Blue-eyed Mullah

some still wonder why
the blue-eyed prophet
passed with the new millennium


the twins were merely pawns
of the underworld
trudging toward a destiny


irrevocably
unspeakably
invoked


from the ancient dust
of father's
swollen tongue


weeping


the blue-eyed mullah
gathers his minions
for the quickening


as we rush to folly
marching with
a mad jester


one hand
touching the sun
as the other


drips red
upon corpses in the sand
mummified


by the evil
of our indifference
and their own


willingness to burn
for a blind
puppeteer

The Department of Homeland Ontology

Destinations are never what we expect them to be. That is perhaps the greatest joy of travel.

We pack our miniscule lives into suitcases, pretend to be unburdened gypsies for a weekend...a fortnight...a month. But really, we are cramming our whole selves in there. Our obese lives. Our obscene egos. Our gargantuan hopes and dreams and delusions. Fears and passions and loves.

Whoever said, "You can't take It with you," lied. (It was probably a beauracrat or a businessman.) You can't NOT take It with you. Amazing that It ever all fits.

How do we decide what to carry? What to leave behind? The Department of Homeland Ontology has suggestions, but they are not very practical.

If you expect to encounter the unknown, and plan accordingly, does that remove the element of surprise from the Unexpected. Does it keep the breath from being knocked out of you? And if so, does preservation of breath curb the awe? If you wish to curb your awe, why even step beyond the curb?

And what of the journey? If destinations are pleasantly unpredictable, journeys are the inexplicable phenomena of chaos theory. Why do we always plan for the destination and treat the journey itself as a heroin-chic Harlot? Is it because the Harlot is too feral, too turbulent, too rapacious to prepare for? Or is it, rather, that we judge her unworthy of our wrapt attention? An obstacle to be side-stepped. A burden from which to be freed. A gnat darting in and out of our aural periphery.

The things we lose may be more important than the things we bring back with us. It is sinful to return more beset than upon departure...unless you unburden by laying your quixotic density on others. But then, aren't you saddling them with more things...things that further terrestrialize their existences?

Although it is good to go and and even better to return, there is a part of us that would prefer never leaving the cold comfort of our heroine, the Harlot. After all, it is what we don't know that makes travel so consumingly fascinating. The surprises along the way. And she is always revealing more to us. An ankle here, an earlobe there. The curve of her collarbone. The way afternoon shadows from the tree outside the window play with the color and texture of her skin.

And every once in awhile, if we watch closely, we see something ethereal yet substanial. Mind-boggling. Inspiring to the brink of madness. Don't take your eyes off of her - especially when she holds the mirror to herself. Be myopic when the time and place are right. She holds a treasure worth keeping at such moments.

You just might return home with the memory of having seen yourself through her untainted eyes.

Is 32 years of a Bush-Clinton White House Really a Democracy?

What the hell is wrong with the American people? Counting the two terms that Bush senior served as V.P. - if Hillary is elected President - we are guaranteed at least 32 years of a Bush or Clinton in the White House! Is this the country that brought modern democratic principles to the world, or a friggin' aristocracy?

Look, if the Dems end up nominating Hillary, I will (almost) certainly have to vote for her. (Know this, though: I'd prefer Ron Paul over continuing this abhorrent rut we are in.) But let's not candy-coat a poopscicle, okay? She is the pure embodiment of an entrenched politician, albeit a female. Although it may not necessarily be her fault, she will perpetuate the divisiveness preventing us from solving our most serious problems. We really need someone who can, and will, break through this 51/49, Red versus Blue bullshit. And if you think Hillary Clinton is the woMan, you are delusional.

Edwards had plenty of promise...until he built a 30,000 sq. foot home. For a family of 4. The year before running for President. On a "Let's Help the Poor" platform. (Even if you dismiss the hypocrisy, the timing shows a serious lack of good judgement.) Oh, and did I mention that he railed against predatory lending, then went to work for one of the worst perpetraitors of such practices? Or that he went off on the rich for using off-shore accounts to avoid taxes, then did it himself? Or that he voted for "No Child Left Behind," and then spent years bashing Bush for the law. The Iraq debacle and the Patriot Act? He voted for them.

The John McCain of 2000 seemed like a decent man. That dude is gone-daddy-gone.

Of the remaining serious candidates who should be considered, that leaves us with Obama. Entrenched politician? No. (Not yet.) Does he seem to have the ability to unite a nation? Yes...he has the oratory skills, the ideas, the charisma and the ability to think critically. He has the best chance of bringing the nation together in a way we haven't been for a long, long time. His ideas for education, for helping the poor, protecting the environment, and his foreign policies all look promising. (The healthcare issue might have to be tackled in bits and pieces - maybe he is hoping to eat that monster a small piece at a time?)

Anyway, the Hopeful Curmudgeon is officially endorsing Barack Obama. And I am sure that means the world to him!

www.barackobama.com

CM