Apologies All the Way Around … October 20, 2013

Jonathots Daily Blog


I need one fromFalwell Jerry Falwell, Liberty University and all those people who participated in the Moral Majority, who inundated our society with vicious insults and threats.Bill Clinton

I would certainly like one from Bill Clinton for his part in making politics scandalous, phony and treacherous through his affair with the little girl.

Wouldn’t it be nice to get one from Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggart for taking the precious gospel of Jesus and turning it into a beach ball, which they batted around through greed, sexual exploitation?

I burning crosswould love to hear a bit of repentance from the American church, which remained silent while segregation raged for decades.

I also would welcome some reflection from the Tea Party, which thinks it has the right to stifle any ideas contrary to what they deem to be their common good.obama

And I certainly think we are due a bit of contrition from President Obama for biting off more than he could actually chew, and so anemically launching a campaign intended to relieve the suffering of the poor, only to further confound them.

Without an apology, we have a series of assumptions:

1. “You know that I know I’m a little bit wrong, so why do we need to talk about it?”

2. “It’s not as bad as it’s made out to be, and if I admit too much, I open myself up for my critics to disembowel me.”

3. “Get over it. Let’s move on. What benefit is there in focusing on our mistakes?”

4. “Nobody’s perfect. So why should we waste time examining our imperfections?”

These excuses have prevented us from being a nation that purges itself from stupidity but instead, keeps souveniers which we later display to our children–for them to pick up and resell.

We need apologies all around, if for no other reason than to make sure that the cursed attitudes that kept us repeating the same ridiculous processes can finally be buried in a grave with a tombstone warning us of the deadly results.

Since I don’t know if these individuals will ever come forward with contrition, let me start:

  • I want to apologize to all the people I spoke against in my past because I was ignorant of the freedom God gives to human beings to find their own path, without interruption from my scrutiny.
  • I apologize to my children for being overwrought, too lenient or just not available.
  • I apologize to my wife for being a less-than-adequate husband while trying to become a consummate artist.
  • And I apologize to myself for being a morbidly obese man my whole life, and so far never being able to find a way to unlock my fleshly prison.

You see? It’s not that hard.

And even after the apology is given, it’s a good thing, every once in a while, to remind people that those errors not only disrupted the natural order, but must never be repeated again.

How ’bout it, my friends?

Apologies all around?

The producers of jonathots would humbly request a yearly subscription donation of $10 for this wonderful, inspirational opportunity

Please contact Jonathan’s agent, Jackie Barnett, at (615) 481-1474, for information about personal appearances or scheduling an event

The Precedent of the United States … December 19, 2011

It’s happening again.
I’m not talking about the Christmas season, with the corncob pipe in Frosty’s mouth and Jesus lying in a hay-strewn manger. No, this is a much different straw poll. Politics is back with all its fury–and by fury, I mean infuriating tendencies. Same two candidates we always get. It just never changes. And they both want to be the Precedent of the United States.
Each of them is determined to form the policy for the next four years–or maybe even eight–based upon their particular died-in-the-wool, repetitive diatribe. What we have is Candidate WE ARE  and his opponent, Candidate WE WERE.
When you get down to their basic principles, the candidates have so much in common that they might actually be related, or get this, from the same country. Where they differ is that WE ARE insists that the nation is just as powerful, just as strong, just as entitled and just as destined to rule the world as we ever were. Contrarily, WE WERE  believes that life is evolving, the world is changing and the United States must find its place in the global community–not as a patriarch or even matriarch, but rather, a brother in the household.
The two sides hate each other. Each believes that every program proposed by the other side is detrimental to the well-being of the common good and will render us destitute, if not bankrupt, and did I mention–naked?
Let’s do some comparisons:
WE ARE believes in our nation’s ultimate “rightness.” Even though he seems to have a working knowledge of history, he feels guiltless about slavery (just a very temporary misunderstanding in personal relationships), our treatment of the Native Americans (what’s the problem? We gave them land and taught them how to deal Black Jack in casinos) the Civil War (which is normally referred to as the War Between the States and had nothing to do with slavery, but was just an aggressive disagreement over states’ rights) and the ongoing economic issues of our day (easily explained away as the ignorance and false moves of the WE WERE party.)  For WE ARE, everything is simple. “America is right, you should love it or leave it and to suggest anything contrary to that is to be unpatriotic, not supportive of the troops and makes Martha Washington cry.”
On the other hand, WE WERE loves to point out all the fallacies in the American capitalistic society while extolling virtues of the other systems of the world (which are equally flawed and much more inhumane and destitute of integrity). WE WERE tries to solve all problems by taxing the wealthiest citizens to provide sustenance for those who have no jobs or money, insisting that this is the only merciful and gracious thing to do, while painting all circumstances of our national treasures in history with the grayest hue and advocating for the weaknesses that exist in people as being the absence of self-esteem and lack of opportunity to succeed. WE WERE bleeds from the heart … and the treasury.
WE ARE thinks WE WERE does not love America. WE WERE thinks WE ARE is going to destroy the country by bringing the wrath of the world down on our arrogance.
They share one common miscue–they think there is no alternative but the two of them. WE ARE will become absolutely enraged if you insist that some of his doctrines and precepts have aged and grown yellow with time and might need updating. He still contends there is a common morality that can be adopted by every American citizen, like a little puppy from a pound that you take home,learn to nourish and housebreak. Likewise, WE WERE will sit in a corner and pout if you insinuate that people need to be motivated and require a bit of stimulus from their own souls instead of government interference to make any assistance that would come from the national mindset actually work in the private sector. WE WERE believes in throwing money at problems, as WE ARE believes in throwing problems at money.
WE ARE never met a rich person he didn’t coddle. WE WERE never encountered an underprivileged person who wasn’t misunderstood.
They have taken our country to the brink of futility simply to maintain traditions which they honor like washing dishes and putting them away carefully in scrubbed cupboards, thinking that’s what a good housekeeper does.
Obviously–we need a third choice.  We shall not get it because the power and might of WE ARE and WE WERE will encompass the air waves, and the Precedent of the United States will be purchased–every single time.
So its obvious what the Precedent of the United states will be if the WE ARE candidate wins. “We’re fine. We just need to dig, drill, scrape, encourage the rich to produce jobs and wait for the ball to bounce our way.”
It is also without question that if WE WERE wins the Precedent, it will be: “Something has to be done. We’re not quite sure what to do so let’s pursue the following ten expenditures, hoping that one of them will miraculously sprout some growth.”
We need a WE CAN candidate.
WE CAN would acknowledge that we are a people who have a history of innovation, but unfortunately much of that energy has been lost in a sea of self-righteousness and the doldrums of despair. WE CAN would encourage us to find “the better angels of ourselves” as Lincoln suggested, connoting strongly that there are bad angels who produce devilish results. WE CAN dares to admit there is a problem without insisting that it’s all our fault and that we must shoulder all the blame in order to participate. We require a WE CAN candidate. Yet such an innovator will  never emerge from the masses because he will be called unpatriotic by the WE ARE candidate and unsympathetic to the poor by the WE WERE proponent.
Yes, it’s that season again. Rudolph has a red nose, but nobody cares–because once again, we’re going to go through the facade of picking between two candidates to select the Precedent of the United States, who will once again, when elected, make us all look a little red-faced.


Here comes Christmas! For your listening pleasure, below is Manger Medley, Jonathan’s arrangement of Away in the Manger, which closes with him singing his gorgeous song, Messiah.  Looking forward to the holidays with you!


To see books written by Jonathan, click the link below! You can peruse and order if you like!


<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: