DONALD TRUMP: A FASCIST?

Ken Kastle is a parishioner with me at our church St. John the Evangelist Anglican Church in Abington, PA. He writes a blog called “Looking at Things Through My Eyes.” Mr. Kastle has had a long career in education and often views his politics as I do, so I often find his blog posts compelling. You can fund his blog here.  Below is one of the posts to his blog, enjoy!

_____________

In a December 8, 2015 article by Henry Giroux published in Truth-Out.org, Giroux presents a strong argument that the content of Donald Trump’s candidacy for the U.S. presidency consists of “a blatant appeal to fascist ideology,” and his proposals are based in the fundamental principles of totalitarianism. Giroux draws vivid parallels between Trump and the fascist demagogues of the past such as Hitler, Mussolini, Pinochet, and others of that ilk.

This article should serve as a wake-up call for America’s electorate to recognize the content of Trump’s  proposals for what they are–a call for a totalitarian state reminiscent of Hitler’s Germany–and to demand that the other candidates and the media call out Trump’s candidacy for the anti-democratic movement it is.

Giroux’s article can be read at:

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/33951-fascism-in-donald-trump-s-united-states

ARW: in Parallel with Yes?

This post is the part of my Yes concert series of posts.  I started this series here and you can read the others here.

 

I saw the progressive rock band ARW play a show at the at the Keswick Theater in Glenside, PA on October 16, 2016 during the their ARW Tour.  While the official Yes band exists and is touring (see here), former Yes members Jon Anderson (vocals), Trevor Rabin (guitars), and Rick Wakeman (keyboards) decided to form a band – called ARW – and tour in order to do homage to their common heritage as members of Yes.  Wakeman recruited his friend, bass player Lee Pomeroy, while Rabin netted his friend drummer Lou Molino III, to flesh out the band.  While technically (i.e.: legally) not Yes, the band’s tour is being advertised as “An Evening of Yes Music and More” and in interviews the band seems to view themselves as the next phase of Yes or at least a Yes-band even if they cannot legally use the name.  A similar phenomenon happened in 1989 with ABWH, and that band seems to have been folded into official Yes history.

 

The official Yes has a lineup has been greatly watered down, and I have written a piece on whether it, philosophically/spiritually/ontologically (not legally) speaking, can really, legitimately, and in good faith, claim the name Yes (see here).

 

When ARW formed, I immediately wondered if that band, with its vaunted line up, would be the true and rightful heir to the Yes name regardless of whether they are legally permitted to use it.  ARW currently exists in parallel to Yes (hence the name of this post (see here)).

 

On the face of it, ARW’s line up is leagues above that of Yes in 2016.  Even with only three guys – the A and R and W – ARW members have a stronger claim and are more inherent to Yes history than the five guys of Yes 2016 together.  Anderson is, of course, a Yes founder and main song writer, while Wakeman is their most important keyboard player, while Rabin was their prime mover during their 1980s resurgence.  Compare this lineup with Yes2016 which contains no founder, and consists of their most important guitar player (Steve Howe), their fourth keyboard player (Geoff Downes who has only played on fairly obscure non-classic albums in 1980, 2011, and 2014), a bass player who had some involvement with Yes in the 1990s but never on bass (Billy Sherwood who was a supporting touring musician, and eventual sixth member, in the 1990s, and played on two non-classic albums (one of which is universally considered the worst Yes album) and helped produce a couple of others), and a drummer who has never played on any Yes album (Jay Schellen).  Of course, if drummer Alan White returns, it will increase Yes’ claim to the name as he has been in the band and on every album since 1972 (but those albums do not include the “big three” of The Yes Album, Fragile, and Close to the Edge).  Still, it would seem the scales tip toward ARW as far as a rightful claim to the name Yes is concerned if personnel is the only consideration.

 

In fairness, though, there is more to a band than membership.  When I went to see ARW , I fully expected to see a Yes concert.  In many ways it was: it had the voice and keyboard wizardry one expects to see at a Yesshow.  In saying that, Rabin has always been difficult for me to embrace.  I am not a big fan of his and what he did to Yes in the 1980s.  I find his playing has always tended toward a sort of one dimensional generic 1980’s shredder sort of playing (with a vague John McLaughlin edge).  His playing always seems to tend toward screaming Stratocaster sounds, with a lot of notes and a lack of diversity in sounds, tones, and instrumentation.  As a result, just as he did in his last tenure with Yes, he continues to reinterpret Steve Howe’s guitar parts by flatting them out, eliminating the subtly and stylistic variety and tonal variety and instrumental variety (replacing acoustics, twelve string, steel guitars, etc with a single electric guitar) Steve Howe brought to the music, and replacing all of that with his trademark faux-Van Halen playing.  So, unless they played Yes’ 1980s music, Rabin’s guitar playing just does not sound Yessish to me.  I am not asking for a Howe clone, but I feel like Rabin’s style is so completely different – and unoriginal and non-prog rock – that it just does not mesh well with Howe’s Yes music.  I think this really comes to the fore with songs like “Awaken” or “And You And I,” where they sound completely different and not in a prog rock sort of way.

 

Surprisingly, though, even with the 1980s songs, Rabin’s live chops seem to have diminished due to his twenty-two years away from the stage.    His singing was warbley at times and his playing lacked the excitement and pyrotechnics he used to exhibit during his prior tenure with Yes.  He used to a showman, walking the stage and playing to the audience, but, now, that aspect of his performance was gone.  His stage performance was reserved, perhaps even conservative, as he seemed to be concentrating on his playing as opposed to his stage presence.

 

Even if I liked Rabin and his chops were up to snuff, ARW’s performance and sound just was not what I expect from Yes.  Yes’s sound has always been marked by the involvement of five completely integrated musicians, each often struggling to make themselves heard in the face of four other strong musicians.  Unlike Yes – or a true five piece band – the drummer and bass player in ARW were clearly support musicians.  They, more or less, stayed out of the spotlight and were there to support the main three – the ARW.  Although the drummer was pretty good, I have to say that his snare drum sounded like a cardboard box filled with old clothes, which is not at all what Yes drums sound like.  The bass player also seemed like he was a good bass player, but, unlike Chris Squire, Billy Sherwood, or even Tony Levin, his sound levels was rather low as compared to the other members.  Again, because I think he and the drummer were to get out of the way of ARW.  Even Tony Kaye or Benoit David, arguably the weakest and/or most humble members of the band, were fully integrated into the sound of the band.  By contrast, the bass and drums were clearly secondary to ARW.

 

While it is difficult to suppress the sound of the drums, to me the biggest contrast with Yes was the bass.  It has nothing to do with Pomeroy’s chops.  It has to do with the fact that a key element to Yes music is a big, fat, and prominent bass sound pushing back against the guitar and keyboards.  The bass parts are not just loud, but key elements to the music itself.  Sherwood has kept this tradition alive and, during his brief tenure, Levin respected it.  By contrast, Pomeroy’s bass was subdued, and not an equal part of the music as compared to ARW.  Indeed, even his placement on the stage – in the back behind Anderson and/or Rabin – tacitly revealed his secondary place in the band.  Gone was the powerful bass player on stage going toe-to-toe with the guitarist and/or keyboardist one expects from Yes.

 

In addition, strong vocal harmonies is also a key element to Yes music.  While Anderson’s voice was backed up by the other members of the ARW band, the strong vocal harmonies that are so integral to Yes were missing.  The other singers were not mixed nearly as high as Anderson and, quite frankly, Anderson’s voice was not mixed particularly high either.  Suffice it to say, the backing singing just was not as as strong as one would expect for Yes.  As a result, the music had a much different feel and sound than what one would expect from Yes.

 

If there was one thing that marked the ARW show I saw is that it was safe.  The performances – notably Anderson and Rabin – tended toward the safe notes.  Instead of a dynamic high note, a safer more standard note was sung.  Instead of the blistering solos of old, Rabin tended to play it safe and were more measured.  Even Wakeman – though still amazing – did not play some of the things he used to play.  For example, he did not play his more juiced up keyboard parts on “Rhythm of Love” as he did on the Union Tour or similar interesting playing on “Cinema” that Igor Khoroshev played.  In his case, though, it seems like a lack of preparation.

 

So, strangely enough, despite the advantage in the line up, ARW just does not have the sound and feel of Yes.  Their sound, thus far, was safe, lacking full integration of the rhythm section, and is missing key vocal harmonies.  Despite the lineup disadvantage, the Yes of 2016 sounds like Yes should sound like and presents itself as Yes traditionally has: powerful, five fully integrated members, prominent vocal harmonies, and taking chances.

 

As with Yes2016, the future of ARW will determine whether they can become legitimate heirs to the Yes name.  Right now – despite the Yes nostalgia that Anderson and Wakeman and Rabin bring to bear to ARW – Yes2016, to me, has maintained the spirit, sound, and feel of Yes, whereas ARW merely seems like old friends having fun trying to relive some good memories.  My ultimate hope is that the two bands will merge to form one single band – ala Union – and Yes can be reunited into the band it should be with its core members playing and sounding like they should.

Yessource: Yes Studio Sessions – Roundabout outtakes

Here are my latest uploads to YesSource, my Yes rarities youtube page (about which you can read here).  This post is another addition to my series of Yes music posts.  I started this series here and a collection of all my Yes-related posts is here.  Yes, of course, is a, if not the, premier progressive rock band, and I am an enormous fan of it.

You can see all of my Yessource uploads here.

My latest YesSource uploads can be found here:

• Yes Studio Sessions – Fragile Sessions – Roundabout studio outtake #1 of 4
• Yes Studio Sessions – Fragile Sessions – Roundabout studio outtake #2 of 4
• Yes Studio Sessions – Fragile Sessions – Roundabout studio outtake #3 of 4
• Yes Studio Sessions – Fragile Sessions – Roundabout studio outtake #4 of 4

Father K. Brewster Hastings: In Memoriam

I have known The Rev. K. Brewster Hastings for many years.  He was an Anglican Christian priest, the rector of Saint Anne’s Church in Abington, PA, and my pastor for the several years I spent as a parishioner there.  Tragically, after heart surgery to repair a heart valve, he passed away suddenly (see here) aged only 55.

Fr. Hastings was more that just my priest.  He was a novelist (see here).  He did my premarital counseling.  He preached the homily at my wedding.  We worked together on the Templeton Committee.  He was my friend.  We shared a similar sense of humor, love for serving the church, bookish interests in theology and philosophy, and a fashion sense that would fit in well in English academia.  We were allies fighting the good fight to preserve, protect, and advance traditional Anglicanism.

Although Fr. Hastings was my pastor and friend, he was even more than that.  I met Fr. Hastings as I was entering into adulthood and in the process of maturing my Christian faith accordingly.  God placed Fr. Hastings into my life at just the right moment.  Fr. Hastings understood me.  He could speak “my language.”  He was the perfect person for me who could speak God’s Word into my life in a way I could hear and accept at a time when I needed it.  I tend to intellectualize everything, including my faith, and while Fr. Hastings could meet me there, he also had a faith that was much deeper than simply intellectualized faith.  It was in this way Fr. Hastings could help me progress.  He could relate to intellectualizing faith, but also to moving it to the next level.

One of the areas of ministry Fr. Hastings focused upon was healing.  One of his gifts was his way of penetrating someone’s problems and drawing God out from them.  When I told him about my struggles – whether that was emotional struggles or struggles with friends and family or with my career or marriage or what have you – he could meet me there.  Not just meet me there, but able to fully invest himself and go with me, into the depths, and validate the struggles and being a conduit of God’s grace and mercy.  Fr. Hastings was loving, but that love was not simply soft and Milquetoast.  He could be stern and offer discipline or correction when needed, but it never seemed like a punishment.

Fr. Hastings’ prayers were powerful.  His faith was deep and penetrating.  He looked, of course, to the Bible, but also to the lives of the Saints through the centuries.  He always could find wisdom from the teaching of the Church to apply to one’s life.  Through his ministry, Fr. Hastings was instrumental in taking my faith to much deeper and more profound place.  He helped me learn to pray.  He helped me learn how to read the Bible more effectively.  He helped me understand that praying and theology and liturgy were more than just doing something spiritual and/or asking for things and/or knowing things.

One recent event sticks out for me.  Although I have not been a member of St. Anne’s for a number of years, I could still call Fr. Hastings when I needed him.  Two summers ago, for various reasons, I was experiencing a dark night of the soul as never before.  I sat on my deck at 9:00pm in the middle of the summer and called him and, as he always did, he spoke to me about whatever it was I needed to discuss.  For over an hour we spoke, prayed, and cried, and he helped me through it and, because he was a great pastor, was sure to follow up with me.  I will be forever thankful for him that night.

So, it is with a heavy heart that I say good bye to you Fr. Hastings, my good Father in God.  Thank you for your friendship.  Thank you for your teaching.  Thank you for helping me learn to pray and read the Bible and worship.  Thank you for helping take my faith from just knowing and doing and believing to a faith that is much deeper, profound, visceral, exposed, and vulnerable.  You have helped me know God in new and deeper ways.  You have forever changed my life.  I thank God for you and your blessing on my life is incalculable.  May God bless you, have mercy on you, have grace upon you, and usher you into your greater glory and heavenly reward due to, and found only in, God’s presence.

Requiesce in pace

Yessource: Yes live in Newcastle 10/16/71

ere are my latest uploads to YesSource, my Yes rarities youtube page (about which you can read here).  This post is another addition to my series of Yes music posts.  I started this series here and a collection of all my Yes-related posts is here.  Yes, of course, is a, if not the, premier progressive rock band, and I am an enormous fan of it.

You can see all of my Yessource uploads here.

My latest YesSource uploads can be found here:

• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – Newcastle – Firebird Suite – Roundabout
• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – Newcastle – Perpetual Change
• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – Newcastle – Long Distance Runaround
• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – Newcastle – the Fish
• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – Newcastle – Clap
• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – Newcastle – Heart of the Sunrise
• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – Newcastle – I’ve Seen All Good People
• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – Newcastle – Jam
• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – Newcastle – Mood for a Day
• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – Newcastle – Rick Wakeman Solo (unique)
• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – Newcastle – Yours is no Disgrace
• Yes Live: 10/16/71 – New Castle – Rick Wakeman solo (unique medley)

Court Considers New Spouse’s Income to Determine Child Support Obligation

Nearly all child support orders are based on the respective incomes of the parents involved as measured by statutory guidelines. Sometimes, however, courts believe it is appropriate to deviate from those guidelines due to an unusual or extraordinary circumstance. In the matter of J.P.D. v. W.E.D., 114 A.3d 887 (Pa.Super.2015), the Court, notably and unusually, deviated from the guidelines by taking into consideration a step-parent’s income.

In May 2013 the obligor father (“father”) in J.P.D. filed a petition to modify his support order in order to account for the termination of his alimony order to his ex-wife, the obligee mother (“mother”).

Pursuant to the above-mentioned petition to modify, the parties fully litigated the support matter, including proceeding through a support conference, two custody masters’ hearings and an exceptions hearing (they each filed exceptions to the second custody master’s decision). The trial court, which heard the exceptions, took into account the father’s new wife’s income as part of his household income which warranted, in the court’s estimation, an upward deviation from the support guidelines resulting in father’s guidelines support obligation, about $700 a month, being doubled to nearly $1,400 a month.

Father filed an appeal from the trial court’s ruling to Superior Court claiming that a deviation of nearly 100% more than the guidelines amount was unlawfully punitive and/or confiscatory.

When reviewing the trial court’s decision, the Superior Court first noted that there is a rebuttable presumption that the guidelines support amount is the correct amount for a given case. See Pa.R.C.P. 1910.16-1. The presumption can be rebutted if it can be shown that a deviation from the guidelines is warranted per Pa.R.C.P. 1910.16-5. Father argued that a significant deviation, like the one in his case, is not a legitimate deviation, but is punitive and/or confiscatory.

The underling facts of the J.P.D. matter are fairly atypical. Father testified that his new wife has an annual income of approximately $1,000,000. He further testified that he does not pay for any of his own expenses, including mortgages, car payments, utilities, or even entertainment. He, instead, relies upon his wife’s substantial income for those expenses. Indeed, father could not provide virtually any details into his household expenses as his new wife has full control over them and provides for all of father’s needs. When pressed on his monthly expenses, father conceded that he does not even bother opening his mail, leaving that task for his wife. Furthermore, father and his new wife own the house in which they live, a weekend getaway house, and another property to be developed, while he also leases a Cadillac for $940 a month and travels and vacations frequently. The Court found that since father’s new wife provides for all of father’s needs, all of his income is available for child support purposes.

Father argued that, regardless of whether his new wife pays for his expenses, his own income is comparable to that of mother’s, so a deviation is not warranted. He further argued that a deviation which serves to double his support obligation is an abuse of the Court’s discretion.

In making its ruling, the Court pointed out, as a preliminary matter, that per Pa.R.C.P. 1910.16-5(b)(3), a deviation may be granted based on other household income. By taking into consideration father’s new wife’s income (the so-called “other household income”), the Court ruled that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in doubling the guidelines amount. The Court noted that even with the doubled support obligation, father’s support obligation still was less than 50% of his net income and is only 37% of his assessed earning capacity. Furthermore, even with the increased support amount, father’s household income would still enable him to satisfy all of his reasonable expenses – not to mention the luxuries described above – without having to contribute any money from his own income toward them.

In sum, the fact that father’s new wife’s income is so great, combined with the fact that his income was entirely unnecessary to pay for his living expenses, the Court ruled that it was not an abuse of discretion to account for his household income which would raise his support obligation to only 37% of his earning capacity.

Therefore, when litigating child support, it is key to inquire into, and perhaps consider, the other household incomes of the parties.

Originally published in Upon Further Review on April 26, 2016 and can be found here.

Christian Legal Clinics of Philadelphia Autumn 2016 Banquet!

Hello folks.  As many of you know, I am a volunteer for the Christian Legal Clinics of Philadelphia; you can learn more about us here.  We help literally hundreds of people every year try and secure justice in the legal system through pro bono or low fee legal services.  We are always trying to improve our services, help more people, and be able to do more for the people we are already helping.

We just celebrated our fourth annual autumn Philadelphia banquet and our third annual Bucks County banquet!  At the banquets we had opportunity to hear clients’ stories told by them personally, stories of attorneys who served our clients, and how God has blessed the clients, attorneys, and the Clinic.

Last year at this time the Clinic established a daring budget and goals for 2016.  We opened more clinics; we recruited more attorneys; and, despite taking a risk on our budgeted expenditures, we will meet our expenses through the gracious gifts our donors and, more importantly, God.

It is amazing just how much God has blessed the Clinic, and our clients through the Clinic.  For a glimpse into our work, please check out the videos below, especially the 2016 video which is brand new!

2017 looks to be another great year!  We may be expanding into other locations in and around Philadelphia.  We serve hundreds of people each year, and there are many more we can reach through our services and, more importantly, many more we can reach with the Gospel of Christ.

Of course, like any charity organization, in order to help others we need your help to do it.  Please come out to one of our Clinic locations to see what we are doing first hand; our Clinic locations are described here.   If you can, help out by volunteering; also, we are always in need of money to fund our ministry.  If you feel led to donate, you can do so here.  If you cannot do these things, please pray for us and our ministry.

Finally, the Clinic exists to help people secure justice in the American legal system here in the Philadelphia area.  More importantly, however, the Clinic exists for people to be the face of Jesus to those who need it and to help people, not just through their legal issues, but through their spiritual ones as well, which so often are closely related to their legal issues.  Help us heed Christ’s call to help “the least of these” and pursue religion “that is pure and undefiled” by giving to our efforts.  Always remember that Jesus identified himself as among those called “least” as they, in the end, will be great.

Please be sure to watch these great videos as they show a few of the personal stories of the people the Clinic has helped.  Thanks and God bless.

2016 Video:

2015 Video:

2014 Video:

2013 Video:

Editing: Beta Readers

Here is the latest post by Angela and Daz Croucher to their blog A.D. Croucher! They are up-and-coming young adult authors. Check them out!

A.D. Croucher

Finally, the words you’ve been waiting for: Your draft is done!

You finally get to take a break. So power down your computer and relax… while you hand your manuscript over to… someone else.

Okay, so maybe relax is the wrong word. CRINGE might be more accurate. PANIC, definitely. SKIN-CRAWLING FEAR, possibly.

We’ve said before that writing can be an isolating experience. It’s just you, your computer, the wild and crazy thoughts in your head, and that beautiful bowl of peanut M&Ms (replace with the snack of your choice). It’s no wonder that bringing someone else into the mix feels so disconcerting. You might feel that what you wrote was awesome, just the way it is.

But once your draft is polished, the next step is sending it out into a little corner of the world for feedback. It’s gotta go.

But what that corner looks like is totally up to…

View original post 561 more words

Yessource: Yes live in London 7/31/71 (Tony Kaye’s last show in the ’70s)

Here are my latest uploads to YesSource, my Yes rarities youtube page (about which you can read here).  This post is another addition to my series of Yes music posts.  I started this series here and a collection of all my Yes-related posts is here.  Yes, of course, is a, if not the, premier progressive rock band, and I am an enormous fan of it.

You can see all of my Yessource uploads here.

My latest YesSource uploads can be found here:

• Yes Live: 7/31/71 – London – It’s Love (last Tony Kaye show in the ’70s)
• Yes Live: 7/31/71 – London – Yours is no Disgrace (last Tony Kaye show in the ’70s)
• Yes Live: 7/31/71 – London – America (last Tony Kaye show in the ’70s)
• Yes Live: 7/31/71 – London – I’ve Seen All Good People (last Tony Kaye show in the ’70s)

The United Shapes of Arithmetic: Take Us Back

Nathan Rudolph, my friend and fellow parishioner at St. John the Evangelist Anglican Church, has started a comic strip which I have greatly enjoyed and appreciated.  With his permission, I will repost them here after he posts them.  I think my readers will appreciate them as much as I do as they are rather insightful with a snarky edge.  Enjoy!

Here are the links to the previously posted strips:

• Whatever They Want
• Words (formerly “No Body Understands”)
• Dependence Day
• When Am I Ever
• I am a Hexagon!
• Exactly (formerly “Something Specific Something Vague”)
• We Evolved
• Disagrees With Me
• Mature Content
• Football
• A Part
• 1000 Words
• Shot or Stabbed
• Monkey Poo
• Take Us Back
• Get Along
• Respect
• Your Sign
• One Over Frequency
• Unique
• Communication
• Full of Fallacies
• Too Busy
• Wage Gap
• Word Change
• Age Identity

Here is the latest strip: