NO, I am not trying to compare myself to "Jesus" who I am difinitely NOT. This was the first image that came up when I googled "exhaustion image" , and other than the filth on his body (I just HOT SHOWERED), this is EXACTLY how I feel today.

>>> SO REASONS FOR, then ACTION TODAY:

First of all, I do NOT delude myself into thinking that just because the CIA in their manifestations of Facebook and Blogger seem to have completely CEASED their resistance to and harassment of me and my computer is flying faster than ever before (less or no hackers slowing me down), that the "WAR" against idiots is completely won. These kinds of people only admit defeat in THESE battles, so retreated to plan to use their energy elsewhere, regroup for a smarter attack, or get sneakier and perhaps more violent-by-surprise.

I'm exhausted now, but could rise to any challenge in a split second. I don't worry about an ambush, but WILL take today easy. Given my revelations over the weekend and the slowness of bodies like Harvard Lawyers and Episcopal Bishops to decide how to handle the possible RE-ASSIGNMENT of Tennessee Williams' estate, now likely valued close to ONE BILLION DOLLARS, of EIGHT times what the US Chamber of Commerce spent on ALL the 2012 political campaigns -- a truly MASSIVE amount of money!!!

And there is the matter of VERY SERIOUS CORRUPTION at the top of the Episcopal Church -- at least at Sewanee, the (former) Arch-diocese of Atlanta and ALL the subordinate diocese across the "Old South" whose bishops were copied on MY of my blog posts -- and many of whom I sent INDIVIDUAL EMAILS as well, not a SINGLE ONE was ever replied to!!!

Additionally, several in-the-know people have claimed to me that the CIA/Republicans/Episcopal Hierarchy simply PAID OFF the Harvard Legal Team so they would NOT investigate these crimes. I'm actually in no position to KNOW, and although I can PROVE at least eight lawyers at Harvard have been copied on EVERY SINGLE BLOG POST for 1.5 years -- that does not mean the CIA did not INTERCEPT all those emails.

They simply might not have gotten them.

Back here in Chacala, my landlady got a mysterious delivery of about 5 - 8 gallons of a water-density pink liquid in a plastic container from a beat-up old pick-up truck that had three more of these containers as well. I thought it bizarre -- and the only liquid I could think of that has that fluidity and color was gasoline back when some companies put light dye in it. Since the son has a car, it seems silly that they would get DELIVERY -- and what would they need gasoline for here ANYWAY??

The yard dogs and the five remaining puppies all crowded round it sniffing with interest for several minutes -- but not licking the cap or other area. If it was an OBNOXIOUS liquid, they would have gotten a sniff and immediately walked off. If it were something they found attractive, they would have licked it a bit -- but they didn't.

So for NOW, this chemical delivery remains a mystery.

Everyone knows the "Devil" (which I do not even believe in), had to have a stake driven through his heart or similar to keep from retooling and ROARING back. I do believe the DRAMA quotient of all things will now be LOWERED, so it's time to become more ADULT and begin the process of healing. I don't have to tell ANYONE who has had a REAL SCHOOL education in business or finance that the CONSTANT IMPENDING COLLAPSE of America due to her debt is nothing but a giant lie. Witness that we STILL are not over borrowed as much as we were at the end of WWII -- and our BIGGEST BOOM happened right after that!!! (and the Republican Dwight Eisenhower tax rates for the top wealthy were in the 80 - 90% bracket -- an increase that we will NOT likely have to fully have).

* * *

So -- not because the New York Times was kind enough to send an emissary to catch me at the Azalea Festival a year (two years???) ago to let me know they had BOUGHT OUT CARLOS SLIM, see 3/4 the way down here: http://scottkenan.blogspot.mx/2012/04/red-star-media-exposed.html , but because Paul Krugman GETS IT.

I especially invite my many friends who still are grasping the Republican FEAR MACHINES lies about the economy to read this carefully -- and then seek out NEUTRAL reports to see if you can confirm of deny Paul's claims:

>>> FROM HERE: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/28/opinion/krugman-makers-takers-fakers-.html?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto&_r=1& .

Op-Ed Columnist

Makers, Takers, Fakers

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: January 27, 2013 433 Comments

Republicans have a problem. For years they could shout down any attempt to point out the extent to which their policies favored the elite over the poor and the middle class; all they had to do was yell “Class warfare!” and Democrats scurried away. In the 2012 election, however, that didn’t work: the picture of the G.O.P. as the party of sneering plutocrats stuck, even as Democrats became more openly populist than they have been in decades.

Enlarge This Image

Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Paul Krugman

Go to Columnist Page »

Blog: The Conscience of a Liberal

As a result, prominent Republicans have begun acknowledging that their party needs to improve its image. But here’s the thing: Their proposals for a makeover all involve changing the sales pitch rather than the product. When it comes to substance, the G.O.P. is more committed than ever to policies that take from most Americans and give to a wealthy handful.

Consider, as a case in point, how a widely reported recent speech by Bobby Jindal the governor of Louisiana, compares with his actual policies.

Mr. Jindal posed the problem in a way that would, I believe, have been unthinkable for a leading Republican even a year ago. “We must not,” he declared, “be the party that simply protects the well off so they can keep their toys. We have to be the party that shows all Americans how they can thrive.” After a campaign in which Mitt Romney denounced any attempt to talk about class divisions as an “attack on success,” this represents a major rhetorical shift.

But Mr. Jindal didn’t offer any suggestions about how Republicans might demonstrate that they aren’t just about letting the rich keep their toys, other than claiming even more loudly that their policies are good for everyone.

Meanwhile, back in Louisiana Mr. Jindal is pushing a plan to eliminate the state’s income tax, which falls most heavily on the affluent, and make up for the lost revenue by raising sales taxes, which fall much more heavily on the poor and the middle class. The result would be big gains for the top 1 percent, substantial losses for the bottom 60 percent. Similar plans are being pushed by a number of other Republican governors as well.

Like the new acknowledgment that the perception of being the party of the rich is a problem, this represents a departure for the G.O.P. — but in the opposite direction. In the past, Republicans would justify tax cuts for the rich either by claiming that they would pay for themselves or by claiming that they could make up for lost revenue by cutting wasteful spending. But what we’re seeing now is open, explicit reverse Robin Hoodism: taking from ordinary families and giving to the rich. That is, even as Republicans look for a way to sound more sympathetic and less extreme, their actual policies are taking another sharp right turn.

Why is this happening? In particular, why is it happening now, just after an election in which the G.O.P. paid a price for its anti-populist stand?

Well, I don’t have a full answer, but I think it’s important to understand the extent to which leading Republicans live in an intellectual bubble. They get their news from Fox and other captive media, they get their policy analysis from billionaire-financed right-wing think tanks, and they’re often blissfully unaware both of contrary evidence and of how their positions sound to outsiders.

So when Mr. Romney made his infamous “47 percent” remarks, he wasn’t, in his own mind, saying anything outrageous or even controversial. He was just repeating a view that has become increasingly dominant inside the right-wing bubble, namely that a large and ever-growing proportion of Americans won’t take responsibility for their own lives and are mooching off the hard-working wealthy. Rising unemployment claims demonstrate laziness, not lack of jobs; rising disability claims represent malingering, not the real health problems of an aging work force.

And given that worldview, Republicans see it as entirely appropriate to cut taxes on the rich while making everyone else pay more.

Now, national politicians learned last year that this kind of talk plays badly with the public, so they’re trying to obscure their positions. Paul Ryan, for example, has lately made a transparently dishonest attempt to claim that when he spoke about “takers” living off the efforts of the “makers” — at one point he assigned 60 percent of Americans to the taker category — he wasn’t talking about people receiving Social Security and Medicare. (He was.)

But in deep red states like Louisiana or Kansas, Republicans are much freer to act on their beliefs — which means moving strongly to comfort the comfortable while afflicting the afflicted.

Which brings me back to Mr. Jindal, who declared in his speech that “we are a populist party.” No, you aren’t. You’re a party that holds a large proportion of Americans in contempt. And the public may have figured that out.