Author Archives: deanwebb

An Open Letter to Barack Obama

Dear Mr. Obama,

How are you? I am fine. This will be a short letter. I hear that there were some bad things done by the Secret Service in Colombia. The news media are going a little overboard in their reporting, but I am glad that people are going to be punished for bad things that they did.

Could you please do the same thing for the bankers that wrecked our economy in 2008? I would like that. Also, please get the guys that wrecked the economy in 2007, as they are as much to blame. I think you should also go after anyone that wrecked the economy in 2009, 2010, 2011, and this year. They did bid things, worse than arguing with a Colombian lady about $40. All the energy we’re using to go after the Secret Service should also be directed against the financial people that did worse things to our economy than the Secret Service did to the Colombians.

I know many of them are your biggest political backers. That’s OK: They’re also Mitt Romney’s biggest political backers. Going after them can be a sign of bipartisan unity in a sadly divided nation. It will also lay to rest the rumors that both you and Mitt have been bought and sold by the financial industry and will do whatever they want, even if it means destroying the nation. I know I would like those rumors laid to rest. I hope you do, too.

Good luck with rounding up the rogue mammonai,

Dean Webb

Why Do We Let Sarah Palin Speak?

I got a number of things on my mind this morning. First off, why in the world do we let Sarah Palin speak? Fox News, I can understand. They’re a propaganda organ of Rupert Murdoch’s empire of support for his cracker barrel version of hate and spite, so she fits right in with that crowd. My beef is with the other networks that play clips from her, quote her, or have her on as a guest speaker.

She is not an expert. She is not knowledgeable. She is not an elder statesman. She is a media-crazed spotlight hog with designer lipstick. The most dangerous place in the studio is between her and a camera. Giving her air time is like bringing an alcoholic to a brewery: it’s not good for her and it’s not good for society.

There are loads of better alternatives to Palin. Me, for instance. I clean up good and I have plenty of witty observations that will be controversial, but intelligent. Or do we not want intelligence on our news anymore? Is the nation that much of a smoke ‘n’ mirrors affair that Palin is necessary to keep us uninformed? Agh, what a nightmare world we live in!

Please, if you’re in the news business, boycott Palin. Please. I know I’m not the only one that’s done with her.

Is Your Bank About to Murder You?

Strange times we’re in when that’s a legitimate question. Here’s the proof behind the question mark:

Citibank arrests people for withdrawing money legally: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/15/nypd-arrests-occupy-protesters-non-protester-at-citibank-branch/

Goldman Sachs execs preparing for the Muppet Apocalypse: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2009-12-03/arming-goldman-sachs-with-pistols-alice-schroeder-correct-.html

Citibank kills a guy for not paying his credit card: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia-pacific/in-indonesia-scandals-tarnish-citibank/2011/07/14/gIQAoHJrJJ_print.html

Does the list go on? Yes, yes it does… http://demonocracy.info/infographics/usa/derivatives/bank_exposure.html Read the whole page.

The banking industry is behind the campaigns of both Obama and Romney. Whichever man wins, they want him under their control. Why is that?

Well… ask yourself… what happens to you if you decided to just quit paying your credit cards? Would your bank decide to make an example of you? Maybe not by having you whacked by a hitman, but there are other ways these guys can rain hell down on you, all 100% legal and taxed at a rate of 0% or less.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: interest on debts of any amount is a tool of oppression, a tool of the devil. Jefferson was absolutely right when he said banks were more dangerous than standing armies in terms of threatening our liberties.

Violence Will Not be the Answer

While I say violence will not be the answer, it doesn’t mean that others will try to see if it will be the answer. If history is any guide, and it most assuredly is, then the United States of America will be entering a period of heightened violence. It may be directed inwardly or outwardly, but it is going to be much, much more violent in the near future. It will either be a revolt against those who are both too wicked and too rich, or – more likely – a diversionary conflict with a high body count that may well be the fight of the nation’s collective life.

No war, no violence will solve the problems of a nation. People yearn for peace, trust, and quiet: things that are impossibilities in war. If possible, a people should leave an area of conflict and put distance between themselves and a potential aggressor. If not possible, then that people should defend itself and trust in God for deliverance.

That last part is important. It demands that a nation be righteous, that it be honest, and that it be virtuous. It demands that the nation is led by people that use their power to comfort the afflicted, not to comfort the comfortable. It demands that a nation be guided by principles of sacrifice and not personal profits. To trust in God means a nation cannot have its leaders enmired in the pursuit of profits and powers with an eye towards self-aggrandizement. A nation that trusts in God will face trials, but it will emerge from those trials all the better for having endured them. Trusting in God for deliverance implies that dangers and perils will arise and may nearly overwhelm, but that God will see the nation through those trials. Men and women will make sacrifices, even ultimate sacrifices, but the nation will endure in faith and humility.

A nation that does not trust in God for deliverance will instead play the devil’s game and kill before it is killed. It will exist as a paranoid entity. It will exploit the weak for its own game and assert that all is fair when the fittest are about the business of surviving. Darwinism is dangerous not in the biological sciences, but in the social fields – where it does not belong. In its lack of trust in God, it embarks on a history of violence.

That violence will not solve any problems. It will only lead to the breakup and destruction of nations. Then, when there are no more fit targets for conquest, the remaining nations will exhaust themselves in a mutually destructive war. With nuclear weapons, that mutual destruction will happen at a faster rate than ever before.

I see the events in the world today, and while they are not good, I don’t think I’ll be overly troubled by them. I still trust in God for deliverance. I have my reasons for my faith, and they are sound in my judgment, and that is all I need as precondition for my faith. I do my best to keep honest, to do the best work I can do, and to forgive debts others owe me. If the leaders of the USA were of the same mind, I would not be writing this essay.

Cory Booker: The Kind of Leadership We Need

The Mayor of Newark made a headline for himself by rescuing a neighbor from a fire. When I heard it, I wasn’t surprised. I feel good inside, knowing that Mr. Booker is still keeping true to his principles.

I first saw Cory Booker in the film “Street Fight” – one of the best political documentaries, ever – which documented his failed bid to become mayor. Cory took on an old crony politician and nearly won, in spite of his opponent lying, intimidating, and using police state tactics to keep his hold on power. The sadness of that loss didn’t stop Booker. He came back and won his next election.

Booker resolved to live in the poorest part of town so that, as mayor, he would fix the problems of his people. When I saw this story, I knew he had kept to his principles for these last six years.

This is what we need: men and women, regardless of party, that use leadership to help their neighbors and to make sure that their neighbors are the ones most in need of a powerful friend. We don’t need a crew that feathers its own beds. We don’t need people beholden to rich men and their special interests.

I’m not saying Cory Booker needs to run for president: I’m saying the people running for president need to emulate Cory Booker. Senators, Congressmen, heads of agencies, all of them: live among the poor, put your kids in public schools, ride the buses, eat what we eat and do what we do.

That way, you’ll all start solving the problems *we* have and not all the problems of the richest 0.01% of Americans. Whenever a nation forgets its poor, its end is not long in coming. When a nation remembers its poor and exalts them, its greatness can be sustained.

Thank you, Cory Booker, for showing the way. I’m a fan, and I’m proud of what you’re doing. Thank you for keeping true and fighting that best of fights.

Freedom of Belief

In the USA, we have a freedom of belief. We’re not alone in the world in that respect, but that’s not what I’m writing about. I’m writing about what to do with that freedom.

I used to hold a view that the universe was entirely deterministic. No God guided anything along in the view I held then. I looked at other religions and saw the man-made alterations and inventions in them and felt no sense of the divine. I heard preachers on the television – years before their public downfalls in stories of corruption and lies – and heard the hypocrisy in their voices. I could not believe that which was built upon vain imaginings and crass manipulation.

To me, if a faith was worth having, it would have to be based upon something pure and honest. It would have to be self-consistent enough to provide a framework that would allow belief to cover the yet-unexplained gaps. I never wanted perfect proof for a faith. The very definition of faith means it cannot be based upon perfect proof. But it still had to answer my questions in a manner both consistent and…

And what?

I didn’t know at the time what else was needed, but I knew it needed to be more than a Geometry proof or a Physics experiment. Science had no answers for me for things beyond its reach, that of the senses and their extensions. Death stood before me as a grand, dark gate, blacker than the blackest hole of the cosmos, to which we could send no instruments to gather data, let alone have them return. Science draws up at the gate of death and confesses defeat. In a world with only explanations for the world, that which lies beyond can never be known.

And that left me as cold as a hypocrite’s plea for gold in the guise of a gospel.

Rene Descartes said, “Cogito, ergo sum.” Translated, “I think, therefore I am.” In that Cartesian summation, the inner awareness is supreme. Even if it is in error, it is supreme. This is the point from which we all begin – the self – and it is where every journey of life begins. We determine in our own conscience what we are willing to accept, what we are willing to believe in, and what we are willing to allow to change our lives. We have that will, that freedom, and one of the great wars of humanity is in the question of allowing individuals to exercise that free will.

At its most base expression, one holds a freedom of belief to be in effect only for the self, that all others must then conform to the belief one has chosen. This is the cardinal mistake of fundamentalism, for it denies others the opportunity to express their own dictates of their own consciences. As much as I would desire everyone to believe and to be acted upon by that belief as I am, to impose the decisions of my conscience upon others is to assault the souls of others with the intent of murdering them.

Sadly, I used to be that way to some extent. In my own realization of a thing worth believing in, I sought to replicate that experience in the lives and minds of others. Not something like it, but the very experience itself. I wanted, as in the words of Stanislav Lem, to create mirrors in that which faced me. I never was entirely comfortable with that, as it smacked too much of the hypocrisy which revulsed me.

Defending my faith with loud arguments and aggressive proofs was a step up from that, I suppose, but it was still not satisfactory in that it still did not respect the views others were free to form. While I realize that acquiring my faith was a massive turning-point in my life, I realize that an equally massive turning point was in learning that I had no right to impose or force my views. Each time I have learned about that, and those lessons stretch all the way to this day, I have felt my own faith strengthen and grow.

Even today, I just had the realization that I was as right when I believed there was no God as now, when I very much do believe that there is a God. At each step of the way, I was – and am – convinced that I was – and am – right in my thinking. The person I was thirty years ago is not the person I am right now, but he was still competent and capable of figuring things out for himself. I mean, after all, he is the person that got me to where I am today.

What helped that young man to get here was the guidance of others that had already walked long paths of life with dignity and humility. Many of those men and women were of my own faith, but not all. Thankfully, I do hold to a religion that, while it proclaims to be the only true one on the earth, does not claim to have a monopoly on truth. It also teaches that, in order to live in the most harmonious way possible, we need to tolerate others. It specifically warns against forcing others to do or act in ways contrary to their conscience. Yes, there are exceptions for self-defense and other extreme cases, but those are the extremes. In everyday life, we have to let other people do things that we think are wrong because they think they are right in doing them.

We must forgive and allow them to do those things. We must be tolerant and respect their ways if we wish to have any claim on a right to be respected in our own ways. We must avoid the sin of fundamentalism and embrace the virtue of greater wisdom.

This is why I choose to emphasize that people should never stop seeking the truth. I know there is a grand, unifying truth that binds the universe in its loving eternity. While there may be one truth, I know that I do not yet know the whole of it: I only know enough to know where to keep looking to find more of it. But I do know that anyone who creates rules in his or her own life to seek after truth and then, upon discovery, to allow it to change his or her life will eventually find the same truth I have found and it will change their lives in the ways they need to be changed. Not to make them mirrors of me, but to make them the best that they can be, which is what I seek for myself.

Religion is nothing more than a vehicle for truth. I mentioned that great gate of death before: religion claims to have the answers for what lies beyond that gate. These claims, however, must be subjected to different tests than claims about what the physical world around us is like. The experiments one performs on faith are personal and strictly so. My experiences are my own. I think and therefore I am. You think and therefore you are. What the I experiences is available to the you, the he, and the she, but only on terms acceptable to the you, he, or she. What is in my mind, I cannot re-create in the mind of another. All I can do is hope to expose that grand, universal truth to another and hope that it is something the other will see value in. If not, so be it. If so, happy day!

I have read much of other faiths and I have tried my very best to comprehend them all. I do this not to point out where they are wrong, but to realize where they are right. In so doing, I have realized that, over time, men have encountered personal proofs of what lies beyond that gate of death. They take their personal accounts, many of them bewildering and strange on first examination, and commit them to paper or legend for others to learn by them. In so doing, there are core, resonating ideas that show to me how there is that one, grand truth. Peoples separated by time and space have independently verified, so to speak, that their encounters with the other side of death have given them certain conclusions which I think are safe to say are universal.

Now, anyone who rubbishes that idea of mine is right. The nay-sayer is free to say nay. In his mind, he’s right and in my mind, I’m right. Both of us will be amazed when we come face to face with absolute truth in its entirety – when we realize how wrong we were to think we were so right before. But I do see a danger in absolute rejection of the idea that there is more to life than what we see and experience with our senses and their extensions, the lab equipment of the scientific world. In a sense, it is another form of fundamentalism. It is another form of refusing to seek after truth.

The hypocrites that demanded gold for gospels refused truth: they saw the search for knowledge, peace, and harmony, as an opportunity to enrich themselves. The fundamentalists that killed those that did not believe as they did refused truth: they did not know that, blind as we are, we are bound to think different things as we are individually exposed to different aspects of the grand truth of the universe. The strident arch-defenders of a particular religion refused truth: they presumed they had already learned all there was worth learning and that no one else could offer a view that would add to their wisdom.

I have a freedom of belief. So do you. We can do whatever we want with it, even nothing. I have chosen to seek after truth, wherever I can find it, and to encourage others to do the same, with the faith that those who are honest in their search – who never abandon it, even when it means they must confront the sin in their own life and repent of it – will make a journey worth all the sacrifice. I have faith that I will be standing in the same place eventually as all other honest and earnest seekers of truth.

A Convoluted Scam

I had a dream. No, that’s not some figurative statement. I had a dream, and it was insane. It started with investigative reporter Greg Palast talking about government boondoggle programs being run by no-bid contractors like Halliburton and Bechtel. No-bid means just that: no bid, and the contractor could be charging very uncompetitive rates. That was bad enough. Then it got more convoluted.

The contractors would employ desperate people from abroad in key positions. Why? Those desperate people needed their employment visas to stay in the USA. Without them, they would face immediate deportation to places like Greece and Spain where the economy was in the toilet and they would face unemployment with no end in sight. These were family people, but their families had to stay back in the home country – to keep them more desperate and dependent upon anything handed to them here, I presumed.

These desperate work visa holders were in charge of keeping secrets. If they talked, they could always be discredited by pointing to how they were aliens, they had bad performance reviews, they drank heavily on the job, and so on. The secrets involved the true nature of the boondoggle programs. They were either true boondoggles, which was bad enough, or they were cover operations for black bag operations – top secret activities of the US Government that ranged from being barely legal on out to flagrant violations of the Constitution and the law.

I was investigating these unfinished buildings, hospitals getting irregular lawn care, and sidewalk contracts enduring massive cost overruns and everywhere there was a scared foreigner, desperately smiling and lying to explain away any inconsistencies. The beauty of that part was that if the guy couldn’t talk straight, he could always fall back on his difficulties with the language as an excuse: “No no no no no… what I to meant to say the was we to not the being of isn’t a the to wasting of the moneys.”

The foreigners would defend the boondoggles tooth and nail because that’s what the contractors wanted them to do. Either they were lining their pockets with the proceeds of the do-nothing project, or they were even more profitable fronts for illegal operations running guns, drugs, or worse on a scale far beyond Iran-Contra.

I woke up from that and shook my head about it. It seemed crazy. When I went back to sleep, the dream continued where it left off and I saw more and more of those things, like in some kind of Biblical vision. Maybe it was. There’s only one way to find out.

And if I did uncover a scam like I dreamed, that would be amazing. But what could we do about it? The much less convoluted vision of a nation being run by interest groups already exists. This added complication would only be possible in such a government and the only way to get rid of it is to get rid of the interest groups’ ability to lobby Congress. The only way to do that, in all truth, is to only elect honest Congressmen that aren’t afraid of death. That last requirement is very important, because these interest groups include those that aren’t above a few “accidents” to keep their gravy train making regular stops.

So that’s my dream and my reflection upon it. Make of it what you will: I know what it means to me.

Grand Canyon Dawn


Click for full size.

I should take some inventory in my life at this time. There are so many wonderful things I’ve been able to see and experience. The greatness of life is not in the fame we have for our works, nor in fortunes amassed. True greatness is being able to look back on what we have done and to know, in spite of obstacles and mistakes, that we have indeed fought the good fight. True hope is in the realization that even if we haven’t fought the good fight in our past, that the resolve to fight the good fight in the future can make our lives great from this point forward.

So what does this have to do with the Grand Canyon at dawn?

Well, one day at the Grand Canyon, I decided to wake up before dawn so I could be in position to take photos of the “first sunrise.” While my choice wasn’t fraught with danger, it was still an act of will to get up, get ready, head out, and hike over a difficult path to Bright Angel Point. I fought the good fight that day… and, what do you know, my life was great that day.

A Very Bad Law

The Trayvon Martin shooting is, without a question in my mind, a terrible tragedy. It should never have happened. It is all the more tragic because of a very bad law. The “stand your ground” statute in Florida actually permits someone to provoke a violent reaction but, if the reaction is life threatening, to respond with deadly force. That means if two gunslingers meet in the middle of a Florida street, whoever kills first wins the justified homicide race. For proof that his life was in danger, he can point to his slain foe with a gun in his hand.

Yes, Mr. Martin was unarmed, but one eyewitness says he saw Mr. Martin beating Mr. Zimmerman, the shooter. Another eyewitness saw the opposite happening, so all we have left is Mr. Zimmerman’s testimony, and he did have injuries to his face and head consistent with his account of Mr. Martin attacking him. So why did Mr. Martin attack, if that’s what he did?

Maybe it was the same stupid law. The law allows for people to stand their ground, instead of requiring a duty to retreat. A duty to retreat means a person needs to get away from a confrontation and let police handle the situation. In a stand your ground law, one can stand and engage an opponent based upon one’s judgment.

In this case, imagine what has to be going through the mind of a 17-year old walking home in the dark on a rainy night when some strange guy in a truck pulls up beside you and demands that you come talk to him. That’s a terrifying situation, and I can understand why Mr. Martin would not want to give any information to or comply with Mr. Zimmerman’s commands. We tell our children that strangers could kill them – and that is exactly what happened here.

Had Mr. Martin killed Mr. Zimmerman, the same law would have justified the homicide. Without a duty to retreat and let potentially cooler heads prevail, or at least heads that can be identified as policemen – and I’m leaving the racial controversy with the local force aside – the Florida law as written allows any pair of individuals that doesn’t understand each other completely to open fire, rather than try to understand what’s really going on.

Bad laws make for bad situations. Not only has this law contributed to the Martin shooting case, it’s also used by criminals to justify murders of rivals. Is that really what Florida wants on its hands?

Individual Mandates and Constitutionality

Short version of the problem: Come 2014, I’m supposed to get insurance for my whole family. Looking at the government charts, I’ll have to spend at least $500 per month on a policy. Last policy I had didn’t pay for the square root of jack squat. Whatever policy I’ll have to get in 2014 probably will have the same huge deductible and no real benefits.

When a person in my family gets a major illness, I’ll have to cover that out of pocket. I make too much money to get free clinic stuff, but not enough to buy a policy that actually pays for hospital care. Being forced to buy insurance by the government does nothing for me, but everything for the insurance company whose lobbyist helped to write that part of the health care act.

Should I choose to do without, I can pay just shy of $2100 in a fine to some government agency. It won’t be a tax, technically, but it will go in to the USG’s coffers. So, come 2014, I can either pay $6200 per year for nothing or pay $2100 per year for nothing. Yeah… thanks for nothing, US Government!

This provision shows just how much control the lobbyists have over the President and Congress. They wrote a bill that doesn’t help poor or middle class people, it helps the interest groups that are already rich. I do hope the Supreme Court strikes down the individual mandate as unconstitutional. Congress should not have the power to require people to engage in acts of commerce, particularly when such acts are of no benefit to the purchaser.

By the way, this isn’t something that the Republicans are alone in hollering about. The liberal media is livid, as well. Michael Moore and Ralph Nader have both pooh-poohed this provision. While the left and the right may not agree on the solution for our health care problem, they can both agree that this ain’t it.