities that one of Faith would consider valuable. The "leader" in question can easily demonize any opposition by saying that their opponents are "against God" or "heretics," and in a time when people within the congregation or range of influence are troubled or afraid, they are less likely to cast aspersion on a person who makes strong verbal claims to being a servant of God (or gods). This is true for any religion . . . when mankind gets its hands on religion, the first thing that occurs to many is that it's a great tool for "putting people in their place." Christianity has been used, over the centuries, as an excuse for war, racism, and hatreds of every type. For a man of Robertson's influence to make a careless statement should, in a fair world, immediately destroy any credibility the man has gained by quoting gospel and claiming to be a servant of Christ. Unfortunately, there are many people who will believe that because a good Christian like Pat Robertson said something like this, then it must be true.

Haiti has had a long history of troubles, both political and natural. Its inhabitants suffer from frequent hurricanes because of its location. It has had a long and bloody history. The United States, its neighbor, regards it--for the most part--as insignificant, partly because it doesn't have a wealth of exploitable resources. "Haiti was the first independent nation in Latin America, the first post-colonial independent black-led nation in the world, and the only nation whose independence was gained as part of a successful slave rebellion." (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitian_Revolution for more information on this). This alone seems to chafe the predominantly Anglo-Saxon "politichristians," many of whom carry the smoldering embers of racism and colonialism in their hearts. Most of Haiti's people are poor and uneducated--but poverty and lack of education are not, or should not be, a reason for hatred, exclusion, or oppression (although they often are). I am reminded of the words of the Ghost of Christmas Present to Scrooge, in reference to Tiny Tim--"It may be that in the sight of Heaven, you are no more fit to live than millions like this poor man's child." In fact, i'd argue that the wealthy are closer to being the "surplus population" than the poor. To vilify or demonize a people in a time of great hardship, especially when one carries the name of Christ, is odious at best, and verges on blasphemy, flying in the face of Christ and all the Prophets. When Christ walked the earth, He associated with people who--in that time--were considered the lowest of the low, people that the status quo regarded as untouchable. If a person is to affirm Christ as their Lord and Savior (and, if asked, Pat Robertson would undoubtedly claim this), then they are to exhibit Christlike qualities. Any reasonable individual, Christian or otherwise, would have difficulty equating Robertson's statement with Christ's example.

This is a symptom of a larger problem that i have already mentioned. Too many people within the Christian church are too willing--almost eager--to immediately gravitate to an individual in politics who claims to be a "Christian," especially when that person touches all the right political "hot-buttons" that are almost guaranteed to generate the appropriate knee-jerks: abortion, the "war on drugs," the "dangers" of Islam, homosexuality, and so on. I'm going to take this a step further: a political "knee-jerk" is NOT a sign of a person's Christianity. The Enemy knows exactly how this process works, and uses it to both cause discord within the Church (the body of believers as a whole), and to distract the Church from its true mission: the spreading of the Message, and the alleviation of human suffering. Christians must, as a whole and as individuals, rush to the aid of those who are oppressed or suffering. The early Christian church made the Message of Christ their first priority; directly behind that, and intimately connected to it, was to render assistance to the poor. If we are to be "on our job," these things need to be pre-eminent features of our lives. Everything else must fall behind--possessions, politics, power, prestige, family ties. I'd call on Pat Robertson to make a public apology for his insensitive, inflammatory remarks--regardless of whether or not they were historically accurate--unless, of course, he wants the same kind of judgement to "boomerang" on him, and hold him accountable for the atrocities perpetrated falsely in "God's name" throughout the ages, from the Inquisition up to the present.