Politics & Prose: Dr. Eric Motley & Elaine Pagels: 'Why Religion'

Source:Politcis & Prose- Eric Motley and Elaine Pagels at Politcis and Prose, in Washington .

"Elaine Pagels discusses her book, "Why Religion?", at Politics and Prose on 11/30/18.

When Pagels, author of groundbreaking studies of the Gnostic Gospels, was asked, “Why religion?" she found that her own life illuminates both why she’s made a career of studying religious texts as well as why religion itself still exists in the supposedly secular 21st-century. The daughter and wife of scientists, Pagels was taught to trust the rational, but she found herself attracted to religious music and rituals for how they engaged the imagination. After the loss of her five-year-old son in 1987, followed by her husband’s death in an accident in 1988, Pagels turned to religion for help in facing her grief and anger. Interweaving the fascinating scholarship behind books such The Origin of Satan and Revelations with her own experiences, Pagels’s memoir is as emotionally affecting as it is thought-provoking.

Pagels is in conversation with Dr. Eric Motley, executive vice president at the Aspen Institute and author of the memoir Madison Park."

From Politics and Prose

As someone who is Agnostic and proud of it who believes in reason, science, facts, and only has faith in people, things, institutions that I trust based on the evidence that I've seen from being around them and talking to them, I can actually see why people would be attracted in religion. 

As someone who believes in the First Amendment which includes the Freedom of Religion in America, ( sorry Hippies, I'm not spiritualist and I'm not a Communist either ) I can see why people would want religion, be involved in America, and even need it. I guess this is difference between an Agnostic and an Atheist, especially a fundamentalist Atheist. (And yes, there is such a thing) 

This is not an official definition, but that might only be because there isn't any official definition of religion, but my personal definition of religion is basically basic set of moral values that people believe and follow, as well as the belief in God. Now, depending on what religion you are a member of determines what moral values that you believe in and follow that helps you in your life. 

I can easily see how people can get positive benefits from being a part of a religion and get positive benefits from attending church and listening to their religious leader every week give a sermon, especially when they're going through rough times and need help getting through those tough times. Even though religion is not for me and I prefer to use evidence and reason to get through those tough times in our lives. 

Elaine Pagels, lost both her son and husband in the span of a year back in 1987-88, apparently wasn't very religious before those tragedies in her life, but found religion after that and I can understand someone who goes through those tragedies especially in such a short period of time would feel the need to get help from religion and learn about that and try to figure out for themselves why they're being put through those tragedies one following by another.

Religion, has been used by alcoholics to get over their alcoholism. It's been used to help career criminals who are doing long-term prison sentences get their life going on a positive track so once they're finally out of prison they can become positive members of their community once they're free. As much as I might hate religious fundamentalism in all forms, ( and trust me, I do ) people should also understand and beware of the positive aspects of religious life as well. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Times, on Blogger.

Politics & Prose: Jonathan Martin Interviewing Denis Leary: 'Why We Don't Suck'

Source:Politics & Prose- comedian and author Denis Leary at Politics and Prose, in Washington.

"Are you a "Right Wing Nutjob" or a "Left Wing Snowflake?" Either way, in this third volume of a series that includes Why We Suck and Suck on This, Leary wants to enlist you in his campaign to Make America Laugh Again. Proving that satire can be non-partisan, Leary, creator and star of the FX comedy series Sex&Drugs&Rock&Roll, takes aim at both sides of the aisle, along with their media sounding boards, CNN (the Clinton News Network) and Fox’s Fair and Balanced Republican Report. With equal doses of sarcasm and common sense, he pokes fun at all we hold dear, from Twitter and Instagram to gluten-free diets and our endless thirst for fame. This is social criticism at its sharpest and funniest. Leary will be in conversation with Jonathan Allen, national political reporter with NBC News."

From Politics & Prose

I haven't read Denis Leary's book so I can't get you any real analysis of it whatsoever. But I was alive, conscience, and in America, for the entire time in 2016. Except when I wasn't sleeping, which is any longer than the average American sleeps. And I can tell you about Suck Bowl 2016 (which is what I call the Donald Trump-Hillary Clinton presidential election) and why it was the worst presidential election we've ever seen.

I voted for Hillary Clinton for president and would do again million straight times, if her opponent is Donald Trump or anyone else who is as unqualified to even be a back benching member of the House of Representatives, let alone President of the United States. Or is as immature, thin skinned, unread, lacking in intelligence, knowledge, and curiosity about how the U.S. Government works, narcissistic, dishonest, as a Donald Trump or anyone else with those same characteristics. That are the only reasons why I voted for her.

Not because I'm a fan of Hillary Clinton. I basically see her as a well-meaning, intelligent person, who wants to do a good job. And if it wasn't for this Thanksgiving grocery shopping list of reasons why I don't like her, I could vote for her because I believe in her and believe she would do a great job. 

In Hillary Clinton, we're talking about a major presidential nominee who has been thinking about being President of the United States, at least since she was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2001, and yet didn't seem to have any vision of why she should be President and what her campaign was about. Other than that she's a well-educated, rich yuppie New Yorker, who is also a feminist and a Democrat. Which is why the rich cool people should vote for her. And that she's also a woman and would be the worst female President of the United States. Well, most of the rich cool people did vote for Hillary and she still lost states that no Democrat has lost since 1988. Pennsylvania and Michigan.

So you have the baggage of Hillary Clinton. Well, some of the baggage. How about her lack of candor  and genuineness and ability to make a statement that doesn't sound like it was poll tested or that some who works for her told her to say. Which killed her in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, probably Florida as well, states where she was heavily favored going in. 

What those voters saw in Donald Trump was at least someone who seems to say what he thinks, at least at the time. Even if he changes his position five minutes later after hearing what Breitbart or some other Far-Right publication or organization thinks about it. But Trump came off as real and says what's on his mind. Instead of someone who seems to say whatever the polls are telling him are popular at the time.

This is why I call the 2016 presidential election Suck Bowl 2016. Perhaps the two worst presidential candidates you could imagine running against each other. One, who might be a good public servant, but who is a horrible politician at least in the sense that she lacks any ability to communicate a vision for the country and what her presidency would be like and why people should vote for her. 

Hillary running against a natural politician, at least in the sense of someone who can bring voters behind him and be able to speak to them. But who is a horrible public servant simply because he doesn't believe in public service. His idea of service is serving himself. And some people are still wondering why Americans at least say they hate American politics and don't like American politicians. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Times, on Blogger.

Politics and Prose: Glenn Frankel- High Noon: 'The Hollywood Blacklist & The Making of a Classic'

Source:Politics & Prose- Author Glen Frankel, at Politics and Prose in Washington, talking about his book High Noon.

"One of the most revered movies of Hollywood's golden era. Starring screen legend Gary Cooper and Grace Kelly in her first significant film role, High Noon was shot on a lean budget over just thirty-two days but achieved instant box-office and critical success. It won four Academy Awards in 1953, including a best actor win for Cooper. And it became a cultural touchstone, often cited by politicians as a favorite film, celebrating moral fortitude.

Yet what has been often overlooked is that High Noon was made during the height of the Hollywood blacklist, a time of political inquisition and personal betrayal. In the middle of the film shoot, screenwriter Carl Foreman was forced to testify before the House Committee on Un-American Activities about his former membership in the Communist Party. Refusing to name names, he was eventually blacklisted and fled the United States. (His co-authored screenplay for another classic, The Bridge on the River Kwai, went uncredited in 1957.) Examined in light of Foreman's testimony, High Noon's emphasis on courage and loyalty takes on deeper meaning and importance.

In this book, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Glenn Frankel tells the story of the making of a great American Western, exploring how Carl Foreman's concept of High Noon evolved from idea to first draft to final script, taking on allegorical weight. Both the classic film and its turbulent political times emerge newly illuminated.

Founded by Carla Cohen and Barbara Meade in 1984, Politics and Prose Bookstore is Washington, D.C.'s premier independent bookstore and cultural hub, a gathering place for people interested in reading and discussing books. Politics and  Prose offers superior service, unusual book choices, and a haven for book lovers in the store and online. Visit them on the web at Politics and Prose."

From Politics and Prose

I don't have much to offer about the movie High Noon, as least the original one from 1952. I did however see a movie with the same title from the Lifetime Network (of all places) in I believe 2009. But that is not what this piece is about. (Thank God!) Not a good movie and not trying to cure anyone's insomnia by talking about the second High Noon movie. Not a good movie and not even very believable.

What I'm knowledgeable about and have read about and seen some documentaries about, is The Hollywood Blacklist from the 1940s and 1950s. Where workers out in the Hollywood industry who actually were Socialists and in some cases even Communists and even supported Communist Russia back then (known as the Soviet Union) but weren't criminals and didn't even have official relationships with the Soviet Government in Russia.

The Hollywood Far-Left was simply on trial for their far-left political beliefs by crooked politicians in Congress who were simply trying to take advantage of the Red Scare and the start of the Cold War between America and Europe, against Russia and their allies in the East.

Hollywood professionals like writer Dalton Trumbo which there was a good movie made about him that came out in 2015 simply called Trumbo, were hauled in front of Congress at the so-called House Un-American Activities Committee simply because of their political beliefs. Not for any laws that they might have broken. But because they were Socialists and Communists who didn't like the American liberal democratic form of government and instead wanted a socialist or communist state to replace our liberal democratic, federal, form of government.

The House Un-American Activities Committee, was exactly that which was Un-American. The idea that people could be hauled in front of Congress at first in the House and then later in the early 1950s to the Senate Investigation Committee chaired by Senator Joe McCarthy simply because of their politics and political beliefs and not for anything that they even may have done, is simply Un-American.

So what if Dalton Trumbo was not just on the Far-Left in America, but was also a Communist! He was never going to have any political power in America, nor did he ever want any. And the Communist Party was never going to have any political power in America simply because they're Communists and are illiberal. And oppose most of the liberal democratic values that most Americans love, like free speech and free elections, property rights, right to privacy, just to name a few.

Whether you're a Communist on the furthest Left in American political or a Christian-Theocrat or Nationalistic-Tribalist on the furthest right in American politics, you have a right to believe what you believe. And express your beliefs in public and try to make the case for what you believe in public. Which is as American as our melting pot and individualism. Which is what the so-called Red Scare of the 1940s and 1950s which is what this nationalistic anti-communist movement opposed and tried to eliminate from American life. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Canan Dian: 'Christopher Buckley- Discusses Christopher Hitchens Life & Mortality'

Source:Can Dian- Christopher Buckley discuses Christopher Hitchens life and book and his book  Mortality' 2012.

“Christopher Buckley reviews “Mortality” by Christopher Hitchens”

From Can Dian

 What I like most about Christopher Hitchens is why he never would have made a very successful politician, because he has this big habit of always saying what he thought and what he knew. And he didn’t give a damn what others thought about it. His consistency for the most part and the on exception to that being how his national security and foreign policy views changed after 9/11, I believe are unparalleled.

Chris Hitchens wasn’t just an anti-Christian, or anti-Christian-Right radical on the Far-Left, but he was a true Atheist. He didn’t bash the Christian-Right for their positions on homosexuality, women’s place in the world, censorship, while he defended Muslims for believing that women and gays should be second-class citizens. He critiqued and attacked religious extremism wherever he saw it.

Politically, I’m not sure I have ever had much in common with Chris Hitchens. I’ve never been a Democratic Socialist, or a Neoconservative. I don’t know of many other people who’ve gone from one end to the other politically like that. But I’ve always respected his consistency especially with his Atheism.

If Hitchens was alive today would be treated like a bigot by the New-Left in America, similar to how Bill Maher, Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, are now treated, as being anti-Muslim and anti-Middle Eastern and so-forth. He was anti-Muslim, but he was also anti-Christian and anti every other religion. He saw religion as a dangerous force in the world and with his new neoconservative leanings and perhaps would have if he could had religion outlawed in America. Not sure about that, but he was a true militant Atheist.

I believe political and current affairs writers should be judged on their ability to learn, grasp and to be consistent:

Do they say and write things that add up and where you could at least make a good case for their beliefs

Or do they just write for their team and over hype all the positive things about their side, while underplaying the low points of their side

And are they consistent, or do they contradict themselves. Do they bash religion, while only concentrating on one type of religion, or are they a true Atheist who doesn’t like religion in general. And will critique negative aspects of religion wherever they see it.

Do they bash big government on one side, while praising it on another, but without calling it big government.

Chris Hitchens, meets at least all of my standards as a great current affairs writer. Because he was someone who learned, who understood facts and made his arguments based on them. And adapted when he was wrong and because of these things and many others he’s still missed today and will be for a long time. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

 You can also see this post at The New Democrat, on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The FreeState, on Blogger. 

You can also see this post at The Daily Post, on Blogger. (No pun intended)

Double Cross: Sam Giancana & Marilyn Monroe

Source:People Magazine- Marilyn & The Chairman of The Board. 

"In the later years of his life, Frank Sinatra would often reminisce about his loves, his losses and the friends he missed most, including Marilyn Monroe. 

While the events surrounding what really happened on August 4, 1962 when the star was found dead from a drug overdose remain a mystery, Sinatra's close confidant and former road manager Tony Oppedisano, whose memoir Sinatra and Me: In The Wee Small Hours, is excerpted in this week's PEOPLE, says the singer didn't believe it was an accidental overdose. "Frank believed she was murdered," he writes, "and he never got over it."

According to Oppedisano, Sinatra and Monroe were close friends but not lovers. While Sinatra thought she was beautiful and funny, he writes, "Frank felt she was too troubled, too fragile, for him to sleep with and then walk away."

From People Magazine 

"New York Times Bestseller! “Sam Giancana tells all . . . Controversial . . . ties seven United States presidents to the mob.”—Larry King, CNN

One of the most feared Chicago mobsters Sam Giancana clawed his way to the top of the Mafia hierarchy by starting as a hit man for Al Capone. He was known as one of the best vehicle escape artists, a tenacious business man, and a ruthless... 

Source:Amazon- all you need are a lot of sheep, as well as drunk, high, escaped mental patients, to make it as a New York Times bestseller. Which unfortunately is a good way to describe a lot of Marlyn Monroe's fans who'll never except the fact that she accidentally killed herself with too much booze and pills, on that tragic night in Los Angeles in 1962.

From Amazon

“Ties between Sam Giancana and Marilyn Monroe as told in the Book Double Cross.”

Source:The Literary Group- Sam Giancana's nephew.

From The Literary Group

The whole point about Marilyn Monroe’s housekeeper being asleep at Marilyn Monroe’s house the night that she died and that she was next door, or down the hall, tells you how bogus (to be nice) the claim that Sam Giancana had anything to do with the death of Marilyn. The housekeeper would have heard a break in, or at least of heard a struggle between Marilyn and the supposed assassin, or assassins.

Keep in mind, this younger Sam Giancana, is the nephew of the Italian mobster Sam Giancana. So I guess you could say why would young Sam would be accusing his own uncle of murdering one of the top Hollywood Goddess’s of all-time? The answer being why not: it wouldn’t be the first time that someone has used their famous name to make a lot of money legitimately.

Marilyn Monroe had she been alive today and let's say in her mid, or late thirties with the same personality and physical futures and talents, she would be the OMG, awesome, pop princess, or whatever. She has a lot of fans from this era who look at the world that way. And they have a hard time believing how could anyone that fabulous (let's say) could take their own life. Which is very hard to believe and I understand that.

But if you knew Marilyn and how irresponsible she was and how unhappy she was and the fact that she did have real mental issues and was even committed even at one point, you know she was a mental train wreck waiting to explode. She drank too much and took way too many pills because of how unhappy she was.

I don’t believe Marilyn killed herself intentionally. I’m not implying suicide here, but when you're drunk as she was that night and you’re unhappy to begin with and you’re taking all sorts of medication at night to try to get you through the day and you take all of those drugs including the alcohol at the same time, very bad things are going to happen to you. Since you’re not completely aware of what you’re doing you end up finally taking too much.

Marilyn died from an overdose and no one helped her do that. Other than maybe giving her some motivation and reason to feel unhappy. But we’re still not talking about a murder here. One way to look at the death of Marilyn Monroe is to look at what happens to drunk drivers and they get in accidents and kill themselves by accident as a result.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this post at The Daily Press, on WordPress.