St. John. The. Amenable.

     It has been a significant number of months since I, your patron saint of sorely tried patience, have graced these digital halls. A good thing too, as said absence has until recently left me beatifically unaware of an appalling and astounding assault on a mutation of language even I, in my most pessimistic of prognostications, did not entirely expect. In my defense however, how could one see something so profoundly nonsensical coming to pass?
     I speak of course not only of the apparent demise of the period, but of the complete and utter lack of concern over such a thing. Indeed, some foolish squeaking pip even attempted to cast such a development in a positive light, instead of as the abomination that it so obviously is. Allow me, if you would be so wise, to further illuminate.
     It appears that this abandonment of proper period application is, as is the case with so many of our more lamentable contemporary tragedies, the result of the now ubiquitous medium known as text messaging. Disappointingly, many people are opting to eschew punctuating their sentences, instead leaving their expression untethered and abandoned in the minuscule bubble in which each inane thought travels . This, as many of you no doubt are aware, results in myriad short texts, instead of one that properly conveys a thought. This results in what is known as "rapid fire texting", or "machine gun texting", or "an embarrassment to all involved", and it drives all reasonable folk to madness.
     Further, use of a period to end a sentence is now sometimes taken as a marker of some sort of tone, like sarcasm or sternness. It is more and more frequently being met with defensiveness and accusations of unnecessary aggression. The exact reasoning behind this remains unknown to me, largely because I refuse to be bothered with understanding such stupidity, but also because anyone who finds a period to be overly aggressive would likely recoil in frenzied terror at the exclamation marks I would no doubt employ during such a discussion.
     Throughout my duration as your humble advocate against atrocities of articulation, I have often been regarded as a "kook", or "curmudgeon", or a "linguistic luddite." My consternation is largely ignored as the population so stubbornly marches, lemming-like, toward communicative catastrophes like the use of non-word "aggro", and what I now must assume is the intentional misuse of the word "literally." Foolish as it may seem, I have nonetheless trudged onward in my quest to make the world a less incoherent place, because I believe, quite simply, that the better we as a people communicate, the smaller the likelihood that I will be suddenly forced from this plane of existence via fury induced aneurysm.
     Gaze upon simple sensibility and repent, all ye who would trespass into the dominion of chaos! A period marks the successful completion of a thought. It is not to be replaced by simply hitting 'send.' If anything, sending a separate text should signify a new subject or topic. This would be similar to beginning a new though or idea. If a sentence does not stop, the thought it is meant to convey remains incomplete. This is the foundation for almost all of the punctuation in the English language.
     Without it we all merely resemble hyperactive children who don't know when to stop talking or even how to stop talking and then we all become complicit in making ourselves and our language dumber than it needs to be or should be Neither you nor I are Cormac McCarthy or  ee cummings and if we continue to write as though we are then eventually everything will be so hard to read that people will be reduced to communicating exclusively in recycled pictures and memes and my head will explode and everything in the world will be worse forever This feels so wrong I have to stop right now because this makes every fiber of my being feel as though it is being stomped on by some great cosmic hatred
     Was that not, despite its well written qualities, terrible? Of course it was, and it would be the acme of futility to pretend otherwise. I consider the argument that periods are unnecessary in today's digital world a fully debunked one, and now must move on to this bogus assertion that they convey some sort of overly aggressive tone. I invite you, one and all, to bear witness to the sense which is about to be made, before your very eyes!
     It is true, I grant you, that punctuation can be used to convey a tone. It is not true, however, that it always does so. Consider the following:
     I went to the store yesterday. - This sentence, as it stands, conveys a fact, but does not carry in itself -or in its little dot of an ending- any inherent tone. Such a thing must be gleaned either from the context of the larger conversation in which it is used, or from the tone the speaker uses if said sentence is spoken aloud.
     This is entirely different from, for example:
     Stop. Not punctuating. Your sentences. Right. Now. - You see? Here we have an example of over punctuation, used to create a tone of intense frustration at the inexcusable acts of violence being perpetrated in a given situation.
     Here I shall provide another example over which we may ruminate:
     I cannot believe I actually had to point this out! I am apoplectic!- These sentences end in what is known as an exclamation mark. They are used to convey many emotions, including shock, and yes, hostility. We have them because periods do not do that.
     Simply put, accusing someone of properly utilizing end sentence punctuation as a means of aggression in and of itself, without regard to the content of the actual thought being expressed, is the exact kind of abject ignorance that leads societies to damnation and cultures to ruination.
     I truly cannot make it any clearer.

   -St. John
   

A Prehistoric 35

   
     Despite both the predictions made by many who knew me in my younger days, and the advice given to me by my mentors in the shadowy aspects of my art, yesterday, on the thirtieth and final day of the month known as June, the sixth month of the year 2016 (as well as most other years), I allowed myself to become thirty five years old. Halfway to seventy, a quarter of the way to 140, and almost as much time as it takes to read that first sentence.
     Some of you may remember a time when I turned thirty, lo those many years ago, and I wrote a piece in which I provided some few bits of advice for those who entered this world at a later date than myself. Now that I have reached the halfway point of my fourth decade and found out that I am actually a dinosaur trapped in a human body (thanks to my niece, Chloe), I figured why not do something like that again? So I did. Enjoy!

1. By now you know that everyone has a camera, and everything gets recorded and put on the internet, and everyone knows about all the dumb things you do. Instead of letting this discourage you,  remember that it hasn't kept anyone from running for president.

2. The word 'love' is overused. You don't love everything that you enjoy, and you certainly don't love everyone, no matter how frequently people post pictures of beaches photoshopped with terribly written lines about it on the aforementioned internet. You can however respect people, and do your best to treat them with kindness. Which is not the same as being nice. Figure out the difference, and practice the one that actually means something.

3. Change and Growth are not the same thing. Go back and reread the last sentence from #2 now.

4.  Anyone who tells you they know what god wants is trying to use religion to control you. Ignore them. The whole point of believing in a deity, should you choose to do so, is that said deity is the one in charge, not you. Therefore, it is no one's responsibility, or right, or privilege, to go around trying to make everyone act according to their beliefs.
               4.5. Truth and Belief are not the same thing. Truth is what Is, and Belief is how each person makes sense of that Is in order to keep from going crazy. Avoid people who confuse the two.

5. Being loud is not a substitute for being smart. Shut up, listen, and don't treat every dissenting opinion as a personal attack on you. What you hear matters just as much as what you say.

6. Change your underwear every day. It's just a better way to do things.

7. Stop defending famous people for doing terrible things. I don't care if you like their music, or they play for your favorite team. Someone else will make music you like, someone else will play for your team.  Shine that light of adulation on someone who deserves it.

8. Make sure you get what you're worth.  Or more, if you can manage.

9. You are going to hurt people. Everyone does. Try not to do it on purpose, own up to it when it happens, and don't hold a grudge when it happens to you. That's how people get ulcers.

10. If someone important to you, or even someone you find vaguely entertaining, mentions a thing over and over again throughout a period of time, like years for instance, and doesn't let it go, even when you think said person is maybe getting obsessive, or at least boring and repetitive, you should seriously consider keeping your stupid opinions to yourself and just getting him the damned robot vacuum. He just had a birthday, for cryin' out loud.

     Also, if I somehow live to be 140 years old, please take it upon yourselves to keep me from seeing 141. That is far too long for this dinosaur to be trapped inside a human body. Just do me one favor: however you collectively decide to kill me, make it unbelievably creative and spectacular.

-John

A Brief Word From Our Sponsors

     Ladies and gentlemen, we here at JohnCo. understand that your time is valuable, and the time you spend posting pictures of your selves and food and pets and then looking at and talking about each others' pictures is equally valuable. We appreciate you choosing to spend portions of that precious and rare internet time to read the musings and ramblings of your regular author (hello!-John) and the deranged self-appointed saint of language integrity preservation (you could have chosen a better adjective-St. John), both of whom we sponsor (but don't pay-John)(and so sponsor you are not, sirs!-St. John.) As our way of saying "thank you", we try our best to make sure every product we create has the betterment of your life at it's heart and as its soul.
     And we here at JohnCo. don't mind telling you, we've really brewed up something big this time.
     It has been, since our conception, our primary objective to address the problems plaguing our society to the best of our ability. With that in our corporate hive-like mind, we have worked tirelessly to bring to you something that could eliminate from our culture the controversies surrounding unwanted pregnancies, birth control, overpopulation, and abortion. All of the anger, all of the frustration, all of the enmity between those on differing sides of the issue, gone. All the rage of women who don't want other people, especially old white men, telling them what to do with their bodies, gone. All the bewilderment of old white men who can't quite fathom why everyone is tired of their ignorant trumpeting, done.
     And all you have to do is have a beer.
     That's right, we here at JohnCo. are proud and privileged to announce the launch of our very own birth control beer! All the joy of inebriated intercourse, with none of the reproductive hangover! Each bottle contains our very own proprietary drug TempoSter (TM), which temporarily reduces the male sperm count to zero, thereby eliminating the chance of pregnancy! That's right, ladies, you read that correctly; birth control is your fellas' problem, now. No more trips to the doctor, no more filling prescriptions for you. Just make sure that goober has a beer or two, which we here at JohnCo. don't think will be a problem.
     Now, we here at JohnCo. understand that there is a religious component to this argument, and that argument has somehow managed to infiltrate various levels of our government, despite the whole separation of church and state thing. Not to worry, faithful customers, we figured out how to deal with that. It was a bit of a gamble, but we are pleased to announce it worked, and so we are proud to present our flagship beer, the Full Salute American Ale.
     This fine, hearty American style ale doesn't just have a pleasing and refreshing taste. It doesn't just have our special TempoSter (TM) additive, either. It also comes with a small amount of our very own male stimulant, ManStam(TM), and folks, you wouldn't believe how fast this particular brew made it through all the food safety trials and congressional hearings. It happened so fast, and with so little resistance, that you know it's completely safe and satisfies all moral and ethical compunctions.
     At least, that's what we here at JohnCo. were told, and who are we to doubt the motivations of the old white men who make these decisions?
     So look for Full Salute American Ale in a store near you, and keep an eye out for these other styles, which are heading your way soon, from your friends at JohnCO.:
     Sterile Serenity Stout- A stout in the traditional style, dark in color with hints of roasted coffee and chocolate, and a sense of freedom that will outlast both you and its delicious aftertaste.
     Low Count Lager- A crisp, clean, lager, for those hot summer nights when you really, really, don't want to be weighed down.
     He's not my Hefeweizen- This golden, full bodied wheat beer may be not be filtered, but you sure will be.
     The 'I' isn't for India I.P.A.- hoppy, tasty, and an ABV% that's far more potent than you will be. This, like our Full Salute, also comes with the ManStam (TM) additive.
      And these are just the ones we thought of ourselves! We here at JohnCo. welcome input from our customers, so if you have a favorite style of beer, let us know in the comments, and we'll get our team  on it post-haste!
     So the next time you find yourself in the beer aisle, or bellied up to the bar, trying to figure out what beer is for you, just remember JohnCo., the only brewery where drinking responsibly means having another.
     Side effects may include fierce hangovers, dehydration, headaches, nausea and vomiting. Also, soreness of muscles, scratches, bite marks,  feelings of great satisfaction, and a smile that just does't go away.
-JohnCo.
   
   
   

More 'Meme', Less You

     Not so long ago, I saw what many young people refer to as a 'meme.' For those of you not in the know, a meme is a gimmick of the internet, usually consisting of a picture- often some easily recognizable image from popular culture, but animals making silly faces are also frequently utilized- and some words. The image and words are usually somehow tied together, generally for the purpose of amusement, but sometimes they are created as a shallow means of conveyance for some message or opinion. Usually, these messages or opinions are harmless and vapid enough, their content rarely going beyond the insignificant, like how this one deity is love, or happiness is a choice, or cats, or whatever.
     The one I saw on this particular not so long ago really gave me something to think about though, and that, friends and neighbors, is why we're here today. Without sinking so low as to actually reproduce the image here, allow me to describe it briefly: The image was a fairly close up picture of what I believe was a young woman's only half covered buttock. Underwear was visible, and the dress, which had been pulled aside to reveal said cheek, was what some people might refer to as 'short.' The text, which was written over the image in some cursive font or another, read thusly:
      The more a woman shows, the less she has to offer.
     Oh, what words of wisdom! What pearls, what unparalleled insight! What a truly gifted visionary the creator of this digital masterpiece must be or have been! To take the philosophy behind those who throughout history have stoned women to death for showing their faces in public, or have shamed them for having ideas about, well, anything really, and reduce said philosophy to the succinctness of a picture and sentence! Truly, standing on the shoulders of giants, this one is.
      First and foremost, I have to ask if this means that a man in cargo shorts is less worthwhile than a man in a fully legged pant? What about short sleeve shirts? If I see a gentleman in a tank top am I to dismiss him as a worthless person based on that factor alone? I mean come on, I can see his shoulder!
     And yet, such a meme, I have not seen. Nothing in the way of say, "If you can see pit hair, there must be no brain there."
     Also, in the ensuing social media argument (because of course there was one) the person who posted the meme made it clear that he (surprise) was only expressing his opinion, which he is constitutionally allowed to do. This is correct. The problem is that said opinion supports the stereotyping of a group of people, which is not only wrong, but blatantly stupid, particularly when we consider the obvious hypocrisy on display.
     Which we will do. Starting now.
     Take a moment, or two if you'd like, and mull over how people tend to register images before they read and comprehend words and sentences. What this means is the first thing people are going to see when they encounter this 'meme' is the half naked buttocks of some faceless, anonymous woman. I don't care who you are, when you're scrolling through what so many people so foolishly refer to as a "news feed", and you see a partially naked person, it's going to get your attention, for one reason or another. Maybe you weren't expecting a half naked butt to just show up on your screen (although it is the internet, after all. Butts are everywhere, and I recommend you keep your guard up.) Or maybe you notice this half naked butt because you like butts. Perhaps you're a rapper with a predilection for plus-sized posteriors and a disability to deceive.
     Either way, what has happened here is that our genius and model citizen has used an example of the very thing he claims to shun in order to get his idea across. The sentence could just have been posted, or tweeted, or whatever, without words, but our hero has chosen to amplify it's attention getting ability by reducing a woman to just a body part for his own purposes.
     If I understand this correctly, what this means is that in order to deserve this stallion of virtue a woman must be modest, but in order to properly express his philosophy, we are going to need that butt.
     Look, opinions are all well and good, but when your opinion involves deciding how other people should behave, or what they should wear, or how valuable they are based on same, then it's not referred to as "having an opinion" anymore.
     It's referred to as "being a dick", and the internet already has plenty of those, too.
     So, please understand that while you are entitled to your opinion, you are just as entitled to think it through, convey it better, consider how it betrays your lack understanding, and of course, shut up.
     You're always entitled to shut up.
     Tune in next week, when JohnCo. returns with another exciting new product!
-John

Running Away For President

Greetings, friends and neighbors, and boy do I have a proposition for you today. Shall I ease you into it with one of my classic introductions? I hope you said yes, because I’m going to. Here it is:

It seems that whenever someone raises the topic of our prospects for a future “leader of the free world”, most people get, let’s say, unenthusiastic about their options. Those lucky few who do have a candidate they unabashedly support often seem less than thrilled about the chances of said candidate, despite their persistent hopes. But the rest of you? Oh, the poor rest of you. You know that angered intestine feeling of voting to keep someone out of office instead of voting to put someone in, don’t you? You’ve become familiar with the overarching sense of mottled gray melancholy that comes with such sad situations, have you not?

Don’t bother answering, as I cannot hear you (I don’t know why, but I never get tired of that joke.) Also, of course you’re familiar with it. For many of us, it’s been our political way of life since we reached that carefully and not at all arbitrarily selected legal voting age of eighteen. Upon reaching said age, in which all things are revealed to us and our logic is at its purest, we instantly understand that all politicians are little more than self obsessed liars, who seek only to advance their own careers, with only a nominal interest in the populace at the best of times.

That said and I assume agreed with, I must reluctantly admit that by the time all these campaigning shenanigans come to an end, and the time comes for the masses to cast their vote, I will be thirty-five, and legally allowed to become President of the United States.

Just so you know, I would prefer not to be, as it seems to me to be the worst job ever.

Unfortunately for me, my qualifications are pretty spot on, so I must acknowledge the high probability of a victory by write in vote. It will of course have to be by write in, considering that not only do I not want the job, but also neither party would ever, in a million and seven years, nominate or support me in any way. Which, to my chagrin, stands to work in my favor, considering the high value currently being placed on the political “outsider.” In this regard, I am infinitely more qualified than any current candidate, from either party. I’ve never even worn an American Flag Pin. For those of you who believe a candidate should be an “outsider”, lacking in political experience, connection, or ambition, I am the obvious choice. I can’t say I blame you; the alternative is far from impressive.

Again, I’m not happy about this advantage, but let us move on.

Another long standing issue of the campaign wars is that of finance. A very big deal has been made about whose funding comes from where, and here again I must sadly concede my superiority to those whose names have been already thrown into the ring. No candidate can claim to have put as little money into his or her campaign, nor can any of them claim so authentically to be completely self funded. Consider, if you will, the sheer lack of existence of my campaign, which proves how little has been spent. As for the source of this zero dollars, I ask you: why would I need to ask other people for zero dollars? Believe you me, zero is the only amount of dollars I can guarantee you I will always be able to spend. Besides, other people wouldn’t even give me money for a robot vacuum.

Which, as it happens, leads me directly into yet another grudgingly made confession:I, more so by far than any of your current choices, am indeed a man of the people. Much of the rhetoric we (right there, you see? “We.” Man of the people. Boom) are all currently subjected to revolves around how each of our less than stellar choices for President Elect relates to and understands the situation of the common man. Being born rich and serving in high ranking government jobs for decades, however, does not exactly strike me as the everyman experience. As we have already established, I have no money and have not served as a high ranking government official. I even have to vacuum my own house (thanks a lot.)

Again, I feel it necessary to point out that I do not want this job, despite how clearly amazing I would be at it. Here again, even as I type this, I can feel some of you remain as yet unconvinced. Here I shall once again, despite my best interests, provide further proof, as I give you an actual solution to one of the issues relevant to this election: Immigration.

First off, it is necessary to once again address the issue of building a wall. Why this is still seen by anyone as a viable idea, I cannot say. A few moments of even the most rudimentary thought will reveal how idiotic this idea is, which is why for as long as I can remember, it has been nothing more than cheap political pandering, one of the many unkept promises made to the unrealistic to garner favor. It has never been built because doing so would solve nothing and cost considerably more.

Never mind how ridiculous it would make us look to the rest of the world.

Second, I feel it necessary to point out that a country created and built by immigrants from all over the world should ease up on its xenophobia. Any way you look at it, excluding someone because of their language or religion or nation of origin is a pretty awful way of doing things. Look at it this way: without immigrants, we may not have pizza, coffee, or New York City. I know that some people take issue with the “values” of that last one (whatever that means), but as a nation we pretty much agree on pizza and coffee.

See there? I just brought the whole country together with one sentence. I don’t even want this job (I swear), and I can’t not be good at it.

Now then, enough with pointing out flaws in the plans of others; there is clearly no unique gift there. Instead, I will say that if, as a nation, we come to agree that immigration is an issue we need to solve, I know how to get that done. See, the thing is, if people want to go somewhere, if they really feel they need to do so in order to survive, they will get it done. The entirety of human history is proof of that. What we need to do is remove the motivation for coming here. Admittedly, that is kind of happening now, as we make ourselves less and less appealing to the world, but I would suggest a path that does not necessitate us projecting hostility.

I call it “Project: Home Improvement”, and the basics are as follows: instead of spending all that money trying to keep people out, or worse, blowing stuff up, we invest it instead in helping to improve the country from which said people are fleeing. By that I don’t mean we invade and force a change in government, by the way. Instead, we focus on helping to improve things like infrastructure, and education, and so on. You know, all the stuff we should be spending money on here and aren’t.

Now, I understand that this won’t work for every country. There are a few (to be optimistic) with which we don’t exactly have a benevolent relationship. The others, though? Imagine the kind of alliance we could have if we focused on making all these countries as awesome as we like to think our is? We could get so much done, and then maybe, just maybe, we could finally bring our focus to the things we really need to take care of, like that stuff I mentioned before.

I know that to some this doesn’t sound like quite as much fun as the invasion and forced democracy route, but to be honest, never having served in the military or fought in a war, I don’t really feel like I should just be sending soldiers around willy nilly. That lack of military experience, by the way, is one thing I do have in common with your current options.

By the by, I understand that to many people this idea may seem too idealistic and beyond the realm of possibility, but I would argue that a good leader does not lead by scaring his people, but by inspiring them.  

Now, as I have said and repeatedly reiterated, I do not want this job.I would rather (and there is nothing more true in this whole piece than what you are about to read) have to work on every single one of my birthdays until the end of time, even after I am dead. I have seen a

number of presidents come and go, and watching the job weigh on them has been like watching a time lapse video. They all seem to age at least twenty years or so, and my vanity (have you seen my hair?) simply does not permit such things. I have no political ambition, or personal agenda I hope to force upon the rest of you. There is no lobby whose interests I am inclined (or indebted) to, and therefore I have nothing to gain from it outside of the assured hatred, unrelenting vitriol, long hours, unbelievably stressful obligations, and endless speechifying and photograph posing, not to mention being constantly forced to work and deal with people I most likely could not stand. To put it simply, this job would literally kill me.

Seriously. I would die.

So please, I beg you, if you value my life at all, don’t vote for me. Even though I would do a really good job.

-John

•this message paid for by no committee at all. I don’t have any money, did you not read that part? Somebody get me a robot vacuum.

Unleashed

I once made the decision to eschew discussing current events and the news and such in this space, as I believed there were already enough (and most probably too many) people spouting their specific brand of nonsense into the digital world. That decision has been reversed, because I am a flexible well-rounded person who is fully capable of changing his mind when the reality of a situation demands it.

Or when the surreality of a situation infuriates me to a point beyond belief. That being said, I feel that a return to this path calls for the return of a certain pathwalker, and a gentleman (that’s me) always allows others to precede him. Plus, I recently saw a church with the best name ever, and it inspired me to reach out.

So, for the first time in some time, without further ado (except for this next short clause), because of my aforementioned recent holy epiphany, I unleash for and upon you, St. John the Amenable:  

I, your patron saint of the Disgruntled Groan, return once again at the behest of your regular (if regular he can be called, in the case of actually producing written words) author, to ask the lot of you one simple question, which I will then proceed to answer for you, as you are not invited to edit this document:

What in the unbridled realm of heathenry have you done?

The promised answer: You have allowed it all to become so very, very, terrible, and I am here to set it right again.

Now see here: I am aware that in your only barely United States, a presidential election is underway in this, the year of Your Almost Certainly Perplexed Lord, 2016. Further and more, I am aware that in all elections, the populace is invariably and unfortunately subjected to a great deal of obnoxious and odorous ordure, of both the donkey and elephant varieties.  This election, however, is of another make entirely, as so much of the rhetoric being passed is rather lacking even in the density required for an excretion to labeled waste. It is instead more akin to a methane release, in that it causes a largely unpleasant reaction in those exposed to it, but ultimately carries no weight of its own.

I would very much like to not feel obligated to explain or support my position, but as I am not running for president (as of this moment in time), I cannot expect my words to be taken as gospel without bothering to base them in anything resembling reason or actual fact. That being the case, allow me to provide examples of the ethereal excrement to which I allude.

First, I ask, I beseech, I entreat anyone to explain to me how it is acceptable for a candidate to so boldly avoid answering a question? I have been following this election rather diligently since its commencement in what I now believe to be the end of our most recent ice age. Somehow, these “straight-shooters”, all of them different than the bureaucratic do-nothings whose lazy tyranny has caused us all so much suffering (what with our expanded health care and diminished unemployment and marriage equality), have failed to do much in the way of providing actual answers to questions relating to their presidential qualifications.

What they expose us to, instead, during their multitudinous debates and rallies and supremely staged political events, are responses along the lines of (and here I shall paraphrase, as the notion of quoting any of these ideological idiots appalls me) “trust me, okay?” and “that guy’s wrong and dumb and I’m better” and so on. One of the only true examples of a straightforward answer I did hear, was the simple “no” one candidate offered when given an opportunity to comment on another’s answer. Do you not find it informative that the atmosphere of the room shifted, instantly becoming more relaxed when this answer was given? Do you not find it infuriating to know that providing a simple answer, which is expected of any mentally able person in most every other avenue of the world, is seen as both a rarity and a clever maneuver?

Admittedly, the language of politics lends itself to manipulation, and at its best can be used to shape a conversation that polishes one’s own deeds and qualifications to a high and glossy shine. In this case, however, it is used primarily to belittle opponents in order to deflect, lest an actual rationale somehow crack the shellacked and seamless plastic surface. Unfortunately, being able to explain why someone else is not right for a job is not the same as proving oneself to the best choice. If that were the case, I would be acquainted with a great deal more movie directors and professional football coaches and skilled automobile drivers than I presently am. What it means instead is that for some there exists no real candidate for which to vote, and so the disenfranchised must vote against someone instead.  This is known as picking ”the lesser of two evils”, and the defeated connotation it carries reflects all too well the mentality of those who adopt it.

Understand, people don’t even pick avocados this way. No one selects an avocado simply in order to not pick another one; that avocado is chosen according to its ripeness, its qualifications for consumption, its potential for guacamole greatness. But a president? Sure, that job can be assigned to any rube, as long as it’s not the other side's rube. This is the method of the broken, the defeated, the ones who believe in their hearts that nothing will ever truly be improved, and the language of their candidate bears that out. Promises to undo change, to bring back times gone by, to flee the future and hide behind the illusions of synthetic traditions, surely appeal to those who believe the future to be a grim one. Theirs is a world of only rotten avocados, and I for one desire it not.

As a people, as a culture, it must be remembered that leaders not only reflect the time during which they lead, but also help to shape it. Commotion and crudity are not substitutes for eloquence and reason, and we should demand that our leaders understand this fact and behave accordingly.

-St. John the Amenable