WORDfudge

Church vs Mandate

2012-02-10T11:57:00.002-05:00

I considered jazzing up the title with something like CONTRA-DECEPTION, but this topic has been knocked around so much, I didn’t have the heart. It’s a labor rights issue, and yet both sides of the debate have contorted the conversation until it’s like reading current events on silly putty. Conservatives decry an assault on religious freedom. Liberals rally behind a woman’s right to preventative healthcare. And now our president has decided to grant further exception to the mandate. Are we in an election year or something?

Contrary to popular belief, there IS an exemption for religious employers included in the mandate already. Bloomberg reported that, “Houses of worship and nonprofit religious groups that primarily employ and serve people of the same faith would be exempt, while religious hospitals and universities would not.” Big shocker, people of different faiths work for Catholic-based institutions: professors, nurses, secretaries, janitors, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, probably some Buddhists and atheists in the mix as well.

So, are religious institutions people too, my friend?

If anyone has threatened religious freedom and liberty, it’s the Catholic Church. It wants nothing to do with contraception, even when that means denying healthcare options for non-Catholics. Even as groups like the Catholic Health Organization come out in support of women’s contraception. Even as President Obama announces a further compromise to the mandate, asking insurance companies to pay for the services. Even then, Catholics balk.

Not that I’m insensitive to the beliefs of other people, but we aren’t talking about the right of Catholics to hold beliefs. They can believe what they want about the morning after pill. This is about an employer denying workers a portion of their healthcare coverage. How long before other businesses deny their workers something based on belief? Entire markets would find religion for just that purpose.

And as an afterthought, I’m not wild about tax exemption for religious institutions; I just don’t have a “league” behind me to organize. Yet.

Making Peace

2012-02-07T23:29:00.000-05:00

Writing about peace was a conflict in itself for me. See, writers are not exactly known for our serene connections to the world. Many of us relate to peace like a nutty professor stalks a cure. And when you factor in the scarcity of peace from which to draw inspiration, the result is a frustrated and highly caffeinated soul. I’m forced to make it up as I go.

Oh sure, I find peace in small doses, like in the laughter of children or a sunrise on the meadow, but never the long lasting, cross boundary peace I’ve read so much about in dictionaries. No harmony among all peoples. No freedom from violence and strife. Instead, I read about war and apartheid and Third World conditions. Threats of nuclear annihalation. Pirates roaming our international waters.

The atmosphere in America is somewhat muted (though everyone I know is packing heat these days). I can see another element at work, a human element that aggravates our situation. Enforced civility and political correctness. Conversations edited for content and time. Plenty of tension below the surface, yet the expectation is to hold all that tension inside. It’s like we believe peace is achieved only through peaceful methods, as if the goal is to avoid conflict of any kind.

In fact, we want peace so badly, we settle for immediate peace-like substitutes. We lose sight of larger, cross-personal goals by pursuing our own peace of mind. It’s a bunch of ego-fluffing nonsense and it gets us nowhere. Conflict can produce amazing results if channeled properly and people are open to it. But that means we must ask those uncomfortable questions. We must challenge harmful beliefs. We must be willing to offend others.

Most important, we must find the courage to endure our own difficult thoughts and feelings. When I hear people discussing peace, they point outside themselves to explain how the world should be different. Lots of great ideas, but their solutions usually favor themselves. It’s much different to say that our problems begin in each one of us, individually, because of our perspective on things, our expectations, our personal needs. The more we recognize that fact, the more we break free from our selves and realize our true potential.

I believe this phenomenon spreads when it finds purchase in enough individuals. Think of how a work atmosphere would improve if people felt safe to give and receive criticism about their job or coworkers. And if they’re being really honest with themselves, think of how many people might find their “perfect job” sooner.

Consider the power of the American electorate if we could admit how vulnerable we are to political spin and white-washed explanations. Not because we’re stupid, but because we’re human. We can’t know everything all the time. If we would embrace that weakness, I believe we would put more effort into finding out for ourselves and less faith in politicians. Our voting percentages would skyrocket.

Can we broaden this topic internationally? Imagine how different the conflict between Israel and Palestine would be if the rest of us demanded they find terms other than religious ones to negotiate on… since those will never coincide. Does that sound shortsighted of me? Only because we deem it acceptable to threaten global security over possession of religious property. Imagine how every religious conflict might vanish if we would remind religious people that no man speaks for God.

There are numerous other conflicts out there to illustrate my point, and they all boil down to people struggling to manage their inner realities. The best way to achieve a long-lasting peace would be to teach every one of us to make peace from within. I dare say it’s the only way.

Submitted for “Writers for Peace”

Antioch University Midwest, 2011

Damned Good

2012-01-03T22:51:00.000-05:00

Chuck Palahniuk has taken his readers to many places: the warehouse headquarters of a homegrown terrorist organization; the backseat of a cross-country drug and cross-dressing scandal; the sleazy backroom studio that creates “adult” films. But until his recent novel Damned, Palahniuk chose only to write about concrete settings. He’s never ventured into speculative territory like Hell for the setting of one of his stories. It’s new territory for him and it’s great.

The story’s heroine, Madison, is only thirteen when she finds herself in Hell. As it turns out, the extreme views of Evangelicals and Southern Baptists are all true, making Madison’s pot smoking a mortal sin. At first, Madison is in a rusty cage like other prisoners of Hell, but she soon discovers a way to escape that starts her on a journey through the underworld and ends, of all things, with a transformation in Madison herself. She finds new strength and confidence in hopelessness, and uses it like a weapon to the end.

Palahniuk does a great job of painting a Hell we all can find eternally grotesque and torturous. For example, the landscapes are a patchwork of naturally discarded materials from mortal mankind, things like toenail clippings and scabs and other unsavory things. Palahniuk also creates rules for Hades, and a currency from those candies nobody likes on Earth, even employment opportunities through the exciting and expanding field of telemarketing. It’s all so gleefully hideous and believable.

I gobbled this book up, but then, I love Chuck Palahniuk. His writing is clear and descriptive. It contains a definite pulse as he uses themes and certain phrases to tell his story. I feel like every word has weight and meaning. My only trouble was the continuing aspect of Damned. I’m used to Palahniuk’s novels building to a wonderful crescendo that ties everything together by the end, and the continuing element to this story cut that effect short. But that just makes the wait for the sequel all the more difficult. Check out the website for Chuck Palahniuk called "THE CULT".

[Originally posted at books((dot))AUM]

Very Merry

2011-12-24T20:00:00.002-05:00

Weapons of (Culture) War

2011-12-11T19:00:00.001-05:00

Let’s face it: issuing a PRESIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM in favor of LGBT rights isn’t exactly legislation, but it’s a bold stance for Obama nonetheless. It commits the United States to one side of a global debate on various gay, lesbian, and transgendered issues, a debate that has yet to be resolved among Americans.

Though approval of gays and lesbians HAS INCREASED over the years, there’s still a core of Americans who steadfastly refuse to validate LGBT issues. Two Republican presidential candidates rushed forward to CAPTURE THE HATE VOTE by condemning Obama’s recent support of the LGBT community. Rick Santorum spoke with his usual passivity, referring to the gay lifestyle as apart from what is traditional. Rick Perry was more cavalier about it, pitting gay soldiers against Santa Claus in a campaign ad. To Perry and others like him, Obama is “waging war on traditional values” by supporting gays and lesbians.

Yeah, about that whole culture war thing… remember that conservatives raised their religious beliefs as a weapon against the LGBT community not long ago. Back in 2004, the question of the sanctity of marriage was Issue 1 on ballots across the country. Conservatives shamelessly flogged their “traditional values” to galvanize the vote and reelect a Republican president. And it worked.

But when you elevate an issue to national scrutiny, it doesn’t go away so easily. Gays and lesbians remained visible long after George Bush’s second term began, on television, in advertising, in jokes, in the news. People took another look at gay relatives and coworkers. Obviously, such scrutiny worked in favor of the LGBT community over time. It worked so well, an American president finally spoke of their struggles to a global audience.

So really, if there’s a war on traditional values, it’s because culture warriors wage it constantly, brandishing those values like so many knives. When religious beliefs are invoked on the national level, people get a chance to scrutinize those beliefs, maybe even see through them. Social conservatives would be wise to learn from this.

the Mandate Debate

2011-11-16T12:17:00.001-05:00

In March of next year, the U.S. Supreme Court will REVIEW THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT signed into law by President Obama. Not the whole law, mind you, just the mandate requiring all Americans to have health insurance. For example, one Florida official suggests such a mandate threatens personal liberty:

“We have urged swift judicial resolution because of the unprecedented threat that the individual mandate poses to the liberty of Americans simply because they live in this country,” said Pam Bondi, Attorney General for the state. And twenty-five other states roughly agree.

Americans are mandated to purchase certain forms of insurance already, such as liability insurance for drivers or earthquake insurance for Californians. Opponents of the health insurance mandate argue that those other mandates are not the same. They say that we don’t have to own a home or drive a car in this country, so we should be able to wiggle out of health insurance coverage as well.

But in order for this logic to work, they would have to figure out a way to avoid participating in American health care before they avoid paying for insurance. See, this is the real tyranny coming down on the anti-Affordable Care folks. The potential to get hurt is very real in our lives, and so is the potential to be cared for by the healthcare industry.

God forbid, we could choke at a restaurant. We could get in a serious auto accident. We could get hurt on the job and be required to visit an emergency room. There’s not a lot of opportunity to opt out of care while you’re severely bleeding or unconscious. But there is a way to avoid paying for medical treatment. Several ways, in fact.

That's the point. People need health care all the time for unexpected and costly problems, but since many are not insured, they duck payment or declare poverty. That cost then shifts to the hospitals, doctors’ offices, and eventually, the insured patients who visit those health care providers. All of which makes this a matter of national commerce.

Hey, I don’t like buying more insurance, but I can’t think of a way to guarantee that I’ll never use health care without paying. Can any of you?

Pedophile Fan Club

2011-11-11T02:50:00.001-05:00

The situation unfolding at Penn State disgusts me on more than just the obvious level. Most everyone I know finds it despicable when the rape of adolescents is kept quiet. But that attitude seems to change thecloser you get to PSU campus. In fact, students are actually rioting in favor of Coach Joe Paterno.Overturning trucks and tearing down lamp posts, general hoodlum behaviorbecause their beloved coach covered up one teeny tiny raping of a ten year oldboy.

I can understand loving someoneand feeling conflicted about an uncovered scandal, but rage? Rioting? You bratsneed to recognize a crucial fact here. ANYONE who puts the security of auniversity’s reputation before that of a ten-year-old boy should be fired. Infact, I’m going to go so far as to say they should be set on fire, becauseobviously they can live with a heavy secret like that in defense of their Almamadder.

On the upside, Ashton Kucheradmitted to his tiny gaff on Twitter, and I commend him for that. So... we’re cool.

Happy Halloween!

2011-10-30T11:17:00.002-04:00

Occupied by the People

2011-10-10T20:25:00.002-04:00

I’m not surprised that Republicans and members of the Tea Party are bashing the protesters at OCCUPY WALL STREET. First, it’s an impossible movement to co-opt, as opposed to the Tea Party’s blatant sponsorship by American Crossroads and copious Koch Brothers’ cash. Second, demonstrations have appeared in every major American city, including overseas locations like Britain and Africa, making it much larger than the Tea Party. And third, both reasons 1 & 2 make the established one percent of American wealthy very nervous indeed.

Really though, that seems the goal of the demonstrations: to show their frustration. They are the pent up energy in America today, and they’re finally letting it out. I’ve heard many talking heads scream for the Occupy Wall Street crowds to focus on a message, or to reach out to members of Congress. But doing so could corrupt this movement like it did with the Tea Party. Besides, legislation is not their responsibility. Other, more connected individuals who are sympathetic to the cause will push for legislation. Average Americans do their part by voting and by signing petitions for issues they care about. AND by expressing their outrage when their voices are ignored.

I’ve seen a couple amendments and petitions appear since the movement sprung to life a month ago. Dillan Ratigan has been extremely outspoken about the need to GET MONEY OUT of politics. More familiar organizations like the NATIONAL ACTION NETWORK have scheduled demonstrations appealing to congressional figures to act on jobs legislation. Even corporations like BEN & JERRY’S Ice Cream have endorsed the Occupy Wall Street movement as something that’s long overdue.

As for a message from Occupy Wall St. (et. al), they repeatedly remind the media and anyone watching that they are the 99% ... the vast majority of American citizens. And by citizens, they mean WARM BODIES as opposed to COLD HARD CASH. They’re proving their wealth in numbers day by day. Keep it peaceful, gang, and keep it up!

The 'Job Creators'

2011-10-07T01:50:00.002-04:00

With the rise of the OCCUPY WALL STREET protests in New York City, there’s been a lot of legitimate discussion about money in politics. I say ‘legitimate’ because the protesters aren’t spewing political talking points like ‘no taxes’ or ‘less spending.’ They’re pointing to the financial sector, not Washington D.C., as the source of the problem. Politicians loosened the reigns on Wall St., but bankers and corporate entities were the ones running amok, taking radical risks at the expense of the stability of our country.

Which makes it all the more gut wrenching when I hear politicians shill for corporate and financial interests. We’ve heard them for almost a year now spewing nonsense. “Big businesses, banks and lenders, millionaires and billionaires… they create jobs in this country.” Yeah, thanks for placing the cart before the horse. The truth is that businesses ONLY create jobs when those jobs improve their ability to serve more customers and clientele and thus make more money. Consumers need those few extra dollars in their hands FIRST before greedy assholes can get at them with products and services and not for profit donations.

In any other conversation, you’d be crazy to suggest that a business would hire employees without sufficient consumer demand to justify that hiring. And yet, this same bullshit passes for logical discourse in Congress. In fact, certain politicians are getting all misty-eyed about hurting or overtaxing those innocent, patriotic tycoons. Because if we question the financial sector or the Free Marketeers, they get real bad scared and withhold prosperity for the rest of America.

Average Americans are starting to see through the politicorporate spin, the constant campaign to define our reality for us. They’ve taken to the streets across the country in protest. And it’s a good step, but it’s not the only step the 99% of Americans can take against our financial overlords... Are you sitting down? Because most people don’t like the second option available to them. Won’t even acknowledge it...

If we want to take back power from corporate interests, and we don’t want to fight with the police on Wall St., we could always stop consuming so much. Right? We can stop feeding that beast so much. We could try and be satisfied with less. That way, we’d have fewer wants and needs that corporate interests could capitalize on.

Yes, the richest 1% would survive; they’ve been making money off of their money for years, and that won’t stop any time soon. But that 1% won’t thrive. They won’t have opportunities for growth. It would be a kick to a crotch that has so far lorded high above us. Talk about power!

Favorite Fantasy (XII)

2011-10-04T00:18:00.002-04:00

A floating, evil-eyed bomb beast!

I’ve traveled East Ivalice for over a hundred and forty hours now, searching for answers to my questions. The conflict brewing here has engrossed several neighboring countries, yet our adventure party has long since strayed from the heroism gig in order to plunder the depths of FINAL FANTASY XII. The free roaming atmospheres allow us to hunt those unique targets and tackle side quests at our leisure. In my opinion, it’s an RPG paradise…

Unfortunately, my opinion counts for squat in the gaming galaxies. Many other players threw a fit about FF XII, forcing SquareEnix to re-re-revamp their gaming engine. The redesigned mechanics of Final Fantasy XIII (thirteen) appeal to the real-time action gaming crowd… you know, those dainty young minds that don’t like a lot of menus or turn-taking in their video games. I still can’t understand why those gamers want to play RPGs in the first place, or why a mega company like SquareEnix would appeal to them over hardcore role players like myself. I felt the recent changes were so awful and distracting, I didn’t even finish FF XIII. Instead, I returned to Ivalice in order to rediscover what makes this Final Fantasy game so great (in my unqualified opinion).

Brother against brother.

Experiencing the storyline for the second time has given me new appreciation for it. It’s a dramatic tale of rival nations battling for supremacy, with the next generation of leaders torn between conquest and peaceful coexistence. The game was released shortly after Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, so it has a ton of Star Wars similarities in it (much like FF XIII has a slew of Transformer similarities). Flying ships, advanced technology and magic fused together, stuff like that. I never found drama to translate well into video gaming characters; their faces look stiff and plastic to me, and at a time when emotional expressions are needed. This game does pretty well for a PS2 original.

With that said, the play mechanics are what really draw me to the game. If you’ve ever played a Final Fantasy, you know how tedious it can be to maintain characters during battles. Since you come across a lot of the same enemies in an area, you find yourself performing the same actions over and over, casting the same spells, and healing party members continuously. It gets monotonous.

A little help here, please!

But in FF XII, characters can be programmed with a series of prioritized actions they perform during battles. This is extremely helpful when it comes to removing status effects like poison and raising KO’d party members, but it also makes fighting fun. It’s like your party is backing you up as you fight. Critics say that these programmed ‘gambits’ allow the game to play itself, entirely removing the need for a player. I disagree with that. I still maintain characters and make crucial decisions during every battle… but my mind is free from other, more obvious decisions that play out automatically (like a character falling below 30% health and knowing she needs to replenish).

The Phon Coast

Each region of East Ivalice is a series of area maps strung together, allowing players the chance to walk from one end of the land to the other, fighting, searching, and gathering experience. Enemies roam the terrain visibly, often providing the adventure party an opportunity for a strategic attack or even a stealthy pass when characters are inexperienced.

And the land is beautiful! Breathtaking even, sometimes frightening or mysterious. The frigid mountain palace in the Paramina Rift. The steamy Golmore Jungles. Sprawling cityscapes such as Rabanastre or the foreign empire of Arcades. The designers meticulously crafted each area. No flat and cornered maps here, friends. There are little believable touches everywhere. My favorite by far has been the Feywood near Giruvegan: a haunted forest shrouded in fog and an oily, reflective mist. So mysterious… it’s fantastic!

My crew, Balthier and Fran

Our party is currently roaming the Henne Mines, grinding like hell for experience, whacking at undead vampyr bats that don’t know when to quit. My strongest players are Balthier the sky pirate and his strange Vierra companion, Fran. They fight alongside Vaan, the plucky young hero who really has no depth or personality in this story and thus provides the perfect vessel to make him whoever you’d like him to be. I’ve got Vaan maxed at level 99, a feat I’ve never accomplished before in an RPG. I always get bored in the 70s. But the game play in FF XII is that addictive.

With the numerous side quests and special hunts and leveling opportunities and optional espers to tame, over a hundred forty hours of play so far, I have no clue why SquareEnix panicked and drastically changed their engine to something so horrible. Perhaps it’s true that Final Fantasy fandom is divided into real-time whores and turn-based pussycats. And if that’s the case, we may experience a few more lurches before the war over this issue is finally won. Fair warning to real-time gamers: we turn-based nerds have a lot of patience, and we love to grind an issue endlessly. Let this one go.

Monthly Writing Prompts

2011-09-15T20:37:00.000-04:00

America, Inc.

2011-08-26T20:53:00.000-04:00

RE: "How to Lose Readers (Without Even Trying)"

To Sam Harris: Sorry to hear that people pushed back against your article on taxing the wealthy. Reading your blog, though, it feels like you still want them to get it… to understand the value of supporting the society in which they do business. You might as well give that up. Even if they DID get it, they’d argue against a fair, supportive society. That society creates a difficulty environment for someone to gain advantage over others and thus profit. And that’s not how they made their millions and billions of dollars, now is it?

To reach the wealthy, we must appeal to their gold-plated sensibilities. Forget their human side for a moment and hit them in the coin purse. Ask them HOW all their wealth has value. Not WHAT, but HOW. They want to talk about WHAT they have and WHAT the government takes away. But HOW does all that stuff have worth to begin with? Is there something about the green ink they use to print those millions of dollars that makes them so damn great to have? What cosmic force unites the various business sectors and private investors to create an economy in which those businesses thrive?

People of wealth are too far removed from the perceptual framework of survival. It’s more difficult for them to take a step back and see the foundation upon which they build their empires. We must remind them HOW they are wealthy, over and over again, or they’ll get lost in their profit margins. America has a mixed economy for a reason…

Eventually, this train of thought leads to the point you want to make, Sam: sustaining society is a good thing. But they must see it from THEIR point of view, not one of a rational human being. We are consumers, investors, and borrowers. The cheaper it is to survive, the more money we consumers have to spend building, traveling, baby booming, or whatever else Americans do when not stressed over their immediate needs.

The rich will “get it,” but only when you define society as something corporations and businesses INVEST IN to get more return. Maybe even create a bunch of spreadsheets and graphs for them to argue about in board meetings. They’ll identify with that. Investing in “economic infrastructure” is the safest, sanest way to keep money printing in order for wealthy executives to earn. Bubbles burst. Bailouts bite the big one. Better to think ahead.

I realize that “corporations are people, too,” and in more ways than Mitt Romney will admit to, but you – man of reason, Sam Harris – you cannot treat them as if they’re human beings. They’re not. They’re super humans: brains with multiple arms and multiple voices penetrating our lives, drawing from us in order to sustain themselves. If they’re going to treat us like cattle, at least keep us well fed.

I'm just sayin'...

Limit Breaker!

2011-08-16T20:36:00.005-04:00

I’ve taken a slow but deliberate step back from other people in recent years. My brain was approaching critical mass... again. Not the first time. I'm still politely social. I still go to work and the gym and the grocery. Otherwise, I'm not in the mood for other people. There's a particular dimension of human behavior at work in some people that, until recently, has eluded me. But at last, I'm gaining clarity on it and myself.

I guess I’ve always known about it in some form or another. I’ve been attracted to it, mesmerized by it, and compelled to argue with it. I’m talking about those who perceive and interpret the world in terms of themselves. They cannot relate to a thing unless they project themselves on it somehow. They treat people as means to various ends.

It’s not in everyone, mind you, at least not in concentrated form. But, the more aware I become of it, the more I see of it. I've heard it called egocentrism, self-centeredness, even Narcissistic Personality Disorder in extreme cases. But I’ve opted for ease and aesthetics by calling it psychic vampirism; people who feed on the psychic energy of others in order to sustain themselves in a social environment.

And since that name contains spooky, supernatural terms, let’s get real specific here. ‘Vampire’ implies someone who drains others of their essence, and ‘psychic’ points to the mental and emotional dimension of human experience; those inner states of being that are wholly our own. Psychic vamps don’t suck blood, nor do they leech us of material possessions or money. In fact, the self-absorbed are very good at buying or giving stuff, or paying one’s way, or designated driving. But these are superficial methods to entice others closer in order to feed off their minds and hearts.

They drain us without reciprocating those same basic needs for love and attention, care, interest, meaningful conversations. Psychic vampires are incapable of those things, I think. They manage to put on a good show. Hell, some of them will even ask you how your day was. But listen closely. What they're really doing is setting up the conversation to talk about another aspect of themselves. It sounds a little like: “How was your day? Oh really, because I’m exhausted from work, and here are a few reasons why, blah and blah. Ultimately I discovered a new recipe for chicken cashew while on the internet. You know, I’ve saved money and kept slim by cooking at home. Do you read Cosmo?” And on and on, never noticing they've hijacked the conversation for their perverse and ongoing personal display.

Psychic vampires also have problems that are so massive, they require multiple people to help and provide support. Or at least that's how they explain them. Every friend and family member has a part to play. God help anyone that doesn't fall in line. But strangely, when you try to lean on vamps in the same way, they aren’t there. They cannot be there for you. In fact, they brush you off with a cold indifference and redirect the conversation to them. Big surprise.

Such attention to one’s self is natural on occasion. It helps our survival if we take stock on occasion. It boosts our morale to tell others of our accomplishments, and helps us shoulder problems when others listen. It’s part of maintaining healthy relationships among fellow human beings. But we’re not talking occasional. Psychic vampires literally nest in their relationships. They pad themselves with the warmth and attention of other people.

By now, I’m sure you’re shaking your head slowly, saying to yourself, “That boy’s been hurt.” And you’d be right. I grew up meeting the needs of other people FIRST in order to get my own needs met. In fact, I managed my loved ones like circus animals on parade because, really, that’s what they were. They were too busy meeting their own needs to stop and help me with mine. Throughout my life, I found myself attracted to similar people in social and personal circles. We reciprocated materially, but there was another dimension to the relationships that psychic vampires couldn’t share with me.

I’ve had to learn this the hard way, slogging through years of my own self-loathing, hiding beneath any number of friends and romantic interests that would expect me to handle them, to care for them, ask about them, admire them, and in return, they would let me bask in their splendor I suppose. It’s exhausting, not to mention demeaning in subconscious ways. And the hardest part is that I move toward that, again and again, allowing it to drain me of psychic resources until I can’t bare it any longer. Then I retreat.

This time, however, I’m not going to be a victim about all this. Sure, I’ve ranted for a few paragraphs, but ultimately I’ve cultivated an awareness of psychic vampires because I’m susceptible to them. I’m a ‘giver,’ or someone who ‘copes,’ or some might say a ‘controller.’ I bring this upon myself, and I’m ready to take some responsibility.

So, instead of hating them, I’ve become vigilant about psychic vampires. It may take me a while, but I can spot them now based on their tendencies. I realize they probably don’t see what they’re doing. That doesn’t make the behavior any less harmful to me. In fact, it makes it worse since I wind up arguing with them about an unknown variable. How do you discuss matters of perception with people who won’t step out of theirs? You can’t win.

Besides, it’s high time I started thinking of MY needs. I've started to weigh every relationship in my life these days to determine whether that person gives whatever they take from me psychically. And if they don’t, then I disconnect myself from them. Politely. And if that sounds catty, so be it. If I have to accept a lack of awareness in others as part of their being human, then they have to accept my lack of patience for that same reason.

Boehner Disfunction

2011-07-28T22:38:00.000-04:00

Never let 'em see you sweat from your eyes...

Invaders from Graffiti Planet!!

2011-07-10T19:28:00.000-04:00

on the fate of men

2011-07-02T20:13:00.000-04:00

"Men are not prisoners of fate, only prisoners of their own mind."

~ Theodore Roosevelt

life, liberty, & the pursuit of sausages

2011-07-02T20:05:00.003-04:00

Even though the title caused me to grab this book off the shelf, the story kept me interested throughout. Like other British novelists, Holt uses adverbs and qualifiers excessively, and every narrative situation happens as if we’re all sitting at tea. And come to think of it, the characters never did get around to pursuing sausages. Still, Holt had some marvelous ideas about the nature of time and space, and was able to weave them (if not a bit eccentrically) through the mysterious nature of the riddle “Which came first? Chicken or the egg?” Worth a read if you’re searching for fun and science fiction together.

Posted on Google Books, May 19, 2011. (4 stars)

EARTH: THE BOOK

2011-07-02T19:59:00.000-04:00

The Daily Show crew has put together another comedic gem with “Earth: The Book”. This next installment in their “educational series” presents itself as a textbook on all things physically, culturally, historically, and spiritually Earth-related. There’s humor inside for everyone: the old, the young, males, females, Chinese people, and even politicians. And best of all, its perfect to read in the bathroom! What more could you ask?

Posted on Google Books, May 19, 2011 (4 stars)

ON COOPERATION

2011-06-21T03:49:00.000-04:00

"Competition has been shown to be useful up to a certain point and no further, but cooperation, which is the thing we must strive for today, begins where competition leaves off."

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

ON GETTIN' PAID

2011-06-17T01:05:00.005-04:00

"If you're going to be crazy, you have to get paid for it or else you'll be locked up."

Hunter S. Thompson

Sarah from Alaska

2011-06-16T21:26:00.003-04:00

I was a little ashamed to admit I was reading a book about Sarah Palin. Like all things Palin, I expected more drama than policy, and to that end, this book did not disappointed. But Sarah from Alaska showed me Palin the governor, before the campaign trail and her popularity with culture warriors. It revealed a conservative woman who reached across the isle to accomplish big things for Alaska. Someone I may have voted for even. As for the narrative, it’s mostly bare bones reporting, but that makes for a quick read. I’m glad I dedicated a day or two to get to know Sarah from Alaska.

Posted to Google Books on June 16, 2011. (3 stars)

ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE: UPDATE

2011-06-15T12:12:00.000-04:00

Watch for falling body parts

Breaking developments in the Apocalypse, ladies and gentlemen. It’s been nearly 16 hours since reports first came in about living corpses wandering the streets, attacking citizens, and moaning for brains. After a hectic investigation, top military personnel have uncovered an explanation for this abomination.

READERS ARE URGED TO TAKE THE FOLLOW EMERGENCY STEPS: 1) SEEK IMMEDIATE SHELTER 2) TURN ON ZOMBIE-RELATED MEDIA AND THEN MOVE AWAY FROM THE TELEVISION 3) GENERATE UNDEAD CONTENT FOR DEFENSE PURPOSES; BLOG, TWEET, CREATIVE WRITE 4) STAY CALM! HELP IS ON THE WAY

Direct from the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., a de-classified report of scandalous consumer abuses perpetrated by big budget studios in Hollywood, CA. Armed raids on the research facilities of three major motion picture studios revealed devastating evidence of human brain testing. Many of the documents seized are still under investigation by the FBI, but what we’ve learned so far will shock you.

The fans are coming!

In 1998, research scientists discovered proof that the love of zombie-related films was itself mindless and ravenous. They isolated ‘zombie fandom’ in the brain and found the best way to target it was through simple exposure to blood and gore. Fandom doesn’t require good story or believable plot developments, just lots of necrotic zombie flesh, cannibalistic behavior, and explosive headshots using an assortment of artillery.

Backed by corporate sponsorship, studios invested billions of dollars to intensify the experience of zombie films, hoping to over-stimulate fandom and thus create dependency. They saturate films and television with zombie themes and ideas for nearly a decade, raking in profits that defied themselves each year.

Fancy some human flesh?

But scientists underestimated the level of dedication involved with zombie fandom. They never counted on fans exposing themselves to those graphic and realistic images over and over and over and over again. The results were far more devastating than addiction. The neuro-chemical seat of zombie fandom rotted from within. And once that critical portion of the brain has been afflicted, fans must be fed a steady stream of undead entertainment or else they revolt. Literally, their cellular structures rebel against them and they become the very thing they crave.

And now, plagued by a shortage of zombie entertainment, this rebellion has taken hold. As Americans shift their infatuation to super heroes and serial comedies, corporate sponsorship has all but dried up for zombie films. Fandom attempted to satisfy its cravings on The Walking Dead series on A&E, but that only lasted for one season. Certain authors have tried to pick up the slack, inserting zombie references into otherwise classical works of fiction. There’s a Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, an Abe Lincoln, Zombie Killer, and a twist on that timeless classic, The Adventures of Huck Finn and Zombie Jim. But it was too little, too late.

President Obama has issued a national state of emergency while military personnel rush zombie film festivals to every major movie theater in America. Once these buildings are destroyed, an estimated 87% of the undead infestation should be eradicated, allowing teams of black-op soldiers to move in for strategic kills as necessary. Until then, citizens have been ordered to arm themselves with zombie stories; blog posts, tweets, dirty limericks, anything to placate the masses of ravenous fandom wandering our streets.

Stay tuned to our blog affiliate, W-FDG, for the latest fictional news as it develops.

THIS CAT FOOD WILL SELF-DESTRUCT

2011-05-31T00:13:00.006-04:00

"Make with the food or I take out your kneecaps."

Few people recognize the dangers they face when handling a can of cat food. It’s an assault on cat owners everywhere, in fact, physically, mentally, and in extreme cases, emotionally. Sure, the commercials make those tins look harmless. Just peel back the lid and behold! A sumptuous protein feast swims in its own gravy amid slender carrot chunks and other bits. The meal slides effortlessly on to the plate, often in the shape of the animal that gave its life. The cat rushes in on cue, eats, and then bonds lovingly with her owner. It should be criminal to mislead the public like this.

Nothing could be more dangerous than a can of cat food in the hands of an unsuspecting owner. Of course, human error takes some small responsibility (because a human usually has cash and opposable thumbs). But those tin cans are designed to break through an owner’s defenses, lulling him to sleep with pastel colors and happy, serene pictures of cats. Those corporate bastards have obviously done their homework. Most people move right past the safer bags of dry food. Before he knows, the cat owner reaches for a can of such and such pâté, now with crunchy things, completely unaware of the potential blood and sacrifice in his hand. Domestic hand grenades, two for a dollar.

Consider the metal ring on top. Familiar enough. Seen it on a thousand soda cans and more, right? The brain recalls the same motions, pull back on the tab and replace, and sends those signals down the arm to the hand. But a tin ring is cheap. It pulls the lid half an inch away before it snaps off, creating a hole just large enough, say, for the typical owner’s finger to wedge in and pry it open. It’s also a hole small enough to slice hunks of skin away with the effort. And since few people open cans of cat food near a first aid station, the owner has to rush to the bathroom to tend to his gashed up finger marinating in protein ooze. Extensive testing reveals that this scenario comes up often enough to mention here, and that each time, the cut stings like motherfucker.

Once started, the owner must finish opening the can as soon as possible. Cat food is deadly serious to cats. Just look at their desperate eyes or the way their ears pivot back and forth when you open a can. They know that sound, that signature pop and release of air followed by thin metal cleaving away. Never mind that the kitchen stinks almost immediately, a sharp smell like garbage, which means even deaf cats have a way of homing in on the tin can once it’s activated. Those ripe odors attract every living creature within a few yards of the dish. Bugs love cat food, and mice too, which should say something right there. But cats only become more ravenous, as if they sense their competition scuttling nearer.

The pressure is mounting by now. A typical owner just wants to feed his damn cat and sit back down. But the devil’s tin, that antique puzzle box, it refuses to let go of the spongy meat cake no matter how it’s shaken or fingered. It makes a sucking sound like it wants to let go, like it’s trying to push the food free from inside. It’s really laughing, though; gagging as it catches its breath. If only scientists could pinpoint the escape velocity of cat food from tin cans. But then, the calculations are heinously complex, involving variables like the size of the can, the contents (both meat and slime coating), distribution of air pockets, firmness of grip (number of fingers and their placement), speed of the arm, even the level of panic motivating the cat around the owner’s legs. Too many things to consider. The typical cat owner doesn’t stand a chance. If even one of these variables is exceeded, the results are catastrophic. Namely, the cat food flies free of the can and hits the plate with such force that it slides right off the counter, shattering, nearly decapitating the cat. The meat rolls away and lands in a pile of cat fur gathered in the corner, as is found in a typical cat owner’s home.

Dazed, the owner drops the tin can as if it burned his fingertips. The cat notices a fur-covered meal scurrying away and is touched somewhere deep inside where instincts lay dormant. She pounces without mercy, and no amount of shooing or hissing can break through her trance. What’s left is to pick up the pieces of this traumatic event, wipe down the walls, and properly attend the wounded. By the time all that’s accomplished, the cat has barfed up the entire meal along with a large, greasy hairball. Hence, the cycle repeats. And it WILL repeat itself. The sinful contents of each tin hold addictive properties, guaranteeing a finicky attitude toward any substitute for this food substitute.

Only when free market Capitalism has died a horrible death can product designs such as this cat food tin be considered acceptable. That’s a consumer talking, of course. From a corporate perspective, this model is sheer genius. An owner may go through two or three cans of food trying to feed a single house cat. And they’ve all bought in to this design, too. Familiar, warm and fuzzy… dangerous.

I implore cat food makers around the world: think of the lives involved, both human and feline, the unnecessary suffering… when will it end?! Our government should investigate this container for possible ties to Nazi technology. Until then, I implore all cat owners to USE CAUTION when operating a can of cat food. Use the buddy system whenever possible. Together, we can fight back!

THE HARD STUFF

2011-05-15T03:43:00.001-04:00

"I can drive. No really, hand to God."

What the hell is going on over at NBC studios? Kathie Lee Gifford and Hoda Kotb GETTING DRUNK BEFORE NOON, that's what. We're not talking once by accident while sampling holiday punch either. Tuesday is Boozeday on Today with Kathie Lee & Hoda. These ladies treat a wine sampling like a contest. I watched them ride the Purple Cowboy for $12.00 a bottle. The Martin Luther King Jr. holiday is considered a good reason to drink to them!

What's up, America? Why didn't anyone tell me the drunken, bitchy, middle-aged character was en vogue right now? You know I don't view much outside of cartoons and news these days. Here I find two sauced biddies flapping around morning television, getting paid mind you. Hell, anyone can produce newsie / chattie / product placementie programming if they've had enough Merlot. Or Champagne. Or martinis, of course.

Tell you what, NBC. You give ME a couple million dollars, a studio and crew, and enough liquor to sustain my show for a season, and I'll give you ratings gold. Here's the pitch. I'm an intelligent, opinionated gay man and I'm allowed to get loose on national television and express myself. I'm sitting in front of a well-stocked bar, with a well-stocked bartender ready to attend to my every need. Guests of the show sit in luxury atop red swivel seats, plush with sculpted back support. Naturally, I'll take the chair on the end, equally plush and red and swivelish.

We'll chat about the news and politics and some fashion and cultural stuff. Nothing too ditzy. Smart people get sauced too, you know. I'm aiming for more bitching than bullshitting. It might be a smaller demographic, but I'm willing to risk it. We could have a diverse roster of guests on the show. Someone famous might barf on television. Maybe a politician says something naughty. Who knows? The potential must-see television moments associated with booze are near infinite.

It's a ratings magnet, I tell you. The whole thing could be sponsored by Budweiser and Absolute Vodka. We could air the show later at night if it makes you feel better. It would certainly make me less pathetic than ol' Kathie Lee burping up mimosas at 10 a.m.

Think about it, Hollywood. Have your people call my people.

BIN LADEN

2011-05-14T00:57:00.000-04:00

Hey, did you hear about the new drink called the bin Laden? It's a combination Colt 45 and a shot that goes straight to your head.

LIVE TWEETING

2011-04-16T02:38:00.001-04:00

I'm finally catching up with the rest of the 21st Century. I've had a Twitter account for a year now but never used it more than to follow famous people. But this thing called live tweeting... oh man, I'm hooked. You use what are called hashtags to mark your tweet as belonging to a particular thread (idea, product, television show, etc.). The thread appears in real time so you can see what others are saying about the topic as well. It's not necessarily a conversation, though I've seen one become chatty for a hot minute. To me, they're more about expression.

Lately, I've been following Stephen Colbert's thread, #NotIntendedToBeAFactualStatement. See, last week, Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona said something wildly untrue about Planned Parenthood, and when the media called him out on it, a spokesperson said that Sen. Kyl's remarks were not intended to be a factual statement, rather to prove a point. My man Colbert took this and ran with it, using the phrase as a disclaimer after several untrue statements he made about the senator. He created this hashtag and continued his tirade on Twitter where it reverberates to this day. I've kept the search up while I've written here, and already there've been forty-eight tweets added to the thread. And you know, most of 'em are pretty damn funny. God bless the Colbert Nation.

I also enjoy watching the evening news while tuned in to a hashtag on Twitter. For example, I sometimes watch The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell which has the hashtag #lastword associated with it. Viewers comment on whatever comes up on the show in (nearly) real time... you have to account for a small lag while the search refreshes, but other than that, the comments are spot on. It's very cathartic to listen to other Progressives bitch and moan like I do. Ha!

I think it'd be great to have enough clout as a writer to draw an audience to a hashtag of my own creation. Truly, that's a sign that you've made it in today's electronic media blitz: if you can attract the most attention. It's also a sign of the emerging market of readers/consumers of media and entertainment. They're always caught up in something new and shiny. As if creative people need one more thing to stress over, right?

FWD: CHECK THE LABEL

2011-04-16T00:01:00.000-04:00

The following is one of the countless forward messages I receive from my family. Since it's a great idea, I thought I'd share. DR

Diane Sawyer has a special reporting coming up this week on America’s addiction to imported goods. They removed ALL items from a typical, middle class home that were not made in the USA. There were hardly any items left beside the kitchen sink. Literally. Durng the special, they are going to show truckloads of items made in the USA delivered to replace the items removed, how to find those items, and the difference in prices.

Diane said that if every American spent just $64 (more than normal) on USA made products this year, it would create something like 200,00 new jobs. It made me think!!

ABC World News w/ Diane Sawyer: Made in America

CHECK THE LABEL!!

Look for this whenever you can.

I was buying food the other day at Walmart. On the label of some products, it said ‘from China’. For example, the “Our Family” brand of Mandarin oranges say right on the can ‘from China’. So, for a few more cents, I bought the “Dole” brand since it’s from California.

American markets continue to offer Chinese products, the same products that have proven inferior and sometimes even toxic when consumed. 70% of Americans believe that trading privileges afforded to China should be suspended… so why do we need the government to suspend them? DO IT YOURSELF, AMERICA!! Simply look on the bottom of every product you buy, and if it says ‘Made in China’ or ‘PRC’, choose another product or none at all. You’ll be amazed at how dependent you are on Chinese imports.

Who needs plastic eggs to celebrate Easter? If you must have eggs, use real ones and benefit some American farmer. And Easter is just one example. The point is, don’t wait for the government to act. You are the consumer. You can assume control on your own. CONSIDER THIS: if 200 million Americans each refuse to buy $20 in Chinese goods, that’s a billion dollar trade imbalance resolved in our favor, and fast!!

The downside? Some American businesses will feel a temporary pinch from having foreign stockpiles of inventory. WAAAAHH!! We’re sending a message to them. Start supporting American goods and services again. START NOW! Show them that we are Americans and nobody can take us for granted. If we can’t live without cheap Chinese goods, we deserve what we get.

Pass it on, America!!!

TALK ABOUT CUTS IN FUNDING

2011-04-12T00:55:00.003-04:00

It's time the gentlemen in power allowed women to speak for themselves in America. It's not just a choice, it's THE HARDEST CHOICE. Stay out of it!

ON GUARANTEED RIGHTS

2011-04-06T01:35:00.003-04:00

The Constitution was meant to be a shield, not a sword.
source unknown

SUPER OKAY

2011-03-20T01:31:00.000-04:00

When I found out that DC Comics was producing a MMORPG, I nearly flipped! Anyone can tell you I’m a HUGE fan of DC Comics, especially Batman and Robin, so an ongoing adventure set in Gotham City and Metropolis seemed the perfect introduction to this new gaming platform. Are you kidding?! Creating my own superhero?! And/or super villain?!! Sounds like a super good time! Sign me up!

Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games (MMORPGs) have skyrocketed in popularity since the early days of WarCraft and Final Fantasy XI, with good reason. They allow players to create unique avatars that take part in online quests. As they quest, their character grows stronger and more personalized based on experience (RPG). It’s like chose your own adventure, but instead you chose the role you play in an adventure. (Hint: I’m the nerdy magician usually.) MMORPGs invite gamers from all over the globe to come together in a shared setting (MMO). I was itching to waste large quantities of my time inside of one.

That was before the release of DC UNIVERSE ONLINE. The game has been out for over a month now, and I’ve played most of that time. And I have to admit; my feelings are heavily conflicted on this game. It’s a gruesome battle between my brain and my heart.

My heart has fallen for the missions involving such greats as Batman, Wonder Woman, and the Flash. For the villains, I’ve hench’d for the Joker and Harley Quinn, fought with Sinestro, and battled Queen Bee. Traveling freely through Gotham and Metropolis is equally a thrill. I can’t tell you how great it was the first time I noticed I was not the only hero vaulting across rooftops in Gotham City. So great!

And while the character creator is a bit limited in what it offers, I’ve been able to create two fantastic characters with depth and personality to them. The tiered system of powers and abilities helps to keep everything in order. (If you play, I recommend flight. It’s too many things to describe.) As always, I’ve created two characters around magic and/or mental abilities. The picture to the right is of my hero, Mobius the Mind Master. My villain, Evil Eye the sorcerer, has yet to be photographed. (He’s a slippery one!) See?! You start out with whatever you can cobble together, but as you upgrade and select new powers, your character becomes something unique for you. There’s plenty of opportunity to create and interact with the real, honest-to-goodness DC universe as a hero of your own making. It boggles my mind!

Oh, but it’s not enough to lull my brain to sleep on this one. There are many bugs and glitches in DCUO. There have been times when enemies didn’t populate the game board, and yet they attacked me and finally tapped me out. I’d say I experience that at least three times a week, and I play five of those days. Many of the items fail to fully populate the field also, like switches that open doors and allow you to continue missions. Yeah, whoops. Exactly. The levels themselves have a difficulty level on them that’s laughable. You may go in as a level 21, but by the time you come out, you’re probably closer to 24 with a lot of regenerations and weapon repairs in between. I’ve used potions and got nothing in return. Etc. and so forth.

This is not acceptable. DC Comics asked me to pay a hefty sum for the game itself, plus asked me to dedicate fifteen dollars to them every month so I could see what adventures they unlock next. The least they could do is have the product ready to play, one that doesn’t frustrate the gamer or require them to wait over an hour for updates. I understand glitches. I’m not asking for perfection. But it seems at times as if the very foundation of the game is shaky, like they probably should have kept it under wraps for a few more months. They already delayed release on it during the much-rewarded Christmas holiday. I can see why.

My loyalty and love for DC Comics remains, but they have not been enough to excuse the massive failures of this game. They’ve actually heightened those shortfalls; I want to play so bad, I’ll bang my head against glitches for hours. Madness, I tell you! Let’s say 6.5 out of 10. Get the lead out, DC. Fix this damn thing before my head explodes.

WESTBORO BAFFLED

2011-03-10T03:14:00.001-05:00

by Muther Mayhem

for God Discussion and the Antioch Voice

I’ve followed the exploits of the Westboro Baptist Church for many years, longer than the 24-hour news channels ever could. Back in my day, these “Christians” liked to protest the funerals of men who died of AIDS complications or gay bashings. American’s didn’t like to talk about the gays though, so it didn’t make the news much. I saw enough to make me sick for life.

Which made the recent Supreme Court ruling on Snyder v. Phelps that much harder to accept. The ruling protects the right of Fred Phelps and members of Westboro Baptist Church to hold anti-gay demonstrations outside of funerals for deceased soldiers. Overwhelmingly, the justices claimed that the demonstrations were on public property, on matters of public concern, and conducted peacefully. Eight to one in favor of this opinion, like eight quick punches to my gut.

Don’t get me wrong here. I’m disgusted by the Westboro Baptists, but I respect the First Amendment of our Constitution and all the caveats it provides us, including Free Exercise of religious beliefs. Hell, seems like I want freedom of religion for all Americans more than many Christians want it (always so nervous around Muslims and pagans and non-believers). I realize the Westboro Baptists have a right to demonstrate in full view of the public, at gay pride parades and significant court dates and other public functions. I tolerate their offensive signs, like “God hates fags” or “God bless dead soldiers” because I have to.

In the end, none of that is directed at an individual. The Westboro Baptists are swinging their free speech in the air, not connecting to any one person. Each of us has that right.

And even when we talk about intruding on individuals, we must realize that certain people are accessible to the public because of who they are. For example, Barack Obama governs every American, including members of the Westboro Baptist Church. Its members have a right to demonstrate in front of the White House, and to picket with signs that say “God hates Obama”. The same principle applies to any person in the public’s view. The rich and famous donate to charities and pursue agendas all the time. Counter protest is inevitable.

But we’re not talking about any of that in Snyder v. Phelps. The Westboro Baptists made this demonstration extremely personal to Matthew A. Snyder, private citizen and former Lance Corporal in the Marine Corps. They posted announcements of his funeral date and location, they created a spectacle across from the event that resulted in rerouting the motorcade, and finally, as if that wasn’t enough exercise for their free speech, The Westboro Baptists used Snyder as the subject of an online rant about parents raising their children in sin, thus targeting the family as well.

Free speech was never in question in this case. What should have been at issue was the content and methodology of the free speech to determine damages. The Westboro Baptists are an opportunistic pack of media jackals attracting attention to their beliefs. They frequently cross that thin line in the First Amendment between open debate and stalking a private citizen. Justice Samuel Alito expressed it eloquently in his dissenting remarks:

“[Phelps] and other members of their church have strong opinions on certain moral, religious, and political issues, and the First Amendment insures that they have almost limitless opportunities to express their views… It does not follow, however, that they may intentionally inflict severe emotional injury on private persons at a time of intense emotional sensitivity by launching vicious verbal attacks that make no contribution to public debate.”

Alito goes on to cite several precedents that define the narrow strip of legal turf where free speech becomes assault. And though these qualifications are narrow, they apply in this case.

Not even the Westboro Baptists deny that their protests cause pain and emotional scarring. They don’t contest those charges when dragged before the courts. The Phelps’ strategy is to frame their demonstrations as something other than a series of personal attacks. But many times, they ARE personal, and not just directed at fallen soldiers. They’ve protested individual firefighters, policemen, civil servants, victims of natural disasters and shocking crimes. Never mind the AIDS funerals and gay bashing trials. The Westboro Baptists are vultures preying on the weakest among us: the grief-stricken.

I really wanted that to change last week. More than anything, I want America to respect the dead and those who mourn them. Period. We pull to the right when a funeral procession drives by, don’t we? Our jobs allow us to grieve when a loved one passes, right? I thought if damages were awarded to the Snyders in this case, maybe that would be the evidence other Christians needed to start caring. The obvious exception is the Patriot Guard, motorcycle heroes who travel wherever the Westboro Baptists decide to protest funerals in order to provide a buffer zone between the hate speech and grieving families. What do you suppose that says about the soul of Christianity in America, when our response to funeral protests is left to biker gangs?

There’s a deeper issue lurking beneath the surface here, people, one that’s not about politics or homosexuality at all. These extreme right wing nut jobs call themselves Christians, and they use the Judeo-Christian Bible to spout their hateful rhetoric. I see them demonstrating like they do and I wonder, Where are all the other Christians in this country? Don’t they want to weigh in on this? Don’t they care? Where is the backlash, people? This has exploded far beyond the whole gay thing. A sect of the Christian Church is picketing funerals in this country. Not picketing the idea of funerals in front of some government building, but actual dead soldiers and other private citizens, individually, drawing private moments into the public eye.

I’m calling Christians out on this one. I know there are many, many rational members who could step forward, not on behalf of government, but rather on behalf of Jesus Christ and the Christian faith. Do we really have to go into faith without works here? Exercise freedom of religious expression. Show some compassion for the families by counter demonstrating. Surround those funerals with crowds of quiet, respectful, loving people. Perhaps if enough Christians networked with one another, the funerals of soldiers could even be confidential. At the very least, they could pressure lawmakers to restrict the access nut jobs have to private funerals. Anything but turn the other cheek. Because there are plenty of examples where Christians must tolerate the Westboro Baptists, but personal attacks aren’t among them.

ON PLASTICS, NOT MARBLE

2011-03-06T14:40:00.001-05:00

Your brain changes a little each day... why not take an active role in that process?

DR~>

DRUNK ON WRITING

2011-01-26T19:39:00.000-05:00

"You must stay drunk on writing so reality cannot destroy you."

Ray Bradbury

CORPORATE LAPDOG

2010-10-13T12:21:00.000-04:00

As the debate heats up over whether the Republican Party is benefiting from foreign campaign donations, I wanted to make sure this little gem gets plenty of air time:

So... did Rove answer the question about foreign campaign contributions? He hems and haws for a couple minutes before Stephanopolous gets specific. Let's check the transcript:

Stephanopolous: "Can you guarantee that none of the money, none of the funding going to groups that you support, that you're raising money for comes from foreign entities?"

Rove: "We do not solicit foreign entities, and we tell people that we- we will not accept foreign money and that it is illegal since 1907 for a- for foreign money to be involved in an American political campaign. We have it on our- on our materials that no foreign money can or will be received. And let me just tell ya, all the area codes I'm dialing are in the United States."

Obviously the emphasis is mine here. Rove made sure we knew he wasn't ASKING for foreign donations. He emphasized that his organization was TELLING the American people a specific message, and that such a message was included on the materials they use to solicit donations. Nowhere did I hear a clear denial of the charges. I heard artful dodges and deflections.

Now, I'm not saying Karl Rove is a lying douche bag, or that politicians have perfected the art of talking around questions they don't want to answer. In fact, through several different postings on WORDfudge, I've advocated for facts above name calling and partisan rhetoric. But, well, you get the message.

ON PERSPECTIVE

2010-10-11T21:19:00.005-04:00

"Life is ten percent what you make it and ninety percent how you take it."

~ Irving Berlin

WHOLE 'NUTHER M

2010-09-13T02:29:00.000-04:00

DISCLAIMER: The following is a scathing review of the new release, Metroid: Other M. I’m not holding back while writing this, so if you don’t want the game ruined, stop reading now. And to other readers, those who don’t play video games, sorry to geek out on you, but my heart is broken right now.

Let me begin by saying how excited I was that the Metroid series was returning to third person perspective. I love the suit that the heroin wears, so watching her move and execute special abilities is a treat. It adds a very cinematic quality to the game that was lost in first person shooter. I can at least admit that this game has the feel of Super Metroid, only in three dimensions.

And really, I enjoyed the game play for the most part. Modern day gaming enthusiasts will probably criticize the grid-like maze of passages or the side scrolling perspective, but I felt the developers used depth and open areas to give it that feeling of freedom and exploration we love. Also, the transition between third person and the visor perspective felt natural.

But that’s where my charity ends for this game.

Even though I like the game play, they still need to tweak the engine, especially that damn stealth walk. There’s no reason to slow the action down just to walk through the ladies room. And they can get rid of detective mode while they’re at it, so I don’t have to figure out what tiny bit of the atmosphere I have to hold my curser on for five seconds in order to move forward. Each of those clunky game features slowed the action down to frustrating levels.

The play time stinks. 100% completion on normal mode can be achieved in fifteen hours. I mean, come on! I should be slogging through a new Metroid game for days, maybe weeks. And the so-called Hard Mode you unlock? The reason it’s hard is because you have no power ups to collect. No energy tanks, no missile expansions, no machine parts. That’s the best part about a Metroid game! Finding things! You take away the search and discovery, and it’s just running back and forth shooting at things.

But the worst part, by far, was the story. Just awful. Blasphemous. At one point, I took a bathroom break while a cut scene played. Samus talks to herself a lot in this game, giving us bits of detail to flesh out the story. 90% was pointless and absurd. Her relationship with military personnel as both professional and personal was forced and corny. Maybe close ties with soldiers, but a superior officer that treated her like a daughter? That allowed her to openly defy orders or speak out?

My real problem is that the developers at Team Ninja seriously misunderstood Samus Aran as a character. To put it bluntly, she is a badass. In her line of work, she has to be tough and capable; she tootles around the cosmos hunting bounties for cash. In this game, Samus is sometimes frail and dependent. They had her stumbling, reaching out to a military leader at one point, wounded and in need of protection. Yeah, I went and had a bowl movement at that point.

And while we’re at it, Samus is also a human being, which means she would use the tools at her disposal to get a job done. So, if she found herself in water and she had the gravity suit available to her, she’d turn on that feature and use it. After all, it could be a matter of life or death! Of course she’s going to turn on the kick ass features of her suit when they’re needed. Team Ninja was extremely lazy here. There’s a way to orchestrate Samus’s initial exploration to unlock her power ups naturally.

Whoever made this game has some serious issues with women. Or maybe it’s a Japanese culture thing. Either way, they took a beloved female character and erased everything noble and strong about her.

I’m honestly plucked that Nintendo allowed this to pass their smell test. They’re usually so diligent with flagship titles. Out of ten points, Metroid: Other M gets a 4.0. This story never happened. Samus was delusional and dreamed the whole thing. She’ll wake up in cryogenic stasis or some science fiction gimmick. I don’t care! Anything is better than domesticating the toughest bounty hunter in the galaxy.

ONE'S DISPOSITION

2010-09-02T00:31:00.000-04:00

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, and the pessimist fears this is true."

~ James Branch Cabell

HAGDOM

2010-08-17T03:24:00.013-04:00

While speaking with friends the other day, I realized how many people in the heterosexual community still do not understand the complex relationship between a fag and his female counterpart. You've probably witnessed countless examples of these two together, especially while at the mall or other comfort stops. This is no small thing, people... worlds turn on such intricate social networks. You might say that special give and take between gay men and straight women helps to balance the whole equation for human beings. For now anyway.

But of course, like all things human, the gay / girl dynamic has gradations to it depending on the people involved. And here's where the confusion comes in I think, because gay stereotypes are well known and shattered occasionally, but the women involved are still clumped together as one generic heterosexual group. The reality is far different:

the fruit fly = this woman has an unnatural attraction to gay men (and by unnatural, I mean sexual attraction that will never be fulfilled, no matter how much liquor is involved). Fruit flies often buzz their way through big city club scenes, hoping to find that sensitive, caring, and well groomed individual who listens to them... with a penis. You may hear one laughing about the whole "gay thing", knowing in her heart that all gay men really need is the right woman to come along. INDICATOR: multiple visits to a hair stylist per month, resulting in overworked color or perms.

the fag hag = god bless this lady of the evening. She is any woman who shouts, "Fuck you men! And your unrealistic expectations of women!!" Girl, you know them ol' gay boys are gonna hang with you, so come on over. They refer to the gays as "the funnest people to be around," which roughly translates to "guys I don't have to shave or wear makeup around." A little known fact, the first fart on record by a female occurred while in the soothing and non-judgmental presence of gay males. INDICATOR: at least one junk food item somewhere on their person (or in their car).

the flame dame = gay men flock to this powerful woman. And the chances are good that heterosexual men try to get at her as well. Flame dames are usually well composed, confident, and most important, never overly dependent on men. In general or specific. More than anything, gay men act as shielding for the flame dame, repelling straight men in the heat of their cruising. INDICATOR: spontaneous house party on a Saturday night followed by spontaneous clean up afterward.

the homo honey = after serving a number of years within the Homosexual Agenda, any woman will have tolerated more than her fair share of drama, heartache, and self-loathing from her gay counterpart(s). She thus becomes eligible for the homo honeys. The many perks of this select group include access to a clothing and style advisory board, a 30% discount at any Lane Bryant store, and a lifetime of respect and admiration. INDICATOR: repeated requests from gay men to get the phone numbers of other gay men. BONUS INDICATOR: membership in the "Purse of the Month Club".

Again, stereotypes are shattered daily, so no angry comments. These are mere parameters, and half hearted ones at that. For the real story inside Hagdom, ladies will just have to support their local gay man and see for themselves. Live the adventure!

(Note: this program is not available for college credit.)

ON HAPPINESS

2010-08-16T13:16:00.002-04:00

"Happiness is simple. Everything we do to find it is complicated."

Karen Maezen Miller

EXHIBITS A, B, C, D...

2010-07-15T20:42:00.090-04:00

Recently, the NAACP called on members of the Tea Party and other people of good will to repudiate the racist elements showing up at Tea Party rallies and protests. The resolution from the NAACP was specifically crafted so that the Tea Party would not be targeted as a whole. And yet spokespeople and celebrity Teabaggers have come out swinging against this resolution. They claim the movement is only engaged in political dissent in an age of government largess.

News flash! There's a ton of photographic evidence out there of racism running wild at Tea Party rallies. I searched "tea party + racism" on Google and found dozens, and it only took me thirty minutes. Here are some of the worst:

When you have to rewrite your racial slur so it's spelled correctly, is that irony? Or just par for the course?

Racism isn't any cuter when you get the kids involved, people. Sorry.

Obama has to be a Muslim... he's black. Right?

Yeah, I know, disgusting. But you gotta admit... the president looks pretty fly in this pic!

Wasn't it enough for her to call the President of the United States a liar? Why did she have to bring Africa into it?

The term 'half breed' specifically targets race, in case there was any confusion.

This picture makes me sick... so sorry to post it.

The racism started LONG before Obama became our 44th president.

Blurry, but you get the picture. And I'm still bitter that the Tea Party uses images of the Joker in their slander.

This sign was going so well until he decided to equate a brown man with al Qaeda.

This is when it started getting personal for me, cuz you know I love Michelle Obama. My girl!

The tea bagger's grasp of American history. Alas.

I made a collage like this in high school, and mine was just as factual. I got an 'F'.

Disagree with his healthcare policy all you want, but why did you have to bring voodoo into it? I'll tell you why... racism.

It's pretty sad when your only exposure to the black community was 'In Living Color'. That was the 90s dude, catch up.

And if a bunch of rednecks act like fools, will we still call it 'white power'?

This was sent out by an elected official as a holiday greeting card. Because Christmas is sacred.

Good old fashioned Civil War era racism here... vintage.

I believe in some of those things too. Where's my turban? Oh right, I'm white.

And since the bigotry and hatred in the Tea Party is not aimed solely at African Americans, I thought I'd add this pic. In this guy's defense, I've heard Barney Frank is hung like a purple dinosaur. Oy!

PHWEW! That was a terribly painful internet search to conduct. Keep in mind, I didn't select pictures with nooses in them because, honestly, I saw a few toward the end of Bush's second term. Nor did I select signs that spoke of Obama as a Fascist, Marxist, Communist, Socialist, or member of the Nazis. Those are technically political arguments which honor the spirit of the First Amendment. And besides, I don't see many tea baggers using those terms properly, which is embarrassing enough for them.

Members of this political party need to recognize, whether they like it or not, they are debating our first African American president. So when racism enters the debate, it makes tea baggers look like they're afraid of the person they are debating. They're focusing more on Obama than his policies. By all means, talk about taxation and spending and points of legislation coming out of the Obama administration. Don't allow racist comments and slurs to de-legitimize the message.

OUR PART

2010-06-30T00:08:00.025-04:00

During a recent conversation on the Gulf Coast oil spill, I wondered aloud what it would take for the American people to push back against corporations like BP and hold them accountable. BP's response to this spill is particularly offensive given their FOURTH QUARTER FOR 2009. They could at least research ways to effectively contain and/or clean up the mess that's bound to come from drilling off-shore. Anything but floating worms and powders, top hats and funnels and giant plumes of fire shooting endlessly into the sky.

So I asked about my fellow Americans and what it would take to push back against crap like this. Imagine my surprise when I got this as a response: "What do the American people have to do with it? We elect a federal government to take care of those things."

Now before I wax patriotic, let's go back to September 10, 2008 when Americans discovered the federal agency in charge of oil regulation, the Minerals Management Service (MMS), was LITERALLY IN BED with the lobbyists they dealt with. Actually fornicating and snorting drugs with corporate personnel, sometimes on federal property. The Obama Administration is in the process of RESTRUCTURING that agency, but in the meantime, the oil fields and drilling born from all that collusion and debauchery cover the globe. How long before we can verify that other facilities haven't cut corners or neglected regular maintenance? How many more Gulf Coast disasters are waiting to happen?

In theory, I can see where my friend was coming from with his response. We elect a government to act on behalf of us, right? We forget that some of "us" are corporations and banks, and in America, THEY'RE PEOPLE TOO. The whole issue of corporate personhood has twisted the Fourteenth Amendment to allow shady practices and rampant social agendas to go unchecked for a while. Corporations have a right to lobby the government on behalf of their interests, and wow do they have persuasive resources. Cocaine and whores for everyone!! Casual Friday ad infinitum!!

(Cue patriotic music.) If you really want to break it down, we as a collective society elect a government to provide a network of resources to get shit done. That's all. They help us achieve our objectives, whether it be security or oversight on the many other aspects of our lives. By it's very nature, a democracy acts as an amplifier for the people; otherwise, it's a dictatorship, or a military state, or a theocracy. We are the energy and the impetus. We are the reason the government acts at all. But we as citizens have to participate in that, loudly and often. Not just during election years. It's obvious that certain of our CORPORATE CITIZENS are participating. We have to compete with that.

Which brings me back to my original musings, where the American people hold corporations like BP accountable for the oil spill. It's obvious that we're not getting off of petroleum any time soon, nor is this essay an anti petroleum rant... I see that we use it for fuel, for plastics, for medicines and healthcare needs. But if we're going to keep up this addiction, at least in the short term, we have to do it smarter and safer. No more lives should be lost or devastated. No more wetlands destroyed by oil spills. And if we can't guarantee that, then we should not drill offshore.

I personally don't think the petroleum industry has much of a reason to innovate on their own. At least not until the oil dries up. Which is why Americans should make an example of BP. Sure, the equipment and manpower will be swept up by another competing company instantly, but we 'THE SMALL PEOPLE' would be sending a message to the industry. The rampant neglegance, lack of planning for disaster, and bullshit media strategies will not stand.

HEALTH CARE HYPOCRITES

2010-02-27T18:58:00.004-05:00

It amazes me the number of people against health care reform who currently benefit from Medicare. Retired people no less, or folks on disability. They get all fired up about the evils of “socialism”, and yet when I remind them that Medicare is a government run program, they cling to federal assistance like it was their job. [wink]

There’s a huge disconnect here that anti reformists are unable or unwilling to see. So instead, I suggest we harness some of their populist rage and put it to better use... by shaming this double standard.

Consider the lopsided way federal assistance programs are funded in this country. Money paid into the system goes toward those people who are currently using the system. Our tax dollars are not held in some account with our names on it, waiting for us to come of age. It’s spent as soon as it's collected from us.

Which means the tax dollars used to support CURRENT Medicare recipients are taken from MY wages. That’s where the money comes from. And hey, I believe such a system should be in place, and that people who’ve paid their share into the system should be afforded some measure of security. But I have a problem with people arguing against my getting some form of assistance or reform or cost management, ESPECIALLY those who’ve stopped paying into the system (which is true for many recipients of Medicare). They should be BEGGING for wage earners like me to get some form of assistance, to help manage our finances, keep our heads above water and continue to pay into the system. The system that supports THEM.

It’s real simple: people who have federal tax dollars supporting THEIR health care needs should not argue against federal tax dollars used to support MY health care needs. Why should they get both?

ON GENIUS

2010-02-23T18:00:00.005-05:00

The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.

Albert Einstein

WRITER'S MANIFESTO

2010-02-16T20:11:00.023-05:00

The Creative Self. I'm a writer, though you wouldn't know it most of the time. I rarely feel confident enough about my writing to share it with the world. Instead, my words fill up notebooks in disorganized bursts. I tell people those notebooks are fermenting for later use, but so far, they collect dust on my shelf, unseen.

Even as I draft this, my brain struggles against creating a manifesto, afraid to commit to an angle on the subject of writing. It gets tangled up in the fear and anxiety instead of exposing their roots. After all, those feelings are not things in themselves. I'm not just anxious; I fiddle anxiously with sentences in order to find a proper fit. I don't just fear; I fear exposing the gaps in my thinking and the scope of my point of view.

I forget that the creative process is not painless. As a writer, I take it upon myself to observe, to make comparisons, to invent people and places and have them interact in situations I decide upon. I'm actively using what I know about the world to build something unique. There will be tension. There will be criticism and rejection. There will be some measure of enjoyment and catharsis involved. There are no guarantees. And all of that is part of the process.

Which is why, of all the agendas to have as a writer, I choose to cultivate bravery. I vow to endure those tensions, to accept them as part of my mind set and thus part of the process. My courage will be rewarded - IS being rewarded right now as I conclude this manifesto. No more shying away from what I love.

Those fears and concerns will be there, but I cannot let them stop me. I must remember WHAT I fear, and that's my creative self.

[Submitted for partial credit.]

TEA BAGGERS

2010-02-09T23:44:00.003-05:00

The National Tea Party Convention for 2010 took place in Nashville this past weekend. I’d give you direct reporting of the event, but tickets were WAY out of my price range. Ah, but that’s what happens when a grass roots movement is sponsored by for-profit groups like Tea Party Nation. I keep hoping tea baggers will notice this, but so far only a couple people protested the sharp fees and requests for political donations.

My most important gripe with this group is one of historical fact. Attempts to identify the tea bagger movement as some modern-day Boston Tea Party are not only factually cross-eyed, but also disrespectful to the colonists in early Boston, Massachusetts.

British Parliament had just imposed the Tea Act on the American Colonies which would increase taxes once more. Colonists revolted, and succeeded in turning away shipments of the taxable goods in two different cities. And when problems surfaced in Boston, the colonists decided to send a message to the oppressive foreign power. They dumped the shipment of tea into the harbor.

Now, if modern day tea baggers were ANYTHING like the colonists in Boston, they would cast off the shackles of their oppression in symbolic gestures... like tossing taxable goods into a harbor. Lord knows there are plenty of opportunities to do this in today's world! Government run options for health care like Medicare and Medicaid. Retirement and disability insurance such as Social Security. Those two ALONE are a tremendous burden on taxable earnings.

And before they start in on me, I've heard the counter argument to what I’m saying here. "But dur, we can't get out of paying taxes for this stuff." Whiners. First of all, yes they can, or at least Joe the Plumber figured a way out of paying his. They should ask him. Second, if they VOLUNTARILY gave up using a few government resources, especially in a large voting block, they’d have the perfect argument to bring to their elected officials. They wouldn’t be using certain tax funded goods and services. They would acquire their own resources in the future.

If their movement proved one thing last year, it was that people CAN change a debate by mobilizing at public forums. Regardless of who mobilized them or how distorted the message became, they changed the debate. Period. Why not use this same momentum and actually toss some tea in the harbor? Go to the root of this argument. Work toward legislation that would allow for voluntary exclusion on certain programs. Give up the benefits as a gesture of the revolution taking place across the nation. In other words, show us you mean it.

But they won’t. They’ll argue out of one side of their mouth while feeding the other. This is why the term "tea bagger" is so appropriate for this populist movement. Not because of the balls-on-the-chin connotation, hardy har. It's because the members throw their tea into the harbor only long enough to froth and rally and protest... and then they pull that tea right back out again and save it for later. They argue against government while benefitting from government.

I've seen miserly old women do this with real tea bags. They keep a soggy one tucked away in a baggie in their purse, and use it over and over. By the end of the day, I’d imagine their drinking some pretty weak tea. That’s how the tea bagger message looks in the light of scrutiny: a lot of hot water and little substance, and very little sacrifice.

ON HUMAN CONFLICT

2009-08-05T17:24:00.004-04:00

First they ignore you,
then they laugh at you,
then they fight you,
then you win.

Mahatma Gandhi

WHETHER TO ASK/TELL

2009-07-21T01:10:00.003-04:00

Earlier this month, Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Penn.) announced his sponsorship of the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, a prime piece of legislation said to undo Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I commend Rep. Murphy for doing this, particularly since this is his first term. It shows a willingness to champion principles over politics, something sorely missing from today's political climate.

Seems like everyone else has extreme views on this issue, which guarantees an emotionally charged debate that gets nothing done. So, I'm weighing in.

First, to the opposition. We are talking about war here people, not ridiculous Culture Wars crap. There are tax paying, law abiding, VOLUNTARILY ENLISTED men and women tossed out regularly, not for sexual misconduct, not because they cause problems in the military... simply because you aren't comfortable with them. No shred of evidence supports the notion that gays disrupt military procedures, but plenty suggests homophobes do.

That's what this is really about... coddling your inability to deal with homosexuals. In other words, OTHER PEOPLE are forced to adjust their lives because of YOUR issues. In gay culture we call that drama, and we have plenty of our own to deal with.

And to my gays (and gay sponsors), I say relax. President Obama is not going back on his values. He's honoring a balanced, coequal version of government. Rep. Murphy summed it up nicely: "The President doesn't want to clearly contradict U.S. law, even though I feel that this law is fundamentally wrong and discriminatory." That point cannot be stressed enough here folks. DADT is codified law, not just a fun slogan. Undoing it democratically will take effort, meaning lots of cosponsorships that we have to work for.

I know it hurts to wait, and I know there are people affected by this law frequently. I'm not trying to belittle the issue or loath my self here. Seriously though, the last thing we want is another president who errs on the side of only some Americans. I'm giving Obama time and space to shut down Guantanamo. After that, I'll be pissed right along with you!!

XEUS

2009-07-10T15:14:00.003-04:00

I came across bits from a fun writing exercise I did a while back. You find or create basic sentences that tell about a situation, and then attempt to show the same thing through description or detail. Here's my favorite one:

My cat Xeus was happy. [telling]

Xeus hopped up on my lap as I watched the evening news. My brown blanket covered my lap, which to him suggested a possible spot to lay. He flexed his paws gently against a bunching of fabric as I stroked his spotted fur. His rhythmic purr was soothing; his warmth appreciated. [showing]

I got a little chocked up when I found that. I miss him.

QUITTING = VICTORY

2009-07-09T10:03:00.005-04:00

Well, if you're interested, here's the link to PALIN'S RESIGNATION from her post as governor. Many assume she's doing this to run for president in 2012... they asked the same of Pawlenty when he resigned, to which he said no, and yet we see him on the evening news programs every week. So we shall see.

But for now, this is a happy occasion. The culture wars have receded until such time as Americans are happy and prosperous and so have nothing better to think about than who should get married and what health care rights women should have access to. If you're interested, I took a particularly irksome portion of her press release and commented on it... check it out:

Some say things changed for me on August 29th last year – the day John McCain tapped me to be his running-mate – I say others changed. Let me speak to that for a minute. Political operatives descended on Alaska last August, digging for dirt. The ethics law I championed became their weapon of choice. Over the past nine months I've been accused of all sorts of frivolous ethics violations – such as holding a fish in a photograph, wearing a jacket with a logo on it, and answering reporters’ questions. Every one – all 15 of the ethics complaints have been dismissed. We’ve won! But it hasn't been cheap - the State has wasted thousands of hours of your time and shelled out some two million of your dollars to respond to “opposition research” – that’s money not going to fund teachers or troopers – or safer roads. And this political absurdity, the “politics of personal destruction” … Todd and I are looking at more than half a million dollars in legal bills in order to set the record straight. And what about the people who offer up these silly accusations? It doesn’t cost them a dime so they’re not going to stop draining public resources – spending other peoples’ money in their game.

DR: Let me stop you there governor. What you're saying is that it's wrong to use taxpayer funds to dig your way out of ethics investigations. And yet that's exactly what you've been doing this entire time. You know it too, which is why you cover it over by demonizing the probes and investigations. If only these sorts of things were retroactive, hum? *sigh* Why oh why do I search for wisdom in your words? Okay, continue...

It’s pretty insane – my staff and I spend most of our day dealing with this instead of progressing our state now. I know I promised no more “politics as usual,” but this isn’t what anyone had in mind for Alaska. If I have learned one thing: life is about choices! And one chooses how to react to circumstances. You can choose to engage in things that tear down, or build up. I choose to work very hard on a path for fruitfulness and productivity. I choose not to tear down and waste precious time; but to build up this state and our country, and her industrious, generous, patriotic, free people! Life is too short to compromise time and resources... it may be tempting and more comfortable to just keep your head down, plod along, and appease those who demand: "Sit down and shut up", but that's the worthless, easy path; that's a quitter's way out. And a problem in our country today is apathy. It would be apathetic to just hunker down and “go with the flow”.

DR: No I'm sorry Sarah Palin, but YOURS is the quitter's way out. You see, there's a third option that's wholly other than going with the flow or quitting... it's working against the status quo, fighting the business as usual mentality in Washington, using modest power and trasparency to effect real change on behalf of Americans. All those great campaign slogans you can't seem to live up to.

Nah, only dead fish "go with the flow"... Productive, fulfilled people determine where to put their efforts, choosing to wisely utilize precious time... to build up. And there is such a need to build up and fight for our state and our country. I choose to fight for it! And I'll work hard for others who still believe in free enterprise and smaller government; strong national security for our country and support for our troops; energy independence; and for those who will protect freedom and equality and life... I'll work for and campaign for those proud to be American, and those who are inspired by our ideals and won't deride them. I will support others who seek to serve, in or out of office, for the right reasons, and I don't care what party they're in or no party at all. Inside Alaska – or Outside Alaska. But I won’t do it from the Governor’s desk. I've never believed that I, nor anyone else, needs a title to do this - to make a difference... to help people. So I choose, for my State and my family, more "freedom" to progress, all the way around... so that Alaska may progress... I will not seek re-election as Governor.

DR: Tah bitch!! Don't let the door hit ya where that secessionist party split ya! And if you even dream of running for the presidency in 2012, do the world a favor and crack open a book. No more fancy pageant walkin'.

PYGMY

2009-05-13T01:27:00.005-04:00

Chuck Palahniuk is one of my all time favorite authors. His writing style balances smartly between art and common sense. As a writer, I look forward to Palahniuk's novels. I learn a lot from his use of words.

With that said, I didn't much care for his latest book Pygmy. The words got in the way of the story. It's a first person perspective told by a visitor from a communist country, so the words are supposed to get in the way to a certain extent. I get that. But the narrative was often confusing, tripping me up, causing me to reread and piece together meaning.

What's worse Palahniuk doesn't logically employ this shoddy grasp of the English language. When Pygmy relates American dialogue, he repeats the words effortlessly. Why would he have such a hard time speaking it? If nothing else, wouldn't continued exposure improve his grasp of English? It does for the rest of us.

To me, Pygmy is not a believable character. He understands things like "electric blue" and the "dermis" of someone's skin, but candles are a mystery. Why else would he describe one as a long fire string surrounded by wax, burning on one end? Wouldn't you run across "candle" on your way to understanding electricity and human anatomy? Even if you cobbled the language together using American television??

I'm sorry Chuck, this is nothing personal. You know I'm a super big fan. The plot driving Pygmy is great, but the storytelling distracts from the read. I know I missed some of what you were trying to say, and that frustrates me most. I feel robbed. I still learned from this book, just not in the usual ways. 4 out of 10.

BLATHERING SCORN

2009-04-09T22:17:00.003-04:00

[UPDATED]

This offends me. And I don't even WANT gay married.

There have been a couple different responses to this, but my favorite by far comes from Stephen Colbert of the Colbert Report. Check it out!

The Colbert Report

Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c

The Colbert Coalition's Anti-Gay Marriage Ad

colbertnation.com

Colbert Report Full Episodes

Political Humor

NASA Name Contest

MONKEYSHINE

2009-02-19T23:39:00.004-05:00

The New York Post just released a FORMAL APOLOGY for offending some of its viewers. It's a response to the outrage over a cartoon associating the stimulus bill with a dead monkey. People everywhere exploded about this, suggesting it was thinly veiled racism targeting a black president.

I really didn’t see it, or wasn’t looking for it anyway. I surf the web absently for news while I’m on the phone, so when this came up I clicked the cartoon instead of reading the story. I immediately associated the stimulus bill with the recent shooting of a monkey gone wild. I felt it timely but not very funny… I love animals, even the rabid ones (at a distance).

But by the afternoon, this story ballooned to Al Sharpton proportions. I only saw what all the fuss was about after I paid attention. I guess the House and Senate fought over the stimulus bill so hard that I stopped associating it directly with Barack Obama. I mean the guy had to use some star power just to get the damn thing passed.

Please don’t misunderstand; my dissent in no way extends to the protestors or their issue with the image. I fully acknowledge the racial slurs passed between white and black people through our shared history. But I felt my initial experience of the cartoon was telling, so I wanted to get it out there. I just didn’t see the racist implications at first, and I’m sorry so many other people did.

NUTS IN A VACUUM

2009-01-26T00:19:00.010-05:00

You would think after the presidential election of 2008 I’d be slathered in righteous indignation. After all, this was more than Americans choosing a new direction; it was a message to the GOP. Even former president George W. Bush AGREES WITH ME. But this is more complex than that...

Believe it or not, there are certain aspects of the Republican platform I’m on board with. I agree that government should work quietly in the background, allowing us just enough support to flourish on our own. I too see the wisdom of our forefathers to create a system of government that fosters liberty and diversity. I even agree that America must work toward energy independence (though I was thinking of renewable alternatives while they went for the war option).

But the people who champion these ideas don’t currently run the Republican Party. It turns out fiscal and federal responsibility isn’t enough to grow a grass roots movement under your party anymore. So they ignited the culture wars and took charge of one side. This is the Republican Base I SPOKE OF previously; their desire to guide our nation concerns me greatly. I wish them no harm, nor do I suggest they be treated as less than equals. I just don’t want them in charge anymore.

The delicious irony in the values voting block is that they don’t agree with Republican policy in at least one key way: their need for big government to push a social agenda. Whenever they succeed in passing legislation limiting abortion rights, it’s government blocking a woman’s choice. When public schools are allowed to hold intelligent design up next to science, government decides the two are equal and thus required learning. And when the church says it’s wrong for you to get married to the same sex, who do you think isn’t recognizing your equal rights?

Tsk tsk. I know Republicans are fond of dry humping Ronald Regan, but he started something ugly, something they now can’t control. If they’re not careful, the Sarah Palins of the world will completely transform the party into something dangerous for us all. I know smart, responsible, patriotic conservatives are out there… Do the right thing. Stand up for what you believe in. Take your party back.

STUFFED!!

2009-01-13T22:09:00.004-05:00

How I spent my Christmas break:

Sorry it's taking me so long to post something with substance. It's 20 degrees out, which means I'm hibernating. More soon...

THANKS BUT NO THANKS

2008-11-27T01:48:00.011-05:00

Happy Thanksgiving everyone! This year, I'm thankful for many things; my health, my friends, my two jobs and relative good fortune. And of course I'm thankful for my audience of wise and interesting readers. But most of all, I'm thankful that I'm not hanging upside down, my head on the chopper as government looks on without a clue. That's the greatest gift of all.

MARRIAGE v. EQUALITY

2008-11-14T21:42:00.005-05:00

The success of Prop.H8 has really pissed liberals off. The protests, the email chains, the celebrity calls to action, the tears ... but really, why should people expect any different? Advocates of gay marriage continue fighting this battle on the opposition’s turf, and they get beaten every time. Stop bahsing your heads against this brick wall! You must change tactics!!

'Marriage' is a religious institution. Argue against that point all you want, but as long as the customs and taboos of matrimony are determined by cultural realities, American marriage will involve Judeo-Christianity. You can thank the Protestant Reformation for that, and also the Counter Reformation for transforming the whole affair into a contest for human souls. Marriage has been associated with religion for a long time, and it will be extremely difficult to erase that from our collective consciousness.

I recognize there are such things as “civil marriages.” My father and his second wife held one, and it was blissfully free of religious influence. But therein lies a crucial point to all this. The United States government adopted marriage as a means of legally uniting two people. And further, it’s made no attempt to divorce civil marriage from the ideas traditionally (read, religiously) tied to such a union. That’s an area our elected officials want the people to decide for ourselves (in all our cultural wisdom.) It’s when the people decide to disenfranchise minorities that our government should prove to us they are NOT espousing religious ideas … and so far, they are not.

There’s a lot riding on this gay marriage thing for the Religious Right. Even the language used by conservatives tells us their agenda: that marriage is a 'sacred' institution, and that a constitutional amendment will preserve the 'sanctity' of the union. Homosexual unions do not mesh with their beliefs about reality. Beliefs like an almighty god who frowns on certain sexual behavior, actually causes hurricanes and floods because of sexual 'deviance'. Beliefs like the corruption of children from exposure to same sex unions. This is part of a much larger war to the religious, a war of intrusion on their worldview. And as we’ve seen before, there are enough Americans who belong to some branch or sect or schism of Christianity to have a real impact on this issue.

My father’s union, secular though it was in ceremony, is still considered normal in the eyes of the Church and thus not the target of a major political referendum. And there are lots of reasons why heterosexuals might chose civil marriages, most obvious being the issue of cost. But once you stray from cultural norms, the Church storms back into the room to shout.

Prop.H8 was no different. I knew the vote would be close because there were reports of massive evangelical outreach – we’re talking national support – all pouring into select states to knock on doors and influence votes. Again, religious influence, and you can see by this example that change is possible. The churches don’t hold ultimate sway over government, rather over the hearts and minds of the electorate. This religious perception held by so many is the brick wall I want to avoid.

For this reason, I’m asking supporters of the gay and lesbian community to shift their tactics. I say we let go and give back marriage to religious conservatives. That’s right, I said give it back. I don’t believe marriage is truly what gays want. We want the rights and obligations bestowed upon married couples by the federal government, including the right to share property, custody with children, and hospital visitation rights in emergency situations. This is a matter of equality, not sacrament.

When the Religious Right begins to froth over this, our elected officials SHOULD explain the difference between holding beliefs and having government champion those beliefs. Some high ranking official – someone who governs us ALL – should proudly declare that “Anyone can believe certain people should be excluded, but really, when those people pay their taxes, when they contribute to society by holding jobs and generally obeying our laws and customs, WE CANNOT EXCLUDE THEM!!” In fact, our representatives should be sending two messages: one to gays declaring freedom of speech and religious expression, and one to churches stating the nature of government to represent all people equally. And that should be that ... but it’s not.

This issue has become one of separation of Church and State. Our government allows a certain faction of its citizenry to be excluded based on the religious intolerance of a majority. No other country that allows for same sex unions has crumbled as a result. Any evidence to the contrary is slanderous superstition.

But because so many people can ONLY see the issue of marriage from a religious point of view, I say we give it to them. Let marriage return to what it truly is, a ceremonial union between one man and one woman blessed by god. Leave our government to INCLUDE religious ceremonies as one of a few options for matrimony in America. Instead of “intruding” on puritan beliefs, I’m asking us to appeal to our government to create a marital institution that ALL Americans can hold as sacred. Like civil marriages, only without the opportunity for religious nuts to get all bent out of shape. Civil unions.

Now don’t cringe. I want to focus on what’s really important here: legal recognition that is parallel if not same to heterosexuals. Maybe sometime in the future we can convince the Church to relax its collective sphincter about homosexuality. Maybe. But until then, we cannot invite an argument over what is sacred. We just look stupid.

Instead we should be offering an olive branch; asking for the same privileges while backing slowly away from their precious traditions. You know, looking like the good guys by comparison. But we’ll also be positioning ourselves for a Church v. State battle. Because if the religious communities decide that it was REALLY allowing homosexuals rights that was their issue … well … I think that is a battle that we can raise above mere referendum, all the way to the Supreme Court.

BASE INTELLIGENCE

2008-10-16T03:40:00.002-04:00

Say what you will about Governor Sarah Palin’s nomination. The fact remains that she accomplished what she came to do: energize the Republican base. The so-called values voters are mesmerized by Palin’s quaint cultural narrative, even when facing numerous problems at home and abroad. Even while other Republicans distance themselves from their own party, the base emerges to dominate the crowds at McCain / Palin rallies.

I really thought I was prepared for this. I thought I had this particular block of the electorate figured out. These were single issue voters in 2004, people who spun the election into a debate on the sanctity of marriage. It was even preached from the pulpits of many churches in southern and western states. I realized then that “Republican base” was a polite way of saying church folk. These voters can be riled up about any ol’ thing in order to place them in a political corner. They take anything else a politician says ON FAITH as long as the one issue they care about is dealt with appropriately. I consider them unwitting participants in an effort to divide and conquer us all.

Sadly, that is not the whole picture. In those days, values voters were part of a winning team. Sure they were haughty and smug, but their views were being championed ... so they were reasonably well behaved. Now the “energy” they exude is anger, fear, and righteous indignation. We’ve heard as much during rallies for the McCain / Palin ticket. Calls to bomb Obama, to kill him, and to accuse him of treason reveal a much darker portrait of the base. The wiggly worm of suggestion has invaded their minds, filling their dreams with terrorists and black liberation theologians. This is the culture of rural white working class voters; down home and country, harkening back to a simpler time when stuff was cheap, men were brave and black folk didn’t run for elected office. To them, being arabic is much different from being a decent, hard working person.

But let’s be sure to remember the religious nature of the Republican base. This point is crucial to understanding them, particularly their use of faith and belief to sustain their political views. To this aim, may I present to you REVEREND ARNOLD CONRAD giving an invocation at a McCain rally in Davenport, Iowa.

“Let’s pray. Our god, we want to honor you today as the sovereign lord of this universe. You tell us in your word that you raise up leaders and you pull them down. So we know that you are in charge of everything that’s going to happen between now and November. And lord, we just appeal to you for this event. We want to ask your blessing on our time together today. Please energize Senator McCain as he seeks to share his vision of what we need to do for the problems that we face as a country. And lord, help us to be good listeners ready to hear what he has to share. I would also add Lord that your reputation is involved in all that happens between now and November. Because there are millions of people around this world praying to their god – whether it’s Hindu, Buddha, Allah – that his opponent wins … for a variety of reasons. And Lord I pray that you would guard your own reputation because they’re going to think their god is bigger than you if that happens. So I pray that you step forward and honor your own name in all that happens between now and election day. Lord we commit this time just to you. Move among us. Make your presence very well felt as we are gathered here today. In Jesus name I pray, amen.”

Okay, so besides everything that’s wrong with mixing church and politics, there’s also the irony in this man’s words. Rev. Conrad speaks of his god's reputation as if the last eight years of America under a born-again presidency haven't been enough to shift divine allegiances (if you believe in such things.) No, of course not. What I find most shocking is the nerve of this man to speak to his god in such a manner. You know the fear is palpable when you start telling god what to do!

I bring all this up because it causes me to seriously question the Republican Party. Has the base dragged them into territory that fiscal and federalist conservatives oppose? More on that after the election (‘cuz I’m superstitious.)

HILLRAISERS

2008-08-21T02:24:00.010-04:00

Pollsters estimate as much as 20% of Democratic voters are die-hard Hillary Clinton supporters embittered by the primaries. Many of them loudly reject the idea of an Obama presidency. Some even admit they’ll VOTE FOR McCAIN in November. Hard feelings have bolstered the Republican candidate in ways that boggle the mind.

And lo, a new voting block has formed. Their agenda reminds me of the evangelical community, complete with enflamed passions and single issue consciousness. Their position against Obama is based on belief and cannot be swayed. What they refer to as ‘recognition’ is really redemption they seek.

Hillraisers have made this election personal, and not in a noble, take-back-our-country sort of way. They want vengeance against the Democratic Party for circumstances their candidate helped make a reality. This is a collective temper tantrum, pure and simple. The world either revolves around them, or it suffers.

They aren’t interested in government function or reform. Their votes won’t be influenced by our failing economy, changes in our climate, energy concerns, or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They aren’t the least bit concerned about the election of future Supreme Court justices. Each and every issue debated in American culture today has been rendered inconsequential to Clinton supporters. Progress takes a back seat until a woman wins the White House.

Self absorbed agendas like this are an insult to liberal ideology.

P.O.W.s

2008-07-30T01:18:00.005-04:00

Debate is heating up regarding the war in Iraq. It's an all out assault on the English language, the worst in years. Even basic words and ideas have been manipulated, their definitions tortured. WordFudge is here to investigate.

Most gruesome by far, the mutilation of the word VICTORY as it pertains to U.S. involvement in Iraq. First, we invaded to shut down the production of WMDs. "We have to fight them over there so we aren't fighting them here." Then our rationale changed. We had to insure that Iraq wouldn't become a haven for terrorists. Saddam Hussein somehow became involved with 9/11. "Sure ... our previous justification turned out to be wrong, but ... since we're already over there we may as well clean house." This evolved into our next rationale, the creation of a free and stable Iraqi government, democratic and free. "When they stand up, we'll stand down." And you know, of all the "victories" so far, this one seemed oddly logical, except for the bitter divide between Sunni, Shia, and Kurds. Free and stable meant a government representing ALL those factions together in cooperation. Also, ensuring each of these sects gain their deserved share of the revenue generated by the country's largest natural resource, oil. It seemed nobody predicted sectarian violence would erupt as these different groupings tried to hash out a deal on these matters.

And then the rationale morphed again. The sectarian upheaval required a surge in troop levels in order to contain the violence. Victory now meant flooding a small, impoverished nation with hundreds of thousands of troops, enough to cover most cities with a military presence. This, to certain politicians, is how we define WINNING. Only its still not enough for McCain. For the Iraqi people, their definition of victory is becoming clear, and it seems to involve time tables -er, horizons. Tensions in their shared culture are not just against one another; many see our countinued presence as an invasion of the Western powers they rage against.

Requests to leave fly in the faces of our generals on the ground, and threatens to tarnish the last word abused by assholes: HONOR. "We will leave with victory and honor." This feels more like a cry for help on behalf of Republicans. The poor dears, they've been dealing with a lot of backlash lately, in part because of the Iraq War. They do so want to be Right. But this situation offers nothing but wrong, no matter what we do.

These words, heavy with possible meaning, reduced to talking points. They dangle in front of us like hostages meant to energize the message of their captors. Using them to invoke good feelings about bad policy only cheapens their meaning.

JUST NOT FUNNY

2008-07-19T23:03:00.020-04:00

The Dark Knight is out and ticket sales are through the roof. Critics are gushing over Heath Ledger’s portrayal of the Joker, calling it an Oscar winning performance. Audiences applaud the director for “refreshing” the famous super villain, giving him a greasy, psychotic flavor.

Well ... after seeing this movie twice, I must loudly disagree! This is NOT the Joker. Certain fundamental elements are missing from his character. And since I'm a collector of Joker comics and memorabilia, I feel the need to geek out about this. Bear with me.

APPEARANCE: This time around, the Joker is not bleached white, he’s in face paint that ends at his chin. He’s not smiling, his mouth is mutilated. His hair is barely green at all. No gags. No props. Any possibility for a living, breathing clown among us is gone, replaced by a knife victim with nothing to lose. Personally, I think he looks like The Crow with a makeup malfunction.

But the clown persona is vital on a deeper level. It's what released the Joker from a "normal" life, and transformed his criminal behavior to the ranks of super villainy. Just as Batman dons the mantle of a bat to terrorize criminals, Joker embellishes on his hilarious disfigurement for comedic effect. It's part of the joke!! A symbol of innocence, fun, and merriment committing unspeakable acts.

With that said, I will admit these superficial changes do NOT necessarily ruin the portrayal. I could probably deal with the face paint if it weren’t for the omission of other crucial elements.

CHARACTER: While it’s true that the Joker is a stark raving madman, there is an obsessive method to his behavior which gives him his charm. He is a delicate balance between sophistication, aggression, and child-like glee. His disfigurement leads the Joker to fully own the persona of a man constantly smiling. It seals his fate, but it also points his madness in a specific direction.

Joker 2008 is merely vicious and cold blooded. He’s a sociopath using clown masks to identify his gang. Any humor by him is quirky, awkward, and sarcastic. Heath Ledger shows us a starved wolf when he should have aimed for a hyena.

CAPERS: Crime is a time to celebrate for the Joker. When he crafts a heist into a humorous scenario, he is announcing himself, signing his name to the deed. Comedy is how he shows off. Suffering and death are his version of the punch line.

The current Joker's crimes, while clever and interesting, are not funny. ARE - NOT - FUNNY. Not even to him apparently. That signature juxtaposition between humor and tragedy is missing. He's a terrorist menacing a major city, that's all. Other villains in the Batman universe could have planned them just as easily (the Penguin springs to mind.)

Sorry guys ... I just can’t get into him. No disrespect to Heath Ledger of course. I do find it interesting that he died soon after the creation of this movie, and of a chemical overdose to boot. Hardcore fans of the Joker might understand what I mean by that.

GRAND THEFT SOCIAL LIFE

2008-05-16T12:25:00.007-04:00

Lock up your valuables and ground your children prematurely … there’s a new Grand Theft Auto on the market! Rockstar Games recently released a fourth installment of this electronic juggernaut, providing parents the world over another convenient scapegoat for why their children are hoodlums. And by my humble estimation, it is the best in an already great series. Gamers, start your thumb pressing!!

The plot is waist deep in illegal immigration, drug trafficking, murder, car jacking, and dealings with the mafia. You play Niko Bellic, a renegade Slavic desperate to find closure for atrocities he was forced to take part in during some undisclosed war. He steps off the boat from a long sea voyage to stay with his cousin and hopefully make it big in America. It is the typical immigrant story just itching to slip into depravity, mayhem and crime.

Grand Theft Auto IV takes place in a fictional version of my favorite metropolis, New York City. You’ve got every major land mass (renamed of course), from Brooklyn to the Bronx, Manhattan to Jersey shore, and even Liberty Island with its famous statue. Well known areas such as Central Park, Time Square, the Metropolitan Museum and St. Andrews Cathedral are so well done it’s like you’re right there among them. There are lots of little nuances to enjoy as well, such as hot dog vendors, multi cultural cursing, graffiti everywhere, beat cops, and an overbearing attitude you either love or hate out of fellow New Yorkers. Rockstar went all out for this one, recreating the city in breathtaking detail.

Of course, having been to New York City before, I can report how ludicrous it is to think you can drive at ANY speed through these famous streets. If you’re not in a taxi or a limo, more than likely you’re hoofing it toward the nearest subway. That’s fine by me. I have a feeling this virtual model of the city is the only safe way to fully explore it by car, bike, chopper or boat.

Now let’s be honest; Rockstar Games did NOT make it big by publishing the highest quality software. They climbed the ranks solely by their willingness to push the boundaries of good taste and social taboo. In fact, I’d go so far as to claim this is their trademark, and why so many frustrated teenagers are desperate to get their hands on these games. They’re guaranteed to see lots of blood, hear lots of cursing, cruise lots of women, and witness a few sexually suggestive scenes (from a car bouncing with the purchase of a hooker to a cutaway while the character scores with his latest date).

There are some aspects I don’t like about the Grand Theft Auto series. The game’s engine sucks, and Rockstar refuses to do anything about it. There are so many possible actions to choose from, the button scheme is a nightmare. At times, the character seems to have a mind of his own. It can make accomplishing objectives frustrating. This becomes even more tedious considering where the player is forced to start if they are killed during a mission: waaaaaay back at the beginning, which could be across town and through a couple different plot revealing cut scenes.

With that said, I’m thoroughly enjoying this game. The story is interactive and perfectly executed. The level of challenge is enough to keep you playing for weeks on end (trust me on this). I have to admit though, I play like a homo. My driving is so slow, the secondary characters I transport give me grief about it! Also, I’ve collected just about every pair of shoes you can purchase in the game. That’s just how I roll baby.

FINAL ANALYSIS: 8 out of 10 points. The game kicks ass, but Rockstar ... PLEASE tighten up that engine of yours. I don't care how exciting, action packed, or raunchy your product is, failing because of faulty character movement just ain't fun.

PEEP SHOW

2008-03-20T00:16:00.003-04:00

Happy Easter!!

NATURE OF THE BEAST

2008-03-05T02:48:00.003-05:00

Ohio’s primaries were yesterday and I’m just now coming down from my political high. All that lever pulling and sticker wearing makes me feel so powerful, as if I’m actually making a difference. It’s only later as I watch the results on the news that I discover how woefully ineffective my sordid little life can be. But the high is still there, and I’d like to ride it a bit longer.

Now don’t you worry. I’m not going to use this space to champion specific issues. No, that would be getting involved in government, and I’m learning that has very little to do with politics.

I’m finally starting to get it. I know that the exact definition of the word centers on the art and science of government and influencing government policy. But that is not the nature of the beast. Politics has so much more to do with image and influence these days. Any interest in governance or the legislative process is old hat. And to think, this whole time I was focusing on specific issues, getting to know what the candidates felt strongly about, what their voting histories were, what I was passionate about as a participant in democracy. How embarrassing.

As it turns out, elected officials ARE interested in what we think and believe ... but only because our thoughts and beliefs get them elected or otherwise move currency into their pockets. They're in luck, for most voters in America today have very short attention spans and even smaller capacities for critical thinking. Our decisions seem to be swayed easily by imagery and slander, character assassinations, partial truths and other assorted trickery.

In short, we are easily manipulated. This comes as no surprise since most people become agitated when asked what exactly is going on in their heads. Or worse, they find the whole business of self reflection to be a waste of time, not worth the trouble of dealing with what they find. After all, the average human brain isn’t even wired for basic cable.

No, it doesn’t look as if introspection will ever catch on as a cultural phenomenon. This is unfortunate. It has given us a vulnerability that can be exploited by anyone who knows it exists in us. I’m talking about our leaders of course, but more than that. Corporate entities, advertising executives, public relations officials, law enforcement and anyone else who is put in charge of pushing or pulling us in a particular direction for profit. Scads of research have been done, our brains dissected while still in our heads. Human consciousness and perspective have been meticulously studied so as to gain the upper hand on what we are conscious of and how we perceive.

So when an election arises, we never see an open and honest account of the candidates involved. Truth is slaughtered, quartered and served in sound bites we can easily digest. They say only what they know we’d like to hear. What we don’t want to hear is associated with their opponent. We’re only ever given glimpses of the real people involved, the smoking heads of wizards. Pay no attention to what’s behind the curtain.

We are comfortable with this. We prefer it. It’s easier this way. By the end, we’re more interested in who we’d rather have a beer with than any real involvement in democracy. As if we’d ever find ourselves sipping hops with the truly elite. Oh but we can dream, and we usually do.

The zombie dance continues well past elections. Matters of legislation are presented just so. Decision making is explained to us using a creative spin that any radio DJ would give his right earpiece to possess. Governance doesn’t even have to be involved. Partisanship is well known and well played, and always to sway general opinions on two different sides to the same coin. It’s a contest to see who can gain the most voter support and, thus, lobbyist dollars and associations.

It’s a game, and we are the pieces. Certain concepts move us two spaces left and one back. Scandals slide us across the board. “It’s for the children.” “Cut and run.” Good and evil, adequately funded by our tax dollars. Nobody is ever kinged, nor do they even know they can be.

Perhaps if we became aware of our herd-like placement in society, we might be outraged, incensed, ashamed of what we’ve become, and other assorted strong feelings that have nothing to do with being entertained like children at a puppet show. Maybe seeing ourselves at the mercy of the well informed would make us wary. The knowledge that we are vulnerable to manipulation may be the only way to begin a slow change toward free thinking. But I fear we’ll only see it if nothing good is on T.V.

DENNYCOSTALISM

2008-02-25T17:27:00.010-05:00

I've noticed a distinct increase in the number of Christians who try to peddle their religion at my local Barnes & Noble. It used to be rare and limited to pamphlets left on certain shelves. You could glance through the literature for a few, take it to the bathroom, drop it in the urinal and be done with it. Quick, satisfying, and conveys a message of your own. But not any more ...

Recently, a friend of mine was in the New Age section browsing tarot decks, minding his own business. All of a sudden, he has a New Testament in his face. "I think you should read this instead." And then the Bible pusher disappeared. Now wasn't that sweet? She cared enough to say that she knew best.

My buddy returned to our table and stirred the rest of us into a secular froth. It wasn't the first time this sort of thing had happened, but we were determined to make a stink. We combed that store for twenty minutes before we found her, precious lamb of Christ, cowering next to her six foot five and 250 lbs. boyfriend, careful to keep her eyes in a non religious book the whole time. On some level, they understood what they were doing was wrong, or at least unacceptable according to today's standards. They just ignore that intuitive stuff since it doesn't mesh with their church programming.

We went after it for almost twenty minutes. Naturally, the Christians tried to reserve themselves and turn the other cheek (especially the boyfriend who was majorly pissed). At first, they played it off as innocent. "But, but, I have friends who recommend books to me all the time." Next, a healthy dose of shame. "Why don't you be a man! Be a man about this!!" Then we shifted to how much good Christianity has done for the world. "Just look at the Salvation Army." And then it came ... the freedom clause. "I have the right. It's part of my freedom of religious expression." End of argument.

A red light has been flashing in my brain ever since. WARNING: CONSTITUTIONAL RAPE IN PROGRESS ... PLEASE CONSULT HISTORY FOR DETAILS ...

Now if this were just a couple of crazy kids out peddling Jesus, that's one thing. Some people just don't know how to feel good about themselves unless they latch on to religion. But this same freedom argument has been used more frequently in recent years.

For example, many clergy have argued against adding sexual orientation and gender identity to the hate-crimes registry. They feel such legislation infringes on their freedom of speech and freedom of religious expression. Yeah, when they preach that god is personally interested in your sex life, they want to do so with a clear conscience. Never mind that such preaching isn't even considered a violent crime and thus privy to federal scrutiny.

What truly interests me is what all this says about the religion in question. For the hate-crimes example, they are worried that they won't be able to spread hatred and guilt over their congregations. They want to preserve their right to ignore historical context and accuracy about portions of their faith, and then plant that same ignorance in others unchecked. As for the Jesus peddlers at my local bookstore, they want the right to tell you they know what's best for you and, further, to do so in public. Apparently the sinners in church grew tired of hearing this from them and stopped coming. They need fresh new faces to show their righteousness off to.

So ... you might be wondering what you can do to stem this tide of zealous bigotry. I'm a big fan of free speech, so we can't exactly force them to shut up. Instead, I suggest we start preaching back to them. It can be part of our "religious" freedom.

Our "good work" is to find people who feel it is their duty to preach truth to us, beat us in the head with their Bibles, or force their commandments and laws into our public sector, and then tell them they are dead wrong. We aren't denying god ... we are denying the god that is part of their cross-eyed religious tradition. Remember, that god has been carefully described and detailed in their holy text and thus vulnerable to harsh scrutiny. And while you're at it, tell them how shocked and appauled you are that anyone would insist they have a personal relationship with something they describe as the greatest, most powerful and all knowing thing in the universe. They simply don't look all that special.

And if they get belligerent and insist that you name your religious affiliations ... tell 'em you're a Dennycostal. And then send 'em my way.

GRAVEN IMAGERY

2008-01-01T23:51:00.001-05:00

A friend of mine recently brought to my attention a video on YouTube that I just have to share. It is entitled "Big Butter Jesus", performed by Heywood Banks and made popular on the Bob and Tom Morning Show. Check it out.

I've only ever heard it refered to as the Touchdown Jesus statue, but Big Butter Jesus works just as well. Yes I know it's country, but the content is what counts. Thanks to my friend Jason for sharing this with me. Rest assured, I pissed myself a little with devilish glee.

And while I'm on this subject, I must relate my one and only Solid Rock Church story. I happened to be refueling my car one day while in a nun's habit when who should appear but a bus load of Solid Rockers. They saw a man in women's apparel and immediately approached me with literature. "We just want you to know we love you," they said, and if I hadn't been staring at their self righteous faces I might have believed them.

After a few moments of uncomfortable banter I was able to steer the conversation toward Big Butter (Touchdown) Jesus. When I asked what compelled them to erect such a graven image, they assured me it was winning souls off the interstate for Christ. They said it cost $10,000 of pure love money tithed by their monsterous congregation, and that every last member agreed it was the best use for such a tidy sum. Furthermore, they were shocked when I suggested more tangible forms of community outreach, things like feeding the homeless, clothing the less fortunate, or substance abuse counciling. I guess "loving others" by example only sounds good in the bible.

You don't believe me?? Check out this picture snapped by Father Patty O'Phile!

Incidentally, I did my research on that statue and found they wasted over $35,000 on it ... and the damn thing looks as if it's falling apart. But one thing they got right was how everyone involved felt like it was a great idea. Perhaps they got their inspiration from the anatomically correct horse statue flashing its goods in the next lot over.

If anyone would like to travel down to Middletown and make out with me in front of this gawd awful embarassment to human progress, let me know. [Offer not valid to skanks]

GOOD GRIEF

2007-11-23T19:58:00.001-05:00

For many of us, winter is a season of long suffering. The Earth insists on traveling far from our sun, even though it’s been out that way enough times to know what to expect. Because of this planetary wanderlust, we the little people must endure months of itchy clothing, excessive spending, runny noses, unwanted pounds of body fat, and a host of well intentioned but often stressful holiday gatherings with our in-laws.

Fortunately, such misery affords me a chance to wax existential. I’ve been meaning to discuss the nature suffering for a while now, but I’ve been too busy enjoying myself. Now that cold weather has settled in, I feel sufficiently depressed and thus in tune with the issue at hand. And suffering is certainly at hand for each of us, at least some of the time.

I don’t have to see into every mind to know this is true. The evidence can be found in the various ways we try to avoid or alleviate it from our lives. Addictions of every kind permeate our culture. Illegal drugs continue to prosper despite the number of wars we wage against them. We have a booming pharmaceutical industry because we insist on treating everything from cancer to a small penis with pills and potions. Health crazes have moved into the realm of legislation. Merchandizing depends on a self loathing they help to create. I could go on (and have in past entries ... why do I like lists so much?)

Many think of sickness, pain, starvation, or loss when they hear the word suffering, but these are merely the conditions which bring it about. You aren’t suffering illness; you are suffering FROM an illness. You don’t suffer hardship; you suffer THROUGH hardship in order to gain something. And while we do “suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune”, we only say it that way because an Englishman decided it would sound fancy. The very same writer prefaced those famous words by suggesting “’tis nobler in the mind ...” (See? More lists!)

Believe it or not, suffering is merely a state of mind. When something happens to us, our brains decide how we should feel about it. Grief is just one of those ways of feeling. Bliss is another, and we all know we can’t purchase a pound of it to take home. Instead, we buy a pound of double fudge brownies and hope that bliss will arise as we gorge ourselves.

It may seem hopeless to view suffering in this way. There are so many catalysts for it, how can we ever cope with them all? By realizing what they all have in common: desire. It was the Buddha who first suggested that desire is the root of all suffering. We suffer because our needs and expectations aren’t being met.

Of course, Buddhists also suggest we let go of desire entirely and accept things as they are. This solution annoys me, and not just because it’s something other than what I want to hear. Desire has motivated every step in our evolution thus far, and I see no reason why it should stop. Sure it creates dictators and stalkers, but it also fosters discovery and the bonds people share.

We can never avoid all suffering in our lives, nor should we hope to. Conflict has the potential to bring about great change, even when it happens inside of us. For example, we suffer when we catch the flu, but our bodies eventually build up immunity to it, thereby making us stronger in the long run. Trying to avoid the inevitable will just bring about more suffering, which is what you’re trying to avoid in the first place!

My solution is awareness, nothing more. Desire itself is an addiction, one which we try and feed whenever possible. On the off chance that we actually get what we want, we get a rush of satisfaction or happiness that demands repeating. If we recognize that we don’t always get what we want, we may move past the suffering and begin to learn from what’s going on. The universe does not cater to our every need. In fact, it has needs of its own which include our occasional dissatisfaction. Otherwise, how would things get done?

The awareness I speak of would reveal how frivolous most of our suffering is. We aren’t angry because we’re stuck in traffic, rather because we don’t want to be in traffic, or we have things which need to get done. We don’t grieve because someone died, but because we want them alive and with us again. We don’t suffer because we have less than perfect bodies, but because we want the attention and sexy playmates that such bodies will bring us. (List!) All of it is relevant to our perspective.

Remember this as you dig your car out from under large drifts of snow. Your unhappiness is not so much at what is, rather at what you want it to be. And when you realize this, at least some of the time you can let go and get on with things.

BURNING BUSH

2007-10-13T17:17:00.001-04:00

In honor of Stephen Colbert's new book release I Am America (And So Can You), I'd like to share with you his speech at the White House Correspondent's dinner. Prepare to laugh yourself stupid.

(part 1)

(part 2)

(part 3)

AND THE AWARD FOR BLASPHEMY GOES TO ...

2007-09-13T22:34:00.001-04:00

Let me hurry and discuss this whole Kathy Griffin fiasco before my freedom of speech is completely gone. During her Emmy acceptance speech, Miss Griffin boldly denied Christ's involvement in her winning the award. Her comment went like this:

“A lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus … Can you believe this shit? Hell has frozen over. Suck it, Jesus; this award is my god now!”

This colorful comment was enough to enrage Christians not only at her, but also at anyone in the audience who laughed and, eventually, Hollywood in general. Religious nuts have gone so far as to claim it as hate speech against Judeo-Christians. They liken it unto Don Imus’ ethnic slur toward black women. Can you believe it? You better, ‘cuz it’s true. Check out this CNN REPORT for a slice of the so called “debate”.

Excellent point #1: Nothing about what Miss Griffin said was geared toward Christians. She did not ask Christians or Catholics to “suck it”, nor did she make any attempt to slander their own adherence to the sun god. She made a cultural observation about how people feel the need to thank Jesus or God whenever they receive an award, win a game, or accomplish virtually anything in their lives. She was giving HERSELF full credit for her accomplishment, and rightly so.

Excellent point #2: In this country, a person’s freedom to follow their religious inclinations is guaranteed. This DOES NOT require the rest of us to pay similar homage to such ideas. It does not make those ideas free from scrutiny. Claims of hate speech and bigotry are petty ways for religious people to keep the questioning of their beliefs in check, that’s all.

Excellent point #3: Asking people in a free society to respect every imaginary idea you hold sacred is an insult. By your reaction, you are asking everyone to respect Jesus Christ whether they believe in him or (in Kathy’s case) not. Now, if you asked us to respect the ideas of cooperation or democracy or justice or compassion or any number of other concepts which benefit the Whole, that would be reasonable. You are not asking that. You want everyone to hold the figurehead of your religion, a character who you yourselves do not fully understand, with the utmost respect and admiration. Not doing so enrages you. Get over it.

Excellent point #4: Equating this situation with the Muslim outrage toward a cartoon of their prophet DOES NOT support your argument. Actually, it weakens it. Muslims have every right to expect their flocks to respect Allah; they have no right to expect that from the rest of the world. In fact, their violent actions negate any respect from being earned, especially when they justify their violence using the religion such a prophet stands for. By claiming this rationale as their own, Christians have revealed their fascist desire to force everyone to raise Jesus Christ above all else. I will fight this particularly giddy logic to my bitter end.

I applaud Kathy Griffin.

TURD BLOSSOM

2007-08-25T19:14:00.001-04:00

President Bush has lost his mind. We’ve heard this many times over the last several years, but on August 31st it will be official. On that day, Karl Rove will step down as chief political advisor to the presidency. The man known as “Bush’s Brain” will soon be among the many political rats fleeing the wreckage of current administration. [please hold your applause until the end]

Naturally, there has been much speculation on his resignation. I’ve seen his pasty face on select news broadcasts attempting some sort of damage control for his colleagues. Even now, I find myself amazed at his claims about the conduct and decision making of the White House he was a part of. The worst by far is his unwavering support of President Bush. Rove simply gushes over G. W., suggesting he has unified our country.

I hope by now we can recognize such statements for what they truly are; attempts to feed us the opinions they want us to have. I’m not buying it.

Never mind the blatant attack on a separation of church and state, the underhanded stunts to discredit and undermine critics, the slow erosion of civil liberties, and billions upon billions of taxpayer dollars funneled into a war for profit. The absence of honesty and transparency when making major decisions on behalf of an entire nation will do nothing BUT divide that nation. Not only is it undemocratic, it belittles the people you are governing over.

I know I’m not alone in this viewpoint. Rove’s resignation was met with cheers, applause and quite a few sighs of relief. Many political pundits are excited to see what happens once he crawls out from under executive privilege. Perhaps now his testimony on the firing of several competent U.S. attorneys will be something other than “against our national interest.”

I’ve also heard that his life may be in danger once he’s away from the protection of the black suits. Attitudes about his part in the great America ruin go that deep. Well I for one feel death is too easy for such a magnanimous individual. After all, we’ve learned so much from him about how Americans should be treated. I say we honor his legacy by giving some of that back. Consider the following suggestions:

Create a shadowy branch of law enforcement whose sole task is to monitor for terrorist threats carried out by anyone named Karl Christian Rove (sure it’s profiling, but we already know a spade is a spade). Efforts would include wire tapping, monitoring any purchases and investments, and detailed investigations into the lives of any family and friends.
Pull any sons named Andrew Madison Rove from their undergraduate studies at Trinity University and enlist them on the front lines of the war effort. Record attempts to use political connections to stop the draft procedure. Such actions are against national interest and may be viewed as support for terrorism.
Detain the suspect(s) for an indefinite period of days, months, or years, without arraignment. Any outside attempts to push the legislative process through will be frowned upon. All attorneys sympathetic to such a case will be mysteriously fired without notice.
While incarcerated, the suspect(s) will be subjected to a variety of tortures including (but not limited to): electroshock treatment; physical torture of the head, torso, extremities, and genitalia; enforced nudity followed by photo opportunities; repeated interviews by one Lou Dobbs; sodomizing any and all holes upon the suspect’s person. Complete healthcare will be provided for so as to prolong imprisonment.
Torture is geared for eventual brain death. Suspect(s) will then be hooked up to a feeding tube and placed on display in the Library of Congress. Only then will God's great gift of life be fully realized.
If the suspect(s) is married, he will be replaced by an illegal immigrant so as to perform any unwanted duties under the role of husband.

I hate to sound like an elite, effete snob, but in this case I really believe such actions would be in the nation’s best interest. Let’s call it a morale booster, shall we?

AGE OLD QUESTION

2007-08-10T17:10:00.000-04:00

Finally, after years of speculation, we can answer which came first ...

HEATHEN'S PARADISE

2007-07-14T20:23:00.001-04:00

A popular defense for continued belief in religion is one of quiet despair. After you’ve pointed out the numerous inconsistencies in scripture, shown how moral precepts shift to follow cultural change, and explained away any evidence for the existence of the supernatural, believers will defend their faith by telling you religion is the best way to foster morality. The Washington Post recently published an ARTICLE that illustrates such a claim.

Would humanity be selfish, power hungry, and violent without the influences of religion? I dare say we won’t learn the answer to that question any time soon. I’ve already posted MY VIEWS on why our basic morality does not originate from any form of religion. Uncertainty about our existence is no longer enough to dissuade us from adhering to certain cooperative values that better our chances for survival.

But to argue that humanity would devolve into anarchy without religion is to grossly underestimate our potential. What we are dealing with is a brazen fear that comes from even contemplating a world without a supernatural presence, one which we have become dependent upon. I would like to address that fear.

It is true that people can find comfort and purpose from religion. It is true that people can be deterred from certain forms of immorality through religion, especially if they believe God is actively watching every move they make. These facts certainly do not prove that religion is true, nor do they provide us with sufficient reason to allow it to dominate human consciousness. Indeed, it is possible for religious people to do harm in the world (sometimes even in the name of their gods). It is also true that having your beliefs spoon fed to you limits your free will and involvement in your own life.

At their root, religious morals and values are IDEAS that have come from mankind’s interpretation of the world. They are by no means the only ideas ever to come up in our consciousness. We've realized the importance of knowing ourselves. We figured out the best way to understand reality is through empirical study. We created democracy to provide every person’s ideas equal chance at success (while still leaving them vulnerable to scrutiny and revision). This tells us that we have the potential to produce concepts grounded in reason, and follow them without guidance (or threat) from a divine being.

The claim that society would collapse into anarchy without religion is patently false. Atheists, for example, use empirical evidence to guide their lives, evidence that is grounded in physical and behavioral science. Their own DEFINITION contains values every man can agree on except that they exclude a need for divinity.

The real threat of a society without religion is that we would be forced to actually work toward peace of mind. Without god or gods, we would have only each other to look to, depend upon, and coexist with. Without religious interpretations of right/wrong or good/evil, we would have no choice but to figure those human dilemmas out based on evidence and rational debate. This is not a bad thing, though it frightens people immensely.

It is clear that human nature will include violence, jealousy, fear, and passion with or without religion. But in a society governed by reason, acting on those human qualities would be subjected to intellectual scrutiny and not faith in this or that. We see this working fairly well in nearly every democratic judicial system. Why shouldn’t each of us adopt this way of perceiving the world for ourselves?

CHECKS AND BALANCES

2007-07-12T00:52:00.001-04:00

"We who live in democracies have become somewhat obsessed with gauging public opinion on all manner of topics, and for good reason: in a democracy it really matters what the people believe. If the public cannot be mobilized into extended periods of outrage by reports of corruption, or the torturing of prisoners by our agents, for instance, our democratic checks and balances are in jeopardy."

"Even in shaky democracies, what the leaders believe about the beliefs that prevail in their countries influences what they take their realistic options to be, so belief maintenance is an important political goal in its own right."

Daniel C. Dennett (2006) p. 201, 202

MOORE BIAS

2007-07-09T21:48:00.001-04:00

I went to see Michael Moore’s new movie SiCKO for the second time. It’s a two hours flick, maybe longer, so there was plenty of stuff I missed the first time through. If you haven’t seen it yet, do so … right now. I can wait ... …

… and you’re back. What did you think? I felt it made a lot of great points and even schooled Americans on what a democracy is (or is supposed to be). I’ve read through some critiques and had numerous conversations on the issues expressed. But at this point, the movie isn’t what I’m interested in discussing. Instead, I’d like to touch on the reputation of Michael Moore.

He’s one of those cultural figures that seem to induce strong feelings or ideals automatically. When I see Moore on commercials or in the news, I associate him with passionate, radical thinking akin to gonzo journalism (without all the drugs). Many others instantly demonize him as the golden child of liberal media bias. We either love him or hate him. I have yet to hear an apathetic comment on anything he’s done.

What truly solidifies Moore’s credentials in my mind is his willingness to debate what he produces. For example, former senator Fred Thompson attacked him for creating SiCKO even before it had a chance to screen. Moore’s response was a challenge, inviting Thompson to an open debate on our nation’s health care and, further, his countless campaign contributions by the health care industry. The response was typical: “I’ve been looking at my schedule, Michael, and I don’t think I have time for you.” Keep in mind this was said while Thompson lounged casually in an easy chair sucking at a Montecristo.

Another example is with an author of the Michael Moore hate site MOOREWATCH. JimK was about to shut the site down because of personal and financial issues, and posted as much for people to read. Moore’s response was not vindictive or triumphant; he actually supplied the man with the necessary funds to keep his life on track and thus to keep the site going. To this day, JimK continues to bash Moore, even though he acknowledges the assistance given.

I’m sorry, but anyone who places real money down to secure the existence of an opposing perspective deserves much respect and consideration. Moore may not be right on everything (who among us can be?), but he shows tremendous security in his own views. So much so that he PUBLICLY welcomes the chance to be wrong about what he thinks. That’s my point.

I am wary of anyone who simply puts the opinions of others down without every making their own opposing views available for scrutiny. These folks are guided by one (or all) of three possible motives: (a) they don’t really believe what they believe; (b) they believe without much evidence; (c) they have a vested interest in something that is currently being challenged.

Their tactics are usually to demonize their detractors, discrediting them with the hopes of silencing further argumentation. They feel this somehow safeguards their beliefs, when really it shows a tender spot in their thinking. They are not interested in discovering truth; they are interested in appearing right. The two are not the same. (Wow, I think I pierced the heart of political discourse … bonus!)

I recognize there are people out there who DO take in different perspectives in order to find their own. I applaud you. But there are many more who knee jerk for whatever reason, which doesn’t serve any purpose other than to stroke their own egos. It’s quite possible they’ve adopted a view which was fed to them by the media, which makes them just as guilty as Moore’s audience.

If we don’t agree with what Michael Moore says, can we at least agree that he opens doorways to more moderate thinking? Can we recognize that voices such as his, while extreme, help people solidify their own positions on matters of tremendous significance? And most importantly, if we feel we are being lied to or deceived, can we start defending why we think that instead of attacking others? Here’s hoping …

NINJA GRANNY

2007-07-07T22:02:00.001-04:00

My friends love to hear about the exploits of my grandmother. This confounds me. They’ve all met her and know she is best appreciated in small doses. Perhaps that’s why they prefer my stories to the real thing. Oh yes, it’s easy to have a good chuckle from a safe distance isn’t it?

Well I’m here to tell you it is no laughing matter! She is no ordinary woman!! Her years of training are concealed by the guise of a helpless old hillbilly.

I first became aware of her amazing powers back in high school. It was a beautiful day, one that should never be wasted in the halls of public education. My friends and I decided to take a well deserved yet unannounced holiday. With little effort, we were able to slip past even the most vigilant of school yard monitors.

But I was not allowed to enjoy that day of rest. Somehow my granny discovered I was playing hooky. She tracked me down within hours of my liberation and proceeded to give me the worst scolding of my life, made worse because it was in front of my friends. And while she scolded, without missing a beat, she pulled from her purse a lovely sack lunch for me to enjoy. I was humiliated and awe struck all at once.

From that day forward, she was known throughout my small corner of the world as the infamous Ninja Granny. People quietly feared her, and worked hard to stay in her good graces. After all, she can be an asset when properly motivated. Cross her, however, and you will learn what it’s like to be attacked by someone society deems “helpless”.

I swear to you she is a being without rival. At her side is an industrial sized handbag that can hold a three course dinner. Its mysterious contents are a perfect weight to beat back any attacker, and she can muscle her way through the worst yuletide sales events.

Equipped with sonic vocal cords, her nagging capabilities are astounding to behold. She can guilt, shame, or otherwise belittle a man from fifty paces easily. She can convince any salesman to lower his prices, any waitress that a dollar is a sufficient tip, and any adult male that he is nothing without his mother.

So I write this not to gain cheap laughs, but as a warning to you all. Ninja Granny is out there prowling the streets. She is armed and extremely cantankerous. Remember that the next time you find yourself standing close to an old crone in the grocery store or at the bank. What appears to be a helpless matron just might be your worst nightmare.

THE MORAL CONFORMITY

2007-06-26T21:19:00.001-04:00

In recent years, America has seen a tremendous increase in religious ideas permeating politics and the public sphere. Faith based initiatives supported with tax payer dollars, foreign policy driven by apocalyptic motives, government sanctioned discrimination of homosexuals, supreme court judicial nominees from inferior yet religious law schools, the introduction of Sunday school materials in public classrooms, attempts to display the Ten Commandments in courts of law, and a host of state sponsored thought policing under the heading of community values. Even our politicians feel the need to flaunt (or exaggerate) their religious beliefs to gain voter attention.

Such a religious push is utter madness. If nothing else, it is undemocratic to expect a pluralist (including secular humanist) nation to align itself under Judeo-Christian values. But I’m trying to see the whole thing in a positive light. We’ve been afforded a frightening glimpse of what it’s like to have a bible thumper at the helm. King George is an excellent example of how religious people do not have in mind the best interests of others.

Unfortunately, the whole concept of morality has been tainted by religion. Merriam-Webster’s definition of morality includes anything relating to principles of right and wrong behavior, and an individual’s conforming to standards of what is deemed right. This definition excludes mentioning religion, and with good reason.

We do NOT get our most fundamental morals from any sort of religion. If we did, we would still be stoning people for heresy, clinching real estate deals using our women as collateral, bartering in the slave trade, and offering sacrifices so the universe might spin in our favor. The basics of moral behavior (no killing, no stealing, no raping) came about long before the rise of the Church. They appeared SLOWLY as people witnessed the benefits of banning together in societies. Religions may include the moral basics in their dogma, but they have no right to claim people are moral because of religiosity.

With that said, there ARE frivolous morals out there which religious institutions have a heavy hand in. These include subjecting females to males, condemnation of homosexuality, honoring a day of rest from work, dietary restrictions, defining ideas and words as blasphemous, and taboos on masturbation. Especially in today’s world, these concepts make no sense.

Special moral precepts came about by the superstitions of ancient people. They are enforced today by the same sort of thinking, reached using inferior reason based on the teachings of ill-conceived literature. Religious leaders justify this by convincing us they are in touch with cosmic powers. In essence, they are telling us they know what’s best for everyone (when really they only champion what justifies their own beliefs).

Not only do I question their morality, I question their claim to majority status. Tendencies toward social desirability, or a need for approval in social situations, are well understood as a part of being human. Religious leaders capitalize on this, using concepts of guilt and fear to align us under their agenda. They threaten us with eternal torment, just to keep us convinced they are right. No accurate model of morality on frivolous issues can be determined as long as the Church holds so much sway over us.

So what’s a rational person to do? Well, the most educated of our species today do not believe in the theory of a god that is both outside of human understanding and extremely personal to us. It is time we start supporting the views of people who move our society forward, not those who hold it in age old traditions.

We must begin to speak out. We must show that Judeo-Christian values can be harmful when enforced on a free society. We cannot tell people what to believe, but we CAN and we MUST begin to protest when religious values are foisted upon us. In short, we must grow some balls.

And to help with this task, I’ve compiled a short (?) list of church born ethical issues and how they might be argued against. Enjoy.

DEMOCRACY: Is it moral to govern every member of a collective society with special values that not everyone believes in or supports? If so, we’ve forgotten our American history. Early settlers pulled themselves out of state sponsored religion in England. They disliked the idea of theocracy so much that they enacted a division between church and state.

BELIEF: Is it moral to continue believing in the face of outrageous rational opposition to what you believe in? This is the mental equivalent of placing fingers in your ears and shouting “lalalala I can’t hear you lalala”. Believing may only hold individuals back in the short term, but those individuals VOTE, and that affects us all. Accept that we are all human, and that what we believe might eventually be challenged.

HELL: Is it moral to use fear tactics such as the threat of eternal damnation to convince people you are right? If so, you support terrorism. Not only does scaring people to your side threaten free will and expression, it shows a terrible lack of faith in what you say you believe.

CHILDREN: Is it moral to indoctrinate children, the most malleable and vulnerable of minds, into a set of beliefs that are entirely man made and without proof? No child is ever born religious, or much of anything for that matter. Indoctrinating kids into religious ideologies lessens their potential as human beings. Your job as a parent is to help foster functional people, not tiny representations of your ego.

SEX: Is it moral to place so many restrictions and taboos on something as paramount to human existence as our sexuality? If so, you want to control the feelings which occur in people naturally. Get a life! Prohibition has a nasty way of driving people to dysfunctional means to get what is being denied them.

PHELPS HAS RETURNED

2007-04-19T19:58:00.001-04:00

[I decided to respond to the following ARTICLE on the Westboro Baptist Church. Check it out, then read below.]

While it is necessary and even fun to scorn the behavior of the Westboro Baptists, scorn is not enough to solve the problem. They have a message, and while it's true they hate many people, they've found a special distaste for homosexuals. For more information, check out their website http://www.godhatesfags.com Happy good time jubilations!

I too remember when Phelps and his "family" protested funerals of those who died of AIDS. Nobody seemed to care when it was merely a gay issue; hence their movement was allowed to grow. More people are getting angry about the military funerals, but ONLY because protesting our fallen soldiers is something we ALL can agree is shameful.

The Westboro Baptists will be allowed to continue their religiously shielded hate as long as the American atmosphere allows it. Their First Amendment right is supported, and sometimes even applauded, by religious conservatives. But freedom of speech only remains free until real damage occurs from what is said. For example, shouting FIRE in a crowded auditorium is not something we are free to do unless there really is a fire.

The problem is really about what the Westboro Baptist Church feels compelled to say, driving its members to the point of defiling an otherwise sacred ceremony. And the truth is, homophobia is not necessarily discouraged in America. Nobody wants to touch the gay issue, unless it's to legislate to keep gay issues further from mainstream society. (Thanks Issue 1).

Hateful religious ideologies like those of Fred Phelps are what fuel much of the “debate” on issues like gay marriage, gay adoption, or even basic recognition of homosexuals as targets for violence and discrimination (special rights my ass). They influence the minds of the people we put in charge to protect and to govern all of us in the United States. They are not merely displayed on poster board during funerals.

Yes, it is deplorable that anyone would seek to protest funerals. But shouldn’t we start examining the beliefs behind such behavior? How can we NOT expect religious radicals to show up when we send such powerful messages to support their cause? I see Fred Phelps and his congregation as a TREMENDOUS opportunity for the American people to actually examine the beliefs which hold an entire minority in check. We just won’t do it. We’d rather hear dozens of motorcycles blaring at a funeral than to meet this issue head on.

Not that it’s easy mind you. I’ve been at it for years and have made little progress. But if we can foster a more accepting attitude for homosexuality, Phelps’s free speech will sound more like shouting fire in a crowded room. And eventually, someone will beat the crap out of him.

EASTER HAS BEEN CANCELLED

2007-04-04T19:11:00.000-04:00

TIME/SPACED OUT

2007-03-18T01:04:00.001-04:00

What the …? The Ides of March have come and gone in 2007, and I missed it? Where the hell have I been? Let’s see, I was hurtling toward the holidays head first ... I remember my breaks locked up, powerless against the gravity of the yuletide season. Once I hit, I must have lost all sensibilities. I vaguely recall lots of snow all at once, and also trying a new kind of cake. Other than that, I got nothing. Months of my life, gone.

This isn’t fair. It’s like time and space decided to ditch me for some cooler kids down the block. Or maybe time and space have better things to do than set me on track. I don’t know; whichever makes me the victim in all this.

To me, this is more evidence that the instrument of time is not user friendly. Take your eyes off it and then it’s four months later. Other people tell me their time is working just fine. Some are actually smug about it. Well pheuf … I’d exchange mine if I still had the receipt.

It’s all terribly confusing. Luckily I have a government lording over me, to keep these cosmic constructs in check. Perhaps you noticed their recent handy work? With their awesome powers, Congress successfully moved daylight savings time ahead one month. It was a spectacular feat of prestidigitation for our grand wizards, especially considering how short the congressional work week turns out to be.

This hyper spring forward is part of a new energy plan enacted to combat rising energy consumption and cost. If signed into law, the plan would solidify Spring Forward on the first weekend of March, and also push Fall Back to the final week in November (instead of October.) The rationale behind this space/time flux is magical; an extension of daylight ours will trim energy cost by removing some of the need for artificial light during the evenings. The All Power has blessed us with another hour of daylight!

I didn’t really see much celebrating though. Lot’s of confusion and sleepy faces. It’s the very thing what roused me from hibernation. I still haven’t taken the bunny slippers off, so you KNOW this has impacted me on a personal level.

Let’s start with tradition. The Fall Back period of daylight savings has been enjoyed by many simply because it appears to give them more sleep. But any party shark will tell you that Halloween is made so much better when the taverns have an extra hour to serve booze. The change occurrs at 2 a.m., well before last call. And really, who wants a Halloween party to end too soon? This new energy bill HATES Halloween parties, and it hates you for going to them. We will all be hurtin’ without our “extra” hour of sleep.

Now, as I dry my tears let me remind us of the inherent nature of Time. It is a tool used to measure the duration of events and compare the motion of objects. It is an intellectual structure, a pattern our minds place on the world in motion. We are not moving time because there is no thing to move. We’re merely changing our understanding of it, and with that our habits to compensate for a lack of available daylight. That’s why we have a need to Spring Forward and Fall Back to begin with.

And really, this does not reduce the amount of energy people use. It merely changes when they use it. For example, hundreds of thousands of moms are up at the butt crack of dawn with their children. They’ve got televisions going, hair dryers blowing, microwaves heating, music playing, lights to see by, the works. Some of them now need to use more electricity for the lack of morning light.

The only way I see that we can truly conserve energy and thus coinage in our pockets is to actually take on a conservative attitude. Shifting dates around on a calendar only looks cool. And yet I’m sure our tax dollars went into the committees to decide on the color scheme for the pie charts used to express a need for us to begin making some real progress in the overall problem at hand.

On the other hand, how would Americans react if they were asked to make small sacrifices? A wee piece of me wants to believe we’d do it if it were labeled right. We'd have to update Riveting Rosie, maybe pierce her nipples .

In other news, scientists decided to go public with the reality that we can never travel through time. Again, there’s nothing there to travel through; only the concept itself. There is one moment, ongoing and for us, eternal. Which means I’ll never get my four months back … ever. This blows.

And so I resume my post. Now if only I could forget how to age …

WAR OF THE WORLDVIEWS

2006-11-16T01:42:00.001-05:00

I’ve kept my opinions on Middle Eastern affairs relatively quiet until now. It’s not an issue, it is issues (plural), all feeding off one another to create chaos tenfold. There’ve been bombings, murders, wars, kidnappings, and now bold statements of uranium enrichment. Nations found within the Western definition of the Middle East greatly vary in governing systems and cultural attitudes. Such a topic deserves much reflection, something most people who actually live there get little chance at. After all, immediate survival tends to command one’s attention.

But we who are safe behind our computer screens DO have the luxury of considering the global implications of what is transpiring in the Middle East. Especially we Americans, since we feel it necessary to blow something up over there at least once a week. Don’t think I’m going soft; I merely feel a lot of the aggressions on display are TKJRs, or Tactical Knee Jerk Reactions. We’re focused on a lot of surface crap like territorial boundaries and oil when what we NEED to focus on is the driving force behind the devastation. No matter the actions or decisions involved, they are all humans equally vulnerable to the same fears and needs.

Now I know that I often harp on the religious aspects of a given topic, but religious discussion is vital to the conflicts at hand. After all, what is religion but an agreed upon system to address the fears and needs of its members. This central issue of religious dogma is a terrible burden, for adherence to religion has a blinding affect on people toward other points of view.

For example, people know there are Jews, Christians, and Muslims living in one general area, but I’m not sure they understand how intimately connected these three religions are. Most important to understand is that they are all Abrahamic traditions, that is, religious ideologies that trace their lineage back to that most famous biblical figure, Abraham. The following is a very crude interpretation of the blossoming of the Abrahamic tree:

First there was Judaism, which established its unique beliefs despite much opposition from polytheistic traditions. Over many generations, Judaism began to find favor with the societies it existed in, until it became corrupted. Along came a man with the kahunas to speak out against Jewish elders, and the people loved him. They loved him so much they established a revised version of Judaism in his honor which eventually became known as Christianity. Many more generations passed, with Christendom suffering the same resistance its predecessor endured, until it too found favor and power within society. This power began to grow and conquer other points of view until it became an oppressive force. And once again, a man appeared who spoke out against the Christian presence, his followers creating yet another religious ideology which is now known as the Islamic faith.

Judaism, Christianity, and the Islamic faith can all be considered revisions of the ideas first spoken to Abraham by the one God himself. Judaism evolved along with the Jews until they “went astray”, to which it evolved AROUND them to establish Christianity, which evolved until it too “went astray”, to which it evolved AROUND them to established Islam. And all of this social evolution was fueled by conflicting opinions, corrupt religious figures, and a brash mishandling of whatever spiritual claims they held over their people. One need only observe the many sects and schisms within each tradition to know this truth.

Ah but since man is a temporal beast fixated on his own survival, the conflict cannot end with lineage and a claim to God’s ideal religious values. God was also known to give land to his chosen people(s), which they quickly covered with sacred sites and temples. Here is where we are focused, on the rights and privileges of religious nuts to their prize. It means we are dealing not only with differing points of view, but also territory and “stuff” sacred to each tradition.

Now that our nation is free from conservative leadership fearful of losing credibility, the reality of the Middle East can come forth. We can see that terrorists and insurgents are really staunch believers in Muhammad and his claims that Judaism and Christianity are both corrupted versions of God’s truth. These people can all be found as citizens to a Nation of Islam (not really found on a map), and they have pledged to do away with the other offending world views at any cost. We can see Jews clinging to ancient customs brought about largely to ensure their survival among oppressive circumstances, fighting for a land they claim was given to them by a transcendental figure. And we can see Christianity supporting Jews simply because it shares some of the same holy scripture and ideas.
Why is it so hard for us to get a handle on the overall conflict at hand? Because so many of us see our own religion as necessary to our existence and, further, a force for Good in the world. It doesn’t even enter our thinking. We lack the ability to look critically at the way we perceive the world. This is not a problem for one particular religion, but all of them. They are all corrupt, and must all preach against other points of view as false in order to seem credible. This creates wars. This will be our downfall.

And you know what? The overwhelming numbers of religious people deserve this self made Hell. Sure it sucks for those of us who choose spirituality over religion, but we are a tiny minority lost in a sea of monkeydom. Those who so desperately need ONE DEFINITE shared experience of life will be denied, ARE BEING DENIED RIGHT NOW, and it is driving them insane.

In a very elaborate way, this conflict stands as a test for humanity. Will religious convictions and existential fears continue to cloud our judgments and thus spin us off toward oblivion? Or will enough people, religious and non, realize the nature of these conflicts and decide on a better possible future? Can we see that every perspective is a different representation of the same feelings and needs in the collective human experience?

My vote is a resounding no, which is why I suggest this comically radical solution. If the children cannot play nice with the toys God gave them, those toys must be taken away. If temples and land and artifacts and idols are the symbols men choose to associate reality with, then we must use those symbols to send a new message, namely that we don’t appreciate their throwing the human race into millennia long struggles for dominance and orthodoxy. I don’t suggest we try and convince these believers of the folly of their actions any longer, nor do I suggest we outright kill them. We evacuate the temples and sites they hold so dear, and blow those things to kingdom come.

Yes I know that all Jews, Christians, and Muslims do not hold hate in their hearts. The problem is, they hold Judaism, Christianity, and Islam in their hearts, allowing for haters and nut jobs to manipulate each for their own agendas. This conflict is the very same conflict which brought each religious tradition into being. Either we allow the human spirit to evolve past them, or we die trying.

A RIGHT TO BROWN LUNGS

2006-11-02T18:50:00.001-05:00

With all of the problems Ohioans face going into the midterm elections (corrupt government officials, questionable voting procedures, lackluster education for our children, the loss of many jobs and, as a result, the emigration of our younger generations) we’ve decided one of our biggest issues should be about smoking in public places. Now if I was a conspiratorially minded individual (and I am), I might suggest this is a clever way to get us angry at one another, thus taking some of the blame from where it truly belongs, to those whom WE PAY to keep some semblance of order and cooperation to society. The ol’ divide and conquer. Whatever, I can play along.

However, before I rip this issue apart, let me get on the record for saying I realize cigarette smoking is unhealthy and potentially deadly for those with a family history of lung cancer, emphysema, and heart problems. There is no debate in that area. But all of these possibilities fall squarely in the physical dimensions of smoking. They include chemical dependency (craving a smoke) and reactions by the body to the chemicals ingested (disease/cancer).

There is more to smoking than the physical (as with all things having to do with people). There is a neuro-chemical dependency present as well, one familiar to all compulsions. In this neuro-chemical realm (let us call it the mental dimensions) we find not only a change in brain “juices” but also a changing of neural pathways used to perceive the world, make decisions, and have needs and demands met. It is a conditioning of our minds to seek a quick fix in the midst of immediate stress, loneliness, even boredom. Addiction is a process that must be unlearned; it is not just an aspect of a person that can be chopped off.

And smoking is definitely an addiction, considering most everyone on the planet has been crammed full of good advice about how it’s bad for you. If I’m feeling cocky, I shoot back with “holy crap, really? When did this happen??” It’s got bite, I’ll admit, but it leaves the “well intentioned” person feeling sheepish; like holding up a mirror, revealing their actions in the moment. And yes, sometimes I’m a bitch. It definitely illustrates the frustrations many smokers feel when they are asked to stop doing what they do habitually. It’s like expecting others to eat only healthy foods all the time. You know it’s a healthful way of living, yet you don’t have time for that, you like the taste, you perceive junk food as indulgence outright.

Bottom line: bullying people who are stressed out enough to smoke cancer does not always work. When someone engages in behavior compulsively, the last thing they need is the negativity that comes from being preached at. They need subtle support.

With this in mind, let us now discuss the two motions on the Ohio ballet this year involving smoking legislation. Issue 4 seeks to amend our state constitution, banning cigarette smoke in public places statewide unless that place makes 40%+ of their sales from alcohol (hmm, the two seem to go hand in hand don’t they?) Of course, any establishment can still cater to both smokers and non-smokers provided they are physically separated by walls with doors that close. Issue 5 seeks to ban public smoking by law. It’s still unclear to me whether this includes parts of the outdoors.

I will be voting yes on issue 4 and no to 5. Issue 4 says “yes, we get it, smoking is bad and you don’t want to be exposed to it. We will go into another room or stay away from certain establishments.” It is a way for those who smoke to concede to this terribly one-sided crusade on well being and health. It allows us to admit we don’t care if we have to move to another room.

My problem with issue 5 is two-fold. First, and of the utmost importance, is that NO ban on smoking cigarettes, whether by segregation or by law, will greatly improve the quality of air that we breath. Here’s a fun fact: buildings DO NOT generate their own air in order for patrons to breathe. Air is a blanket that permeates most all of our “public places”; it’s the same air that is filled with gasoline fumes, factory smoke, and natural pollutants. Cigarette smoking merely adds to the problem.

Second, the REAL problem of our air quality goes sorely unaddressed when we look only to smoking in public places. The largest contributor to the crap floating through the air is the burning of fossil fuels, in particular from (you guessed it) the automobile. Nowadays, even our more rural areas hold emissions testing at 45% of total pollutants; at best, cigarette smoking accounts for 10%, and that’s in areas where smokers are gathered. If we are TRULY concerned about health here, such high percentages from our automobiles should enrage us! Yet … we as a nation drive shamelessly. We are proud of it.

I’m sorry, there is no logical basis for what is going to be voted on November 7th, and that includes both issues 4 and 5. It will not solve the problems brought up; only add a bunch of crazy, nicotine-deficient citizens into an already cross eyed culture. Remember this as you cruise the streets in your jacked out rides. And consider, if humans can’t let go of our dependence on cars and trucks, why should some of us let go of smoking?

MISS HURGE U.S. of A.

2006-08-12T04:29:00.001-04:00

My oldest and dearest friend is a drag queen. I believe the reason we get along so favorably is because she is an entertainer and thus a story teller in the truest sense of the word. While I write my tales down, she enacts hers. It’s rather shamanic if you think about it. For more information, click the side bar link in the Peanut Gallery entitled Ms. D. Meanor. Our friendship gives me brief glimpses into the world of drag queens, and brother, it’s a mess in a dress.

For those of you unaware, there are levels of cross dressing people do, each with their own titles and purposes. A drag queen is a man who takes the illusion of a woman in order to perform or entertain. They are a distinct minority from cross dressers, who are men who dress as women because they want to. Interestingly enough, a majority of cross dressers are straight, many with wives and children; they just feel comfortable in chiffon and the occasional cheek rouge. Transsexuals involve actually becoming a woman through surgery and drug treatments, and honestly I don’t know much about these.

But the variety doesn’t stop there. Drag queens are social by nature. There are quite a few drag pageants out there, allowing for a greater number of queens to hold a title and crown of some sort. Two national competitions are for the titles Ms. Gay U.S. of A. and Entertainer of the Year, and oh are they a big to do! They have an “At Large” competition for those girls who tip the scales, a pageant for the golden girls of drag (ballads, snore), and my personal favorite, the booger competition; very campy and fun for anyone watching.

Why so many? For starters, there are only a few places where drag queens can go to perform their craft, let alone win any sort of recognition for it. Gay bars are it, and these are owned and operated by wealthy gay men with influence in the gay community. With so few venues, multiple titles spring up. Drag queens are vicious creatures, with the potential to destroy entire city blocks if jilted from her crown. It is in the public’s best interest to allow a greater variety of queens a shot in the spotlight.

What it all boils down to is drama, which you expect from entertainers. A very large number of very catty cross dressing men are forced to preen and strut for one title. Occasionally, when one of them doesn’t win, they believe it’s due to their age, or their weight, or the color of their skin, etc. and go off to create their own pageant to excel in. Here’s my point: fewer stages + many different kinds of queens + each with a desire to win = dramatic, competitive atmosphere. I’ve heard all sorts of tea, from jealous queens to shady business in the judging booth. It’s all become so terribly confusing.

Therefore, I have come up with another sort of pageant (because you can’t have just 50.) I believe there should be a drag queen competition that requires the contestants to have at least an 8 inch dick. Now hear me out. If you have a really big schlong, it’s going to be more difficult to hide such a thing. This gets back to the roots of drag queenery, putting on the illusion of the opposite sex. All other criteria would be void; you can be older, booger, chubby … you probably WILL be black (good lawd). We can call it Ms. Hurge U.S. of A.

The competition would start with a “weighing in” of sorts, where personal measurements consist of a tape measurer to the crotch. Queens would next undergo an interview by the judges. Questions would vary, though probably remain in the area of “You have a really big dick, how’s that workin’ out for ya?” Later that night would be the star studded entertainment portion of the competition. Contestants would be required to have at least one skin tight or revealing outfit in order to fully show the ability to hide their members. They would have three opportunities to do this: evening gown, talent, and showmanship. Of course, the more numbers they meet this one requirement, the better the judges favor. C’mon, what bigger ego feed can you get? “Look what you all can’t see!” It would be fabulous.

And before I end this, a final word on the matter of pageantry in gay culture. The leather community ALSO holds competitive events for the title of MR. Gay U.S. of A., MR. Gay Ohio, you get my meaning. They strut down a walkway … to the VILLAGE PEOPLE!!! What nonsense. Do I have to slap EVERYONE around here?

IT'S AN EMBRYO, NOT A FETUS

2006-07-21T19:38:00.001-04:00

On Wednesday, our most powerful and magnanimous potentate King George vetoed a bill passed by the United States Congress entitled “Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act”. I’m hoping none of you missed this issue in the midst of the brink on the cusp of a possible world WAR!!! If nothing else we have a shining example of the perspective of our president.

These are Fundamentalist beliefs bearing down on us all. What else can an “extreme” conservative point of view be but rigidly religious? I want us not to forget this initial point, for I will return to it after I speak my mind about the topic itself.

To suggest this bill “would support the taking of human life” draws from the audience a knee jerk reaction. Most of us are peaceful, so that such a phrase brings to mind butchery and murder. Really, most of us lack a full conception of our own lives, let alone Life in its almost infinite forms. Life comes in so many shapes and varieties you LITERALLY cannot walk very far without squashing it. As far as I know, it can be as vast as the ocean, or as small as the crud growing in the cracks of my bathtub. It can be comprised of a single cell, or of many systems and organs, all living, many containing living things of their own, working in tandem to create the illusion of a single being.

But we are not talking about any ol’ life forms now are we? The research is directly related to fertilized embryos, which are the beginnings of human beings. And we’re all human beings, and we wouldn’t want our lives taken from us now would we? We the voters and the votees alike associate such feelings to the issue, completely mucking the whole thing. Supporting any government funding that would “take human life” is all of a sudden extremely personal and threatening. I’m sorry, I can see no possible justification to suppress scientific research while at the same time supporting the death penalty and war. Each has it’s own value in certain situations. There is no moral boundary being crossed.

Like other complex organisms, humans go through stages of development. This is why we have different words involved with pregnancy, words like sperm and egg, embryo, and fetus. A zygote is produced at conception and can spend up to two weeks traveling down the tubes toward the uterus. Once it plants itself it does nothing but divide in cells, some of which form the placenta and a larger portion producing an embryo. For the next six weeks, an embryo works overtime dividing its cells until it somewhat resembles a baby. We’ve all seen pictures of them, looking alien with no eyelids, the faintest hint of fingers or toes. There isn’t much brain there, more a mass of cells that have been chosen to be the brain very soon.

At month three, it is no longer considered an embryo; it has made it to the fetus stage. The difference becomes greater each passing week for that particular life. Cells chosen for various organs or anatomical pieces have begun to knit themselves together. Entire systems not only exist but begin their function. Fingernails and sexual organs and nipples and movement are noticeable. The nervous system begins to weave itself around bone and tissue, giving us the information highway we use to experience the world outside of us.

This distinction between embryo and fetus is NO ACCIDENT. They are stages of development with their own purpose and goals. An embryo is replicating stem cells as generic building blocks, and then distributing these in various places for its genetic code to shape. It is true that toward the end of the two month embryonic cycle some humanity can be seen (a beating heart for example). But most embryos that have been frozen for use in scientific study are NOT that far along in their development, nor would they be of any use if those stem cells were already transformed into heart or brain tissue. The open ended “stem” would be gone from those cells.

So exactly how should we define life? Many scholarly opinions differ as to when we are fully ourselves, an individual being. Some suggest the fetal stage is when we are ourselves, because during this time we start to use our nervous systems and can feel things like pain or discomfort. Nearly all agree that third trimester is absolutely human, and you will find no doctor that will perform an abortion on these. I have even read opinions that suggest newborn babies are not yet fully human, since they lack the capacity to even comprehend spatial reality, move on their own, or protect their sensitive head region as it solidifies. This doesn’t devalue newborns; it heightens a need to protect them until they mature into a tougher version of childhood.

And then there’s the religious opinion (see, I knew we’d get back to it). Life begins at conception to these people, and in certain ways they are right. A newly developed embryo is alive, but so is a plant, a virus, and a patch of mildew. I don’t think the opinion is based on what the embryo actually is, rather it is rooted in the will of their God. Pregnancy doesn’t just happen. God is the architect of our existence on this earth, so naturally we should honor his creation. I’ll reiterate … their opinion is not based on how a thing is, rather on how they believe a thing is.

You think I’m kidding? I saw an excerpt of a congressman in support of a veto present a chart of an egg and an eagle. He proceeded to tell his audience how his five year old brat knew that without the egg, you can’t have the eagle. What sort of person likens the birth of a bird to a human being? We do not exist outside of our mothers, protected by a shell. We exist inside because we are so vulnerable and underdeveloped. Humanity takes a lot longer before it resembles itself. I wonder what this guy tells his kid about the scrambled eggs he feeds him every morning. There’s a baby bird in every one according to the fundamentalist view of life.

Knee jerking … it all boils down to people with antiquated views on reality dictating life for the rest of us. It’s the same story with abortion rights and allowing patients on life support to be released from their pain. Though in this instance the veto was on federal funding of stem cell research, which is not the same as a restriction of the research. Bush promised in 2001 to limit federal funding of this research. We can see who he chooses to keep his promises with.

Now, down to brass tacks … the Chinese and Japanese industries are leap years ahead of the United States on this potentially life saving technology. They understand that there IS a humane way to utilize embryonic stem cells for research. And let’s be honest here, America will lose its super power if other nations learn a cure for illness and disease. No amount of prescription medication will keep us afloat in the face of such science. Personally, I like Asian culture so … I’m set.

CTHULHU REVIEW

2006-06-18T01:48:00.001-04:00

Hmm, well it’s been awhile since I wrote anything publicly. I’ve been kicking something around for a while, but I don’t think I fully understand it. It’s a topic which can be interpreted in several ways. Eventually I’ll feel confident in writing on it. In the meantime, I’ve been reading The Illuminatus! Trilogy by Robert Shea and Robert Anton Wilson. I had already read the Schrodinger’s Cat Trilogy and was laughingly confused the whole time … so I thought I’d give this one a whirl.

Illuminatus! is about conspiracy. Instead of there being one secret power in control, there are several, each driven by the other and all possessing knowledge that is part of a larger Whole. It is intentionally written in a confusing manner, with the perspective changing from first person to third back to first then on to reading some letter or article back to third person, and so on. I feel the writers are attempting to tell the story from the point of view of the story instead of one perspective. That seems the point of the book thus far.

It makes use of almost every organization, cult, secret society, ancient text and forgotten lore I’ve ever heard of, and even a few I had no clue about. The Illuminati are only one familiar name, and I can assure you they were not fictitious. Imagine my surprise when I read a small reference suggesting the Mad Arab al Hazred worshiped ancients such as Yog-Sothoth and Cthulhu. Al Hazred wrote the Necronomicon back in the 700s C.E. as a history of long forgotten beings who once roamed Earth. He claimed to have communed with at least one, thus gaining their practices and intentions.

It is nothing new to suggest other life forms existed on Earth before humans dominated the scene. Archeologists tell us wondrous tales of dinosaurs and crawling fishes and exotic plant life from long ago. Martian sympathizers suggest humans were somehow manipulated by alien beings early on, given knowledge and then left to our own devices. Jewish traditions claim that a number of angels longed for our women and came down to take them for wives. Their offspring were terrible monstrous deformities, awesome beasts akin to the Titans of the Greek mythos. Arabian beliefs called these beings Djinn. It was because of these creatures that YHWH decided to flood the world and cleans it. (The Christian Bible leaves that part out because it’s too Jewish, deriving from the Talmudic Book of Enoch.)

The title Necronomicon literally means “Book of Dead Names”. That al Hazred was collecting these for magical invocation seems most logical. The idea that it is somehow involved with necromancy is superstition derived in part from the root necro- in its title. Its dubious history involves numerous attempts by orthodox religion to snuff its existence. It is hard to say if anyone has access to it anymore. That which I’ve seen may have been a fake.

My interest is in the reference to Cthulhu and Yog-Sothoth. If these were names al Hazred consorted with, it has a relevancy in recent history. They are among the Cthulhu mythos spawned by the writer H.P. Lovecraft. Many of his stories use Cthulhu creatures as a backdrop, where people in our dimension suffer the influences of beings long since transcended to the next plane of existence. Lovecraft supposedly encouraged his fellow writers to do likewise, transforming characters like Cthulhu into a mythos, a collective opinion conforming to a pre arranged set of ideas.

It is very reminiscent of Gnostic interpretations of otherwise orthodox religion. Theirs is a layered reality, where death is merely a doorway to the next level of life. Energy can not be created or destroyed, only changed and in one direction. You continue until you are reunited with God. The Old Ones located in the Necronomicon are gone, banished from our world, giving tremendous importance to possession of their lost names. These are called the Enochian Keys, another reference to the Book of Enoch of Jewish lore.

From a literary point of view, this was ingenious. The Cthulhu mythos is still alive today, lurking at the edges of current culture. Entire books are out there compiling the tradition Lovecraft started, of different viewpoints contributing to the Whole. Several authors have included references to it, including the Illuminatus! There’s even a role playing game dedicated to it. Alas, it is the literary universe these Old Ones must remain. Lovecraft was fond of the Necronomicon and included it in some of his work. It in no way means he actually acquired his characters from it. Definitely fun to research though.

BOX OFFICE BLASPHEMY

2006-05-20T21:33:00.001-04:00

Despite early reviews, I went to see the DaVinci Code. The theater was so full there were only single seats available. My friends and I were forced to separate. It is true that it's an extremely long film, but having read the book I recognize the need to stay true to Dan Brown's masterpiece. In reading the story, the involved characters have lives of their own which need explanation and finality. The inspector and his involvement with the Church is a good example. This apparently translates to another hour in MovieLand.

I thoroughly enjoyed the film. To read about the various works of Leonardo DaVinci involved in the story is one thing, but to see them as backdrop, prop and setting was great. There were flashbacks of historical events throughout, one of which (my favorite) being the famous Council of Nicenea. It was portrayed similar to British parlament, with various factions of Christ followers gathered around a central table fiercely debating the issues at hand. Truly marvelous. I even found Tom Hank's hairstyle pleasing once his character took shape.

The movie's producer, Ron Howard, was questioned at the premier about the controversy around the book and thus his film. He assured fans that he was true to the book (and he was). Furthermore, he encouraged people who thought they might find the movie's message offensive to avoid seeing it. He didn't think it was worth it if the person wouldn't enjoy what they saw. I found that a noble sentiment, particularly coming from Hollywood.

Such controversy over a legend that's been around for quite some time. Having seen the story take place before my eyes, I understand fully why there is so much dispute and knee jerking over it. I don't believe it's because Christ is suggested to be mortal. Sure this is offensive to those who see him as a personal savior, but I think it goes deeper. The Church is the villain in this movie, attempting to destroy evidence that would refute its existence in society. Christianity (Catholicism specifically) is seen to take an active role in misleading their congregations. That scares people.

I've said it once, I'll say it again: whatever your opinion of Dan Brown's DaVinci Code, it has truly thrown open a door that can never be closed again. Not only does the book show the Church's failings historically, but it does so in an entertaining way. Portraying historical facts as a scavenger hunt of divine proportions compells the reader (and viewer) to the end, just to know if the characters find what they seek. And since there is mention of contrary ideas such as the Council of Nicenea and Gnostic Gospels, these ideas have no choice but to live on, agreed with or heavily denounced, in our culture. Long live blasphemy god dammit.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMAZON

2006-05-09T00:27:00.001-04:00

You know, I believe our society has expanded and advanced so quickly that we are unaware of our potential as a Whole. Not only do more of us live longer, we can be more civilized about it, giving us the chance to learn and contribute. I feel it safe to say we are well past the realm of basic survival, man against nature and all She commands.

The society we create today has too much of the jungle in it. We still cling to primal ways of thinking. There's too much competition when we should all embrace the social organism of safety and provision we contribute to. We're still in the habit of knee jerking, only now we respond to one another instead of nature. Ah but what can you do when society is ruled by men?
Don't get me wrong, I like men. Heck, I am one. I understand why men have been on top so far. In our various stages of evolution, men have consistantly been larger, heavier, taller, more muscular; essentially, we're physically better suited to survive the world. And I must say fellas, we've done a bang up job!

Yet our supremacy quickly turned misogynistic. Our society relegates women and children to the care of men, which often translates to control and dominance over them. We've become comfortable belittling their role in our species. We've only given them the physical aspects of equality; our opinions of them are still negative, weak, inferior.

Further, we men dissociate with a part of ourselves in such a woman fearing culture. Men believe feelings and emotions to be weakness, instabilities on the inside. Thus, we call them femanine and relegate them to the female sex. To display them outwardly reveals weakness to other males.

Which leads me to believe that the days of patriarchy are numbered. Feelings and their emotional expressions are a HUMAN PHENOMENON. They are merely a refined version of instincts, adapted to compensate for our prefrontal lobes (intellegence). And in today's world, our conflicts are interpersonal. To be close to one's feelings is to hold sway over the majority of us who do not.

In short, I believe women should rule the world. We men have conquered just about every inch of the planet, we can relax now. We no longer need conquering. We need to sustain life, to cultivate it. That is the job we men have decided women do best, right?? Is it any wonder that a certain unnamed psychoanalyst suggested men are ultimately seeking the comfort and security they knew from their mothers?

Golly I know this seems like a fairy tale, but it doesn't have to be. Since we have government in place, we can create a world that fully supports women as mothers. That would remove any pregnant woman's need for the father to be faithful. Let's face it ladies, mens eyes do wander. Fess up fellers, you love conquering new territory.

We must find a way to shift gears as a species, or else crash and burn. I firmly believe we accomplish this by exhonorating women. Men even admit that women are smarter, and the connection to their emotional selves is precisely why. We as a species-wide and history-long patriarchy have placed women in the role we now need most in our world.

Ladies! You are a majority (however slight). Let's bust some ass here!

FEAR MONGERS

2006-04-15T17:25:00.001-04:00

I gnash my teeth every time I hear how I should not question my government. Recently, I saw a press briefing by Donald Rumsfeld where he was adamant about his not backing down on anything he's done. "To do so," he suggested, "would send a message to the enemy, that America's leadership is weak and easy to topple." In other words, don't disagree or bad things will happen.

That's a bunch of horse manure. WE ARE A DEMOCRACY, something the terrorist mentality disapproves of. We are a government that (in theory at least) supports each and every one of our citizens. When problems arise, a democratic people will allow all points of view to come to the surface and conflict, in order to see how best to go about a situation. Instead of depending on only one perspective, this system allows for revisions and fine tuning. The typical bias inside an individual is circumvented in collecting as many ideas as possible.

Our questioning our government is exactly what frightens terrorists most. They are so used to existing in a theocracy, where politics and religion are one, the thought of a ruling system of government that can be challenged seems evil. THEREFORE, continuing democratic activity EVEN DURING TIMES OF WAR is the epitamy of Democracy.

If we DO shut down aspects of Democracy (such as the legitimate questioning thereof), we fail to be democratic. We would become a police state, or something else where we the people are told by our governors what to do. Let us not forget that the very formation of Democracy was IN DIRECT RESPONSE to various forms of government telling its people how they were going to live. No thank you.

When I see conservatives arguing against government criticism, I am acutely aware how brief their point of view is. "The political rhetoric against current administration does nothing but strengthen our enemies. Look, terrorists are everywhere, and are looking for signs of weakness in order to strike again. It's an anti-war, liberal agenda that is potentially dangerous for our safety." All this does is state the opinion, show that it is a direct result of fear, and projects that into America's future. It is a formula that hopes to gain credibility by causing something to stir in us.

If current administration were already capable of handling terrorism (or war policy, or natural disaster relief, etc.) our recent American history would look different. But it doesn't. Those who are questioning King George do so because they feel less confident and thus less secure under the watch of his administration. The answer to that is not to allow more autonamy.

We the nay sayers want to be safe the same as the rest of America. We just don't invest our faith in those running our country. Instead, we look to what has already happened and suggest things be done differently. Isn't that how growth is accomplished?

In other words, SHUT IT conservative knee jerks, and shame on you for using fear to continue your own point of view. I don't care if it's a fear you yourselves feel pressure from, it doesn't give you the right to ask us ALL to close our eyes. Shut your pie holes!

APRIL FOOL'S TRADITION

2006-04-01T21:55:00.001-05:00

Another April Fool's Day has come and gone. I've seen some pretty funny pranks so far. I love that we can get away with stuff at least once a year!! It's got me wondering how celebrating All Fools Day has endured for so long ... and because of this fact, why we haven't made it something to "officially" celebrate. Imagine the frustrations you could get out HARMLESSLY on, say, a coworker or family member. Think of the tremendous boom on the novelty barf and googley eye markets! I personally replenish my supply every year.

All kidding aside though (yeah, that was supposed to be a joke) it's not celebrated with Hallmark cards or CBS specials, so really we know nothing "official" about April Fool's Day except to play pranks on one another. What I've uncovered in my research is astounding in its implications toward the world.

Many separate cultural legends are behind celebrating the 1st of April. Among them, the day of Christ's crucifixion. Even though Christians observe Passover, the "movable feast", at pre-determined dates during March, April, or May, the crucifixion of Christ has long since been associated with around the first of April (coinciding with Piscese, if yer interested ... sign of the fish?) More than likely, our culture places Good Friday and Christ's ressurection on Passover to coincide with accounts in the Bible suggesting the passion of Christ occurred at that time.

Also found in the crucifixion story is the notion of Jesus being "ratted out" by the Jews, sent before the High Priest in the Jerusalem Temple, who then sends him to be "dealt with" by a priest with more time on their hands, who agrees with the condemnation of Christ and leads him before Pontias Pilate to be executed, who disagrees with the charges and sends the Jews away, where they approach Herod himself, who then instructs (for the peace of Jerusalem) that Jesus be killed, where he is brought BACK before Pilate and finally condemned. Phwew!! April first was sure a crazy day for Jesus.

All of that is a running gag on JUST HOW FAR the Jews would go to preserve their Covenant with their one God. The rambling of the account is half the fun of it, I guess. Essentially, April 1st is an unofficial day to point and laugh at Jews, and show what total morons they are. It is the reason the day will never be an official holiday in America.

Which brings up the notion of Christians supporting their Jewish ancestors, if for no other reason than to justify the use of the Old Testament as Holy text. It was almost unreal to first discover the significance of April 1st and then to discover an obvious cover up of all this in order to avoid anti-Semitic rhetoric. But hating Jews is nothing new to humanity; it's happened for countless centuries.

In fact, legends of old tell us they were once a part of another, more ancient civilization living in ancient Persia. These people were living at peace with one another when, from the sky, a tremendous war ship crashed into their capital city. A new group of beings spilled out, calling themselves Zionists and demanding full access and freedoms to human society at once. Their arcane, ritualistic behaviors and insistance on holding the Truth to the universe was too much. A war broke out wherein the Zionists were pushed into the deserts, banished. To prevent association with this chain of events, the alien creatures changed their name to the Hebrews.

Indeed it was members of this group who accused Jesus of heresy, and had him crucified as a symbol of defiance against Zionist rule. Only later, when they saw that followers of Christ were growing, did they infiltrate the simple minded country folk and implant their beliefs firmly back into practice and scripture. Since then, Jews have tip-toed quietly forward in the shadow of Christianity, abiding their time until they can once again lift off into the heavens.

For years, many MANY famous people have known the reality of the Jewish "lineage" and attempted to rid humanity of its scourge. Among the greatest by far was Adolf Hitler, who's dominance in WWII was not only to proliferate a superior race, but to assure purity in humanity versus the alien Zionists living in our midsts. His was a charge of great importance, and he was toppled innocently enough by Christian culture!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Holy crap, I can't type any more. I'm just fucking with you guys. SHEESH, lighten up. This is really a joke on my friends. They know from past experience that I frequently DO look into cultural myth and legend. I hope I got you guys!

The part about there being a bunch of separate cultural traditions was true though. More than likely, April Fool's Day finds its roots in pagan traditions of seasonal worship. Celebrating the Vernal Equinox with a week of feasts ending April 1. Gaw .. you guys fell for it didn'tcha? Admit it!

RAGE IN PARTIAL AGREEMENT WITH THE MACHINE

2006-03-23T19:13:00.001-05:00

I'm on the lookout for another job ... again! It sucks. Our president has boasted a national low unemployment rate, but something feels misleading about that. (or maybe it's just what I've come to expect from talking Bushes, who knows). I think American working class people are feeling how tight money really is and thus refusing to give up their current job. I know that's my reasoning, as well as others I've spoken with who need work. Sure, it keeps unemployment numbers low, but not because more jobs are available. I certainly haven't found much worth applying to.

Ah but I'm starting to think we working class citizens are not MEANT to be happy or satisfied, not entirely anyway. A capitalist country such as ours has the bulk of its production privately owned. These private organizations use a portion of their profits to hire labour in order to produce more, make more of a profit, and so on. If you are part of the labour force (which most of us are to some degree), chances are you make the necessary money to keep your family alive, with just enough left over to endulge or otherwise distract yourself in life. Things like food, clothes, and shelter are made slightly more available so we can come back to work of course.

Meanwhile, the wage slaves are giving away valuable chunks of our life in order to produce for the benefit of someone else. Sure we get the paycheck, but as I stated most of this money goes toward survival, not really our growth and development. We are given a limited time on Earth to live, and yet spend so much of it making the private owners of business extremely wealthy. We make small change compared to what the boss rakes in. We see little of their profit. This can make you crazy.

We can look to everyone's favorite white trash palace of pleasure, Wal-Mart, for signs of corporate America in action. I'm sure by now you've heard the controversy over illegal immigrants hired for janitorial services. Many of these people slept in the store when not working, so they could stay in America and offer extremely cheap labor. They offer their employees very little other than a paycheck and a blue vest. Check out Wal-Mart Watch for any info yer not sure about. I think there is also a documentary in production.

Public exposure to these blatant inhumanitarian practices has since forced Wal-Mart to offer basic health coverage and paid days off. Yet they react to this "set back" in true capitalist style by announcing store renovations in several areas. They're remodeling in hopes of attracting A WEALTHIER CROWD. White collar instead of white trash I suppose. The isles will be wider, nice wood panaling floors, name brands introduced in select areas only, sushi and lattes served in the snack corner.

So you see, the very structure of capitalism ensures that its members will not only WANT to buy into the goods and services they produce, they'll NEED them to cope with the stress and hastle of dealing with wealthy corporations for their survival. Producing for others makes you crazy!

But in the end, isn't it struggle that moves us forward? Not having what we want makes us work for it, or at least work for some means of dulling the pain of not having what we want. Never before had I thought of capitalism in this way. America is not a theocracy (yet) or a dictatorship (debatable), it's a democracy! And democracy thrives on similar principles of change through conflicting ideas. So far, it looks like the least of all possible evils.

Guess I'll go check the want ads.

SUPER GOOD IDEA

2006-03-19T19:13:00.001-05:00

I found a well animated Flash on the front page of Newgrounds the other day called Superpope. It had a Dragonball Z-esque feel, which was alright I guess, if not a bit overplayed. The story line was simple; a demon crawls from out of a well and threatens the lives of two villagers, in flies Superpope to save the day. Huzzah. Well good for the artist who created it. Only today, while I was perusing the Bookery Comix, I found an edition of what was called Battle Pope that seemed similar to the aformentioned Flash animation, only this pope was a juggernaught, musclular and powerful. And good for Funkotron Publications.

I have to be honest though, I'm a bit upset. It's not the success of these artists. Anyone who fancies themselves a creative person will understand it is no easy feat to get started on your dream. Today's world expects you to produce, "come back to us when you've got something we can market." Anything but well wishing for these two ideas would be heretical to an aspiring writer. Lots of karma at stake.

I'm upset because one of my own comic / Flash ideas is for a supernatural pontif saving the day (although mine is extremely comical, and involves a lot of Catholic mythos in the telling). In all truth, these two produced ideas are nothing like my own, so I still consider my cartoon pope a valid expression of my creativity. Mine is more a commentary on organized religion.

I guess you could say I'm kicking myself. I didn't act on my impulse to create this, and now see evidence of its positive reception in the public eye. Oh no, not to worry about me readers, I've still got plenty of ideas left ... but what if I see another one displayed tomorrow? What if all my great ideas are actually quite common, making it a race to the publicist for validation of one's life work. Even if it's a one in a million kick ass and take names idea, there are still millions of heads capable of generating ideas every day. Stick a bunch of monkeys in front of word processors and watch them churn out the Fiction section at Barnes and Noble.

I'm overreacting, which is perhaps a good way for you to understand why I have yet to produce anything successfully in the eyes of the literary or online Flash community. Overreactive, overly critical of something that is by nature a process, a perspective that is cluttered and in constant need of distraction. I think that's why I've got so many friggin' ideas ... it keeps me moving back and forth and this way and that, so that I never finish anything. Lesse, two collections of short stories with about 6 stories a piece, two novels, a couple comic strips, and an army of cartoon foolery. Big talk aint it? In my defense, this shit doesn't roll out in neat little packages. A lot of times experience is what adds to a good idea to make it better. At least I'm constantly writing (which now includes this forum).

Sorry to whine at perfect strangers. I dunno, I felt a need.

I NEED A FWIEND :*(

2006-03-17T00:25:00.002-05:00

Okay, I feel dumb asking this, but does anyone else play Animal Crossing for the Nintendo DS? See I'm a 30 year old man who's addicted, and no one else I know is likewise. Not even my B-cuz, the most awesome gamer alive! Oh sure, I've found people online who play, but so far I've not been able to convince any of them I'm not a pervert (SHH, quiet all of you!) Still, even if I was a pervert (and the jury is still out on that) what am I gonna do ... expose my pixels at em? Say a dirty word?! Oh man, and there's this awesome final expansion to the local shop that turns it into a mall with a hair salon. I'm so jealous.

I've spent a little time each day since Christmas interacting with the town of Hysteria. It's actually a well laid town. The post office, museum and market occupy all of the northwest quadrant, leaving the remaining acres for housing. Our northeast quadrant has a beautiful view of Hyper Falls. We are currently a thriving exporter of pear shaped fruits and coconuts. The towns local philanthroper Nimrod Noodle has taken great pains at reshaping the land to provide maximum accessibility AND marketability. His clothing line is another story however, as nothing he designs seems to take hold (except with him of course.) He's usually seen cavorting town in a top hat and monacle.

The Hysteria Museum of Fine and Otherwise Hooty-Hoo Arts continues to grow in its various exhibits. Quite far the most complete (and lucrative) of these is the Ancient Animals, which is chock full of goodies. The Gallery has yet to display more than two portraits of worth, and rumor has it many counterfit works have tried to make their way in via shady sources. But above all, the crowning glory is the new Stary Eyed Observatory, where anyone can come and contribute to the star chart with their own unique designs! And if you come back at night, your designs decorate the sky!!!! I nearly flipped when I saw the Triforce floating in the east!

While the town has seen many animals come and go since December, a few remain faithful to Hysterian soil. Dotty the rabbit can't seem to give up her beautiful beachfront property, nor Octavian the Octopus. Angus the Bull is the only original animal still living in town, and he is crotchety. We had a celebrity animal for a short time, Frigga the friggin' blue bird I guess, but she bored easily.

Can't you people see I'm going nuts here?

I'm almost to the point of buying a used DS for my friend Honey and then forcing her to Animal Cross with me 'till her eyes bug out! Damn you woman!! You loved the GameCube version! We shared a community together... doesn't that mean anything to you?

PARABLE OF THE BIRDSHOT

2006-03-16T00:14:00.001-05:00

Dick Cheney's unfortunate hunting accident was made worse given the ravenous press it received. However, an even more disturbing parallel to our situation is found within this simple (if not tragic) act. I'm being serious here, stop sniggering...

These hunters were not in the wilds ferreting out game in order to partake in man's oldest ritual. They were on a farm that offered a service of domesticated birds. These birds were carried onto a hunting field and then burried ... yes burried, head first in some natural forrage that would hold them until spotted by dogs, equally furnished. Not clear enough? People with money can select from a pool of dociles for their own gain. Our nation is Capitolistic, which by its very definition supplies workers the money to live with just enough left over to (sometimes) by the very things they build/create/distribute/sell. Wealth has the advantage of removing itself from this cycle and *gasp* even influence it.

True, I'm bitter. But one cannot help ponder the tremendous amount of creative and innovative thinking produced from hardships that is lost because it isn't adequately funded. Just docile birds waiting to be used for sport or necessity.

MITOCHONDRIAL KIND OF GAL

2006-03-15T21:44:00.001-05:00

I have to admit to frequenting many shady chatrooms while in cyberspace. Sometimes you can find good discussion, if yer lucky. It was in one of these rooms where a debate on evolution raged, and where I first heard someone refer to mitochondria as an alternative origin for mankind. Perhaps some of you are rechecking that sentence to see if I said mitochondria and not something similar like ... well I dunno. I didn't know at the time either, so I chalked it up to my misinterpreting what was typed. So fast forward to a day or so later, in a room designated for Religious discussion. A die-hard Christian came in and began proclaiming evidence for his faith and sited, among other things, Mitochondreal Eve. Proof that all of humanity comes from a single source? Meaning one person?? I had to investigate.

But first, so you understand my confusion, when I heard the word mitochondria I was reminded of high school biology and not paying a bit of attention to it. I vaguely recalled hearing the word, so I looked it up. These are single celled organellas, part of a larger structure but no less important, responsible for food distribution and conversion to energy. While I believe we and all life evolved from a very small start, I felt a discussion of evolution where mitochondria are argued against primates was a bit pointless. If either didn't exist, neither would we. Then came that term Mitochondrial Eve.

Oxymoronically enough, this "Eve" was part of a magazine article in Nature, "Mitochondrial DNA and Human Evolution", (1987). Researchers suggested our inheretance of mitochondrial genetic material could be traced back to a single woman, nicknamed Eve by those involved, supposed to have lived 200 or so thousand years ago in Africa. It does not suggest there was one woman that all of human history sprang from. Further, the evidence and conclusions drawn from that study were mere compelling hypothesis, challenged to this day.

So I return to the two instances where the reference was made. The former, from a friend and EMT nurse practitioner, I have yet to see him again to clarify the point. Yet I will further assert to him that, while mitochondria gave humanity a good chance for survival, so did other organisms in our bodies. That doesn't even touch on the neurophysiological traits that furthered us along. If I am in error here and someone knows more on this subject, please post.

As for the latter instance, the ramblings of a Christian non-apologist, this is yet another instance where that sort of mentality stops after hearing what it wants to. Perhaps there was a lovely soundbite on the news where "Eve ... genetic material... found to be trace back to single source ... Africa, 200,000 BC" and he wet himself with praise. Taking the entire article into consideration would show that for there to be a single source of mitochondria, there had to be a pool of many who did not possess it. Thus the miracle of Eve (under review).

I'm sorry, I know that last bit sounds katty, but you do it to yerselves. Made for some good research though, so thanks.

HOOKED ON A BLOGGING

2006-03-15T18:47:00.001-05:00

DUDE ... I've only been on Blogger four days and I'm already addicted! I have a habit of clicking that NEXT BLOG button on the top right of my dash board, just to see what someone else has to say. I must have been around the world at least ten times by now; China , Pakistan, Washington D.C., Canada, South America ... and now in each of these countries festers one of my opinion(ations). I may not be able to read everything I find, but all these blogs kick ass. I think I'm home (or at least relaxed for awhile in reasonable cyber accomodations.)

When I first started, I chose that boring face template everyone else is using. I've since emboldened myself to dig into the HTML of the template to make it a little more mine. I've already changed the color scheme to my old familiars as well as added a couple of pics for fun. And hey, as I learn more about HTML and moveable type (that's what this is, right?) you can watch this blog grow and, ultimately, bud new ideas.

One thing troubles me though about this endeavor. I've noticed other bloggers seem to write stuff ALL THE TIME! I mean, its tempting to type every little thing down, but who wants to dig through all that for meaningful posts? Therefor I'm giving you dear readers the charge of keeping me on track. If I seem to stray, call me on it! Don't let me embarass myself with a forum full of "today was a crappy day cuz I farted and woke myself up ... it was all downhill from there."

After the newness of this community has left me, I'll probably post a LOT more to other people's forums than my own. Expect a good'un to come out once a week or so. Feel free to contact me.