In this spoken‑word style monologue, Speaker A juxtaposes the futility of using violence to achieve peace with a passionate call for personal empowerment. The piece opens with the line “We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can’t bomb it into peace,” followed by a repeated exhortation for listeners to stand up, open a window, and shout “I’m as mad as hell and I’m not gonna take this anymore!” The speaker then shifts to a personal anecdote about questioning his mother regarding rumors of his father’s laziness, infidelity, and alleged misconduct, highlighting family dysfunction and betrayal. Speaker B interjects briefly with short, dismissive remarks (“I say, pow!” and “Nothing.”). The overall tone is confrontational, urgent, and emotionally charged, blending political protest with personal grievance.
Chapters
We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can't bomb it into peace.
I say, pow!
You've got to get mad. You've got to say, "I'm a human being. My life has value." I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell, "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not gonna take this anymore!" I know nothing.
Nothing.
I know nothing. Nothing. You know, I was a little inquisitive. I walked up to my momma and I said, "Hey momma, is it true what they say that Papa never worked a day in his life?" "No, there's a bad talk going around town. Talk about Papa had 3 outside children and another wife." "That ain't right." "Hey, they talk about Papa drinking soap on preaching. Talk about shaving soap on all the time leeches." "Stealing and lying, stealing and lying." Everybody give it a soul!
Hello, welcome to my show, From Rags to Middle Class. Tonight our guests are Ryan Johnson Kelmar and Oscar Gutierrez again to give us some more offbeat humor. So either next week or a week after, we'll have another constitutional attorney from the Southern California Institute of Law, and we'll be discussing civil procedure, the pro per litigant, and court reform. We had a similar show like that, but this attorney is uniquely interesting because he actually is very involved in court reform issues for the pro per litigant. So I think it'll be really interesting to get his opinion. But tonight, before Ryan and Oscar take over, I'm going to briefly go over my family law court case again. And describe why I am asking for reform in my book called "From Rags to Middle Class," which I might have a publisher looking at it. So I hope— wish me luck. My goal is to have Santa Barbara's family law court facilitators on my show to talk about how they can help people with their questions and paperwork. However, since I have a motion to increase— for an increase in child support, currently in front of the court, those guests might need to wait until the end of July to be on my show. So at the beginning of June, I will take a 3-week break before ending my show at the end of July to study for the bar. So I— but before I begin talking about family law reform, I want to take a few emails that I've gotten over the last couple weeks and answer them. I've thought about them, I've written a response, So my first question, which is actually very good, is how do you think— or the first question— your son feels about my talking about my family law case? And this is a really good question and one that I wrestle with. I remember when Ryan was in the second grade at Orca School, I had told him there was no Santa Claus and the other parents were literally mad at me. But I told Ryan there was no Santa Claus, so he did not think he was bad when he compared himself to his other more wealthier peers. Orca— there are a lot of families at Orca with a lot more money than we had, and I didn't want Ryan to feel like he was bad because Santa didn't bring him as many presents as the other kids. However, this year I was able to tell Ryan that he wasn't gonna get very many presents because he was bad. Just kidding. He got the joke. So, um, so yes, I do talk to Ryan also about money, and he knows his parents were not married. So what? He is loved by both of us. As far as my talking to Ryan about money and responsibility, my goal is that Ryan will be a man who will take responsibility for his actions. So I tell Ryan that even though his dad loves him and is nice to him, his dad is selfish to me in not paying his share. And I tell Ryan that it is very important to me that Ryan not be a selfish person when he grows up and to have a different attitude towards money. So that's my response. So my next email is, uh, during your show where you played the Secrets, the video, I agreed with your guest about the idea that asking the universe for what you want is the same as praying. This is to me kind of a weird question, but interesting. So I agree— so I disagree with that, that what I call creationism, not to be mixed up with the conservative rights definition of creationism, mine is more how you create your reality by looking at your thoughts. So for me, praying also carries with it imagery of a male figure who represents concepts of fear and guilt and heaven and hell. So praying as a young girl would have been, please God, I've been good, give me what I want, or please forgive me. But the concept of visualization and looking at your beliefs means that we have to take responsibility for our beliefs and experiences. But good news is that we can also change our experiences. There is no please or forgive me. You know, I was going to talk about court reform and update you on my civil case out of the Santa Cruz Court where I had 9 easements in dispute over a 3-acre property I owned in the Santa Cruz Mountains. And I am currently in the 6th District Court of Appeals. And if I believe in the power of visualization and creation, what I call creationism— I need a different word— I have to ask, why do I continue to experience our legal system as corrupt? And where judges have no conscience about how they apply the standards of law. I came up with what could be turned into a comedy dialogue by Kathy Griffith— Griffin, because her jokes focus on her mom and religion a lot. And so when I was growing up, I was raised by my mom who divorced my dad when I was 2 because he liked women and alcohol. So I constantly heard the mantra, "Men are just dessert." and luckily I still have a sweet tooth. Learn to rely on yourself and you can't rely on men. However, my mom was also born-again Christian and she would leave the Bible open on the table for us when we were teens. So for me, when I thought of the idea of surrendering to an authoritarian male figure in the sky called God the Father, this was quite confusing. So my question to my mom would be, "But Mom, I thought you couldn't rely on men. Which is it?" So maybe because I was taught that you can't count on male figures, especially authority figures, I experience a predominantly male judicial system as one for which you can't rely or trust. So I guess I need to spend more time with my beliefs about judges.
