Furibundum

It Could Happen

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 02:57:00 +0000

I was digging deep again, as I do every year or so, into my box of keepsakes and relics that I really don't know why I kept them but did. Stuff I wrote as a kid (some of that, I must say, rather disturbing), old letters of the real life mailed sort, newspaper clippings of miscellany, that have strangely yellowed and gotten brittle already and that shit just ain't right since it seems not so long ago ... whatever, I'm getting old.

From the Kansas City Kansan, newspaper that we got delivered daily, Friday, July 25, 1975, I had cut out and kept this one particular article headlined "Youngster completes first novel." I was always writing as a kid, so I remember very well snipping this one item, on account of the twelve-years-old youngster was my same age, and I very much wanted my own novel published. Of course I hadn't written it yet, but I figured this proved I could do it, too, kept it for an affirmation thingy.

Over the years I've remembered saving that specific one, but never had brought it out it read it again, because why would I really? Not that it matters (I'm just wasting space here), but I was reading it tonight and it struck, the beginning:

"Alexandra Sheedy sat on a loveseat, giggling and chattering about the novel she just finished ... She is petite and has long, golden hair. She is 12 years old and her friends call her Ally. Her first book comes out this fall, published by McGraw-Hill."

The book she wrote was She Was Nice To Mice: The Other Side of Elizabeth I's Character Never Before Revealed by Previous Historians (which you can pick up for a piddling two cents at Amazon, with mostly good reviews from ~~all~~ both of its readers!)

I Googled to be sure that this was, in fact, the Ally Sheedy: St. Elmo's Fire, The Breakfast Club, and so it was. Also War Games; I like that one a lot, too. Short Circuit, not so much.

I don't know why I think clipping that article someone means squat. She obviously never went on to success writing anything else, which was my reason for keeping it in the first place. Hell, she hardly even had much success as an actor, aside from just a few notable roles. But dollars to doughnuts no one else knows her first publicity write-up, or what it was for, and I'm pretty sure nobody has it in a box like I do.

I maybe could yet write a book someday; it could happen.

I Think

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Tue, 18 May 2010 06:08:00 +0000

I think I'm bored blogging. I think I'm done with it. I think what's the point? I think you should check out my blogroll instead. I think they say stuff better anyway.

Every Time I Breathe, Big Daddy Weave

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Thu, 13 May 2010 06:00:00 +0000

I am sure all of heaven's heard me cry, as I tell you all the reasons why this life is just too hard. But day by day, without fail, I'm finding everything I need, and everything that You are to me... Yeppers, that pretty much sums it up.

Betty White "needs to start taking her relationship with God serious." Seriously?

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Tue, 11 May 2010 21:02:00 +0000

I was one of those grassroots Facebook campaigners responsible for Betty White hosting Saturday Night Live the other night, so for that, let me just say: "You're very welcome!"

I thought she was fantastic, better even than I had expected she might be, and by most accounts her coming on the show was a huge success. Except for some, who apparently had more eternal concerns weighing on their minds, precluding enjoying it so much.

Like Jose, who while conceding that Betty White is legend "in this day and age of rebels and rockers" (I really don't know what that means, but it seems to be a good thing), is more concerned about her afterlife appearance instead, presumably being so old as she is. A legend, sure ...

"However, I think Betty really needs to start taking her relationship with God serious. Betty can't please this new generation, she has nothing to prove to them. Her relationship with the Lord is what she needs to take serious."

Well, all righty then. I found that rather presumptuous of Jose, conjecturing to somehow know the woman's relationship with the Almighty, and prescient to what lies ahead for her if she doesn't start taking it more seriously; sooner than later, at her age.

His comment might be one of the more stupid ones, certainly not germane to the article about her performance on the show. I could be wrong, but I'm guessing that some of Betty's material might have been a bit too blue to pass Jose's own righteousness muster, to secure a spot for her in the heavenlies.

Don't know why some people can't just enjoy here and now without always being bothered with whatever hereafter fate awaits, especially for others' souls. Worry about your own forever if you want, but why fret so much about Betty's? It's just weird is all, not to mention a dumbass waste of time thinking about it.

If God has any sense of humor at all, Betty White is probably good to go, whenever she kicks it. Fogeys à la Jose need to get a life, one in the present (which is the only one we can be sure about, actually) and quit worrying so much about the one afterwards.

Bringing happy back, that surely must count for something in the vast scheme of all things eternal, I would think. It certainly counts for earth-time better spent than adjudging others' right standing (or not-so-right standing) with God, that's for sure. Live and let live, die and let die; meantime, enjoy the muffins ...

The Anti-Gay Fundie and His Boyslut Porter

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Tue, 04 May 2010 23:14:00 +0000

To tell you the truth, I'd probably hire this hottie Lucien to "lift my luggage", too, or whatever else, as a matter of fact, so it's doubtless inappropriate for me to knock some other guy as being so very wrong for actually doing just that. Hypocritical of me, I know, and hypocrisy is never a good look.

Except that the "some other guy" happens to be anti-gay activist and fundie Baptist preacher George Rekers, who hired this particular 20-year-old (well, not to fret semantics, but more exactly rented than hired, to wit ...) from the gay escort site Rentboy.com. Where one can apparently troll for such nice, slender blonde male ~~hookers~~ porters as Lucien.

See, George needed someone to accompany him on his ten days traveling throughout Europe, he says, to help with lifting his luggage, is all. "I had surgery, and I can't lift luggage. That's why I hired him." Well, I suppose that's one way to put it, and where better to find someone to lend a lifting hand, than the self-dubbed world's largest gay escort site, eh?

Also, it turns out, praise the Lord, what a blessing in disguise, really, a bonus conversion op how that surgery thingy turned out... since all Rekers is truly only interested in is "helping and lovingly caring for people identifying themselves as 'gay'." Just like John the Baptist and Jesus would do!

Thanks to Joe.My.God for getting this clarification out of Rekers: "Like John the Baptist and Jesus, I have a loving Christian ministry to homosexuals and prostitutes ... I spent a great deal of time sharing scientific information [with Lucien] on the desirability of abandoning homosexual intercourse, and I shared the Gospel of Jesus Christ with him in great detail."

Or not. I reckon he surely shared something, all right, probably got some of his stuff lifted, even, but I doubt very much if it was Bible or baggage in any event, respectively. George Rekers is a douchenozzle. I do think Lucien is hot, though, in that slutty way I like, and at least he's not pretending something that he's not. Like I said from the start, hypocrisy is never a good look.

Incest is Best

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Sat, 01 May 2010 04:35:00 +0000

This is a picture of an old lady and her grandson. They are in love. This is the first time in years Granny has felt sexually alive, and he has always been attracted to older women. So they are having a baby together. The pair of them paid for a surrogate with a viable egg for him to spunk. Awesome. Via this...

Blind Eyes, Seeing God Clearly

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 04:48:00 +0000

The other day I left this comment, mostly pointless to the original blogger's post, you know how things digress sometimes: "I once worked with a blind lady, she had no eyes, and one morning she came into the break room and said, 'I can't even see straight until I have my cup of coffee.' She also had a TV in her office, go figure." I forgot to mention in commenting, that she also wore eyeglasses...

Got me thinking, though, about my time working there at Unity Village (especially how I should never have left for so many reasons, but I will spare you all that), and Kimberly Morrow in particular, the blind one in for the cup o' joe. Specifically, a certain article she wrote back then for one of the magazines I worked on at the time, Daily Word.

Here's part of Kimberly's article, although it's a puzzler to me why I hesitate swiping it, since I seldom have qualms pilfering others' stuff (excepting that one time from Martha Stewart, but she's a scary bitch so that was different). I reckon Unity can take me down for it, but until then maybe it will manage to reach some who otherwise might never have read this, because it's well worth reading.

I See God Clearly

"At age 35, I consider myself to have been blessed with a life that has already been wonderful beyond all measure. I have had the privilege of acquiring a good education: I graduated from a large, suburban high school and went on to earn bachelor's and master's degrees and a Ph.D. I have been gifted with a tremendous 'cheering section' of family and friends.

"I have had the privilege of seeing God clearly from a unique vantage point few others are fortunate enough to share. I have never seen the mountains, but can well appreciate the struggle of the climb. When I scan a document in braille, I have the extraordinary sensation of truly being physically touched by the power of words. Listening to a friend reading a text aloud to me, I revel in my narrator's words. The basic elements of his or her true character inevitably take center stage through the distinct interpretations that spring forth from the tone, quality and inflection of a well-modulated voice. The textures and shapes of stones and seashells, the tides of the ocean, the smell of freshly mowed grass, and the songs of unseen birds fill me with a sense of wonder and mystery. All comprise remarkable pictures of nature that I believe are every bit as vivid to me as are rainbows, skies and sunsets to those who are sighted.

"Perhaps the most rewarding aspect of living in the nonvisual world is the fact that certain judgments that have become all too commonplace in the everyday lives of most seeing people rarely enter my awareness. I can know an acquaintance for months, have a cup of coffee and sit directly across from that person, or take his or her hand in mine and never have an inkling of the race or ethnicity of the person with whom I am sharing a portion of my life's journey. 'Foreign' accents are simply another element of interesting, nonvisual texture in my auditory landscape.

"I will never in my life comprehend the reasons why the mere color of one's skin or one's nation of origin has caused barriers to be erected throughout the course of history.

"On a daily basis, I rely on others to describe the moon and stars, sun and clouds – things I have never seen but that I know perfectly well are present. And just as I have always taken these elements of nature for granted, so have I also taken for granted the existence of a higher being in the universe. The presence of God is simply one more thing I have never seen but which I can sense in every fiber of my being.

"My existence is also devoid of the visual images that often accompany humankind's concept of God. It is amazing to me that, while we are outwardly visual creatures, gaining about 80 percent of our sensory information by means of sight, we build temples, sing to and about, create religious dogma, and worship a Being we have never seen.

"The experience of spirituality in general is one in which we may focus on physical healing, but God heals in other ways also. There is healing of the mind and soul too – a healing from the inside out. Even though I am not what many would call physically healed, I have been healed in other ways and been given so many other gifts. God has healed me by giving me a type of sight – insight.

"Although being blind comes with its fair share of trivial inconveniences, and although there is much in the world that will always remain a mystery to me, I can state with complete conviction that I would not trade my life for that of anyone else. To have been bestowed with vision beyond vision is an experience that defies description. I see God clearly, and when it comes right down to it, what more could one truly wish for?"

Okay, so that is pretty much the whole article, I couldn't figure out where to snip it, it's all that good. I did, though, cut it short toward the end, so that I could finish with a "read more" link here, which you should really click through so that I don't get in trouble for not pointing back. Plus you can read about her guide dog Fern, who was awesome. Except for the poop outside; Kimberly Morrow couldn't see that so clearly as God, I guess, to pick up after.

Georgia outlaws microchip implants: "Just imagine having a beeper in your rectum and your beeper numbers displayed on billboards throughout the city."

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 05:20:00 +0000

Well, that bill passed, the one from Georgia "so as to prohibit requiring a person to be implanted with a microchip," Senate Bill 235.

At least it made its way through the House Judiciary Committee, anyway, next stop the House Rules Committee that decides whether it moves on to the full House vote and (fingers crossed) final passage.

I'd think it probably should, taking into account the compelling testimony brought up at this last hearing, from some fat lady about why non-consensual chipping should be made against the law. There she described in detail her own personal experience, with being implanted against her druthers: "I'm also one of the people in Georgia who has a microchip," she began. ("Also one?" There's more of them there?)

She went on about the specific disadvantages, how it violates one's "right to work without being tortured by co-workers who are activating these microchips by using their cell phones and other electronic devices." (Okay, now I know this is a completely serious matter here, but as far as office pranks, I can't help myself thinking that this would be a total hoot!)

"Microchips are like little beepers," she further told. "Just imagine, if you will, having a beeper in your rectum or genital area ... and your beeper numbers displayed on billboards throughout the city. All done without your permission." (Just imagine, indeed!)

"This microchip was put in my vaginal-rectum area," she said, planted up there somewhere, I guess. It also beeps, apparently, which you'd think might make it fairly easy to track down more specifically exactly where in that area, but what do I know from lady parts? It's been awhile since I've been there, done that, and not particularly something I really wish to remember much about. Still, though...

And those beeper numbers, I wonder what that is all about! Just why should they be displaying her digits on billboards throughout the city anyhow? It does seem rather a violation, nefarious even, especially considering it's the Department of Defense that implanted her with the device in the first place!

Nothing at all like your ordinary (and mostly accepted these days) space alien anal probing, nope; this was a government thingy, and when the government gets all up in your ass like that (or wherever down there) without your consent, that's going way too far. And you know how Republicans are about the government butting in thataway!

She's been trying, through the courts, for the past eight years to get them to un-implant her, but so far not so good. Maybe now that her story has been made more public, and now that Georgia most assuredly will be added to the list of other states making it illegal to stick things in people without their okay, something might be done to finally get it out.

California, Wisconsin and most recently Virginia have already outlawed microchipping their own citizens for whatever reasons, not the least of coincidental perks, it should be noted, perhaps thwarting via legislation the end times and the Apocalypse. Suck that, Antichrist!

Happy Earth Day (Beware the Carnage)

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 06:28:00 +0000

Stupidity, thy name is Edward Hudgins:

"Most individuals who celebrate Earth Day by cleaning up trash beside the road no doubt mean well. But ... the premises behind the eco-extremists are anti-human and, if acted on consistently, would lead to worse carnage than that wrought by communists. On Earth Day we should reflect not on the planet but on the inhabitants who can make it of value."

I should have something to end this here, but all I can think to say is, "Huh?"

Hung on the Cross

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:13:00 +0000

So what, I'm not very mature for my age. I don't care, I'm easily amused because of it, and I enjoy being amused. Like this picture of a crucifix which was hoisted a couple of months ago above the main altar at the St. Charles Borromeo Catholic church in Oklahoma:

I can come up with lots of hilariously inappropriate captions here, some that even I am embarrassed to admit thinking up, despite my unabashed crudity. I would share but probably everyone else is too sophisticated to see the humor. Plus, I really don't want to go to Hell.

I'm guessing that there are an awful lot of Okie parishioners down there at the church where this is hung for real, who I reckon wouldn't appreciate my sense of humor about it, either. They are, in general, hugely offended by it instead, because they see nothing funny whatsoever about displaying Jesus' ginormous penis in church, not in the least bit!

Seems as though this has caused quite a "deep divide" among members of the congregation which, from the looks of that thing, is completely understandable just how deep a division it could be. Pastor Phillip Seeton, though, claims that the dubious portion of the crucifix painting is meant to be only Jesus' distended abdomen (too much of that last supper, maybe? I dunno.) and not the Good Lord's engorged schmekel.

"I think it was painted according to the certain specific rules of iconography and church art," he says. Well, what I think is that Pastor Seeton is clearly getting his ographies mixed up, confusing the porn and the icon ones. And if indeed it was painted according to some "certain specific rules of church art", that would have to be rules according to St. Tom of Finland, then, if I were to wager a guess.

No doubt about it, that this crucifix is one blatant, pervy sacrilege, which I personally really don't have a problem with at all. Still, not to be overly disparaging of anyone making excuses for it, but come on... how could one possibly concoct any sort of plausible explanation how that right there is not, in fact, a huge painted-on penis? Seriously. It's not even in the least bit subtle, and those lady friends pictured to either side of him certainly seem not to have missed it.

[In fact, now that I look at the picture closerly (← really should be a word), that one specific indigo lady appears to be so impressed and affected that she can't even keep her hands off of her own self. I also notice taking a sharper look, I'm not quite so sure those are all lady friend admirers, either; some first century androgeny thing going on with a couple of them.]

Anyway, to be completely honest, I suppose I would find this particular crucifix somewhat disturbing if it was hung up in my church, too. Maybe "distracting" would be a better word to describe it rather than disturbing, just speaking for myself, but either way, it ought not be there. Sure, I appreciate inappropriate as much as (likely more so than) the next guy, even Boner Jesus as objet d'art is fine by me, but in church it seems just exceptionally bad taste.

Especially with so much of that "down-on-your-knees" time spent in front of it; I think Catholics do that a lot, don't they? I could be mistaken, but be that as it may, it's nonetheless wrong being up there. Strangely enough or maybe not so much, in spite of the churchgoers' ruckus, the priest guys in charge of the place don't seem overly concerned at all, and have no plans to get rid of it. Also students from the neighboring Catholic school regularly attend Mass in the church, but that's neither here nor there, I suppose.

Why the Bible is Divinely Inspired (Why Not the Qu'ran)

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Wed, 07 Apr 2010 03:15:00 +0000

Arguments for why the Bible is the inspired Word of God and the Qu'ran, well, not so much. Michael Gleghorn is a research guy with Probe Ministries, so he knows how to research and probe stuff, to figure out such things.

And here's what he came up with, reasons why he thinks one can suppose that the Bible is indeed the divinely inspired Word of God:

"First, the Bible claims to be an inspired text: 'All Scripture is inspired by God' (2 Tim. 3:16). This does not prove that it really is inspired. However, if the Bible nowhere claimed to be inspired, then we would hardly have good reason to believe that it was. Thus, what the text claims for itself is important.

So you see? The Bible is most likely the inspired Word of God because it says so itself, right there in its own pages, and also nowhere does it mention that it is not, which is just as important, as the Probe dude points out.

Furthermore, answering to the question why the Qu'ran can not also be a divinely inspired Scripture, Gleghorn explains:

"If the Bible is inspired by God, then it would seem logically impossible for the Qu'ran to also be divinely inspired. Why? Because both texts teach very different doctrines that are not logically consistent with one another.

"Clearly, both texts cannot be correct, for this would violate the law of non-contradiction. Thus, if the Bible is inspired by God, then it logically follows that the Qu'ran is not."

And there you have it, logically the Qu'ran can not be inspired by God because if the Bible is instead, which has already been evidenced as per the above, then that law of non-contradiction thing cinches the case.

(He probably should have been more clear about that, though, specifically how that the non-contradiction law only is applicable to inter-contradictions, intra-contradictions not a problem. But I suppose he might have figured that was a given, hardly worth mentioning, really.)

Although, now that I think about it, I reckon some Muslim research guy somewhere could also very well make the flip-side argument for the Qu'ran over the Bible, recording the Almighty's utmost authentic pronouncements. Verbatim, even, when I read back over this, except for switching the two books.

Well, also that one 2 Tim. 3:16 Bible verse, "all Scripture is inspired by God", would need to be swapped out for the Qu'ran's Jonah 10:37, "it was not possible for this Qu'ran to be produced by someone other than Allah", but yeah... other than that, same same only different.

Now I'm just totally confused about what's what, and right when Michael Gleghorn had me pretty much convinced, what with his awesome compelling reasons regarding why so, the Bible as God's authoritative word. Holy shit.

Dead Bunny, Alive Again Jesus, Happy Belated Easter

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Mon, 05 Apr 2010 09:40:00 +0000

Well, I suppose you could call it a resurrection of sorts, or at least a make-believe one. Martha Stewart got a dead rabbit for Easter, stuffed into what she says was the most beautiful Easter basket ever. "Stuffed" being the key word, a taxidermic bunny. You can click here for a look-see on Martha's blog. I'd copy it, but frankly the bitch scares me and I'm afraid to pilfer her stuff. Also, that rabbit is just plain creepy.

She also got an iPad, which made reading the comments there entertaining; her blogger buddies should learn specificity, which exactly of the uncalled-for two they were commenting about. At least for me it was amusing, but then again I'm admittedly depraved. "My husband really wants one of these just to try out & see what it's like ... Enjoy it and let us know how it is!" Heh. Oh well, I thought it was funny anyway.

Of course, Jesus wasn't just pretend resurrected, He raised up from the dead for real; no Evolution (← they did Martha's hare) to account for that, a one-off Divine quirk, that was. Which is why there is Easter, after all, to celebrate His Resurrection from being executed a couple of days before, getting for us eternal life notwithstanding our bad selves.

So that's very cool, to be sure, and definitely something deserving a day set aside, commemorating Him doing that for the mess of us. My preferred way of celebrating is with lots of blue Peeps and lots more Natty Light, thank you, Lord. This year, though, now that I am unfortunately sober, Easter just wasn't quite the same as past ones. To tell you the truth, I would contend that redemption really is best enjoyed under the influence, but c'est la everlasting vie.

All right, I had intended to write mostly about Jesus instead of what I ended up with here. Martha Stewart's fault I veered totally off-course, with that freak show Easter basket, candy and carrion. So I'll do my Jesus jabber later on, and leave it for now with belated happy Easter wishes (or happy Passovers and whatever other Sundays to the heathen remainder), hoping everyone had an awesome day. It's 5 a.m., going to bed now, probably have nightmares. Later.

Florida Church Adds Fourth Easter Service

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Sat, 03 Apr 2010 00:17:00 +0000

Church 4 Times this Easter Sunday, All 4 U. Sometimes I wonder if maybe Jesus wishes He had just stayed dead; this has to be completely embarrassing.

Glenn Miller, Fools Rush In

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 01:14:00 +0000

I don't know exactly how much national attention has been given this, other than maybe a blurb here or there, but it's getting quite a bit of buzz around here in the Kansas City area, a campaign ad airing on local radio station 980 KMBZ.

It's from one particular, xenophobic assclown Glenn Miller, who registered as a write-in candidate to replace retiring state senator Kit Bond. Miller also once ran the White Patriot Party, fun fact there. And so here ya have it:

[audio here in separate window]
"Hey, white man. 100 million more dark aliens are coming to America. Google 'the next hundred million' for proof. In 1960 white people were 90% of the population. Today, truth be told, we're less than half. Another 100 million foreign mongrels are on the way. But you don't care, do ya, whitey?

"All you care about is satisfying your belly, pocketbook and genitals, or watching the coons play ball on television. The future white children will be a nightmare and you don't care. Your own women and children ought to spit on you every day. Go to whty.org and get involved, and phone me at 417-463-7703."

Except that whty.org has been down quite a lot lately (I choose not to dwell on reasons maybe why), though I did manage to find a link to a cached copy of the page here. Just in case and if you wanna.

Program director at KMBZ, Neil Larrimore, says the station has no choice but to air such commercials from write-in candidates. "The company is required by federal law to run these spots and to do so without any edits. Our hands our tied.".

It could be argued, though, that indeed "KMBZ is a right wing, hate-filled swamp of teabagger bullshit, and that their line-up includes such conservative luminaries as Mark Levin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and an assorted local group of similar wannabes." Maybe they don't mind so much their hands tied, really.

Quasi-Supernal Hooey

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:32:00 +0000

I don't know what's up with me the last couple of days, but I have gotten really indifferent about political goings-on and headline news in general.

Instead I've been just perfectly laid back about most everything that normally would get me riled up, and I must say I am rather enjoying the reprieve. It's not that I'm unaware of the news, I check out those tabs across my homepage, but just a glance enough to know whatever and then... meh.

I'll lose all of this mellow before too much longer, I know, but for now I am mostly blah about piddly affairs, other than what truly matters going on just around me; the sort of thing that usually annoys the hell out of me when others are that way, not giving a hoot. It's not exactly true saying that I don't give a hoot, though, it's just a different one in tone, considering that my discernment of what goes on "just around me" is existentially everything, really.

I think it's the weather, along with where I'm at with virtually nobody around. For instance, it hit 80-degrees today and I sat outside quite a bit just watching the planet do its thing. I did that a lot yesterday, too. One forgets being cooped up for so long how overwhelming is nature; it's incredibly astounding, that's what it is. Being removed from even the nearest small town by several miles, with only hills and trees and assorted wildlife, persons-free, is pretty cool.

It certainly shifts things into a proper perspective, if you consider it. I look to the east and can see pretty far, and the reality whacks me in the head, the literalness of continuing farther than the hill there onward, disregarding arbitrary boundaries, the actuality of the whole schmear we feel distanced from, the atrocities and the carnage of wars and the disenfranchised and suffering are all, not figuratively, just over that hill. The genuine truth of that directly struck me.

Thinking too that if, as rumor has it, the world is indeed round, then in fact whichever way one points to, it all still manages to be the same, over the hill there somewhere. What is behind me is also ahead of me, really. I've been pretty awed the past couple of days contemplating the vastness and yet the relative smallness of the planet, and the occasions of so many messes we the citizens hanging on here have made.

I can't clearly express myself how it is I feel, what has clicked inside my head, has affected me. That much is by all means obvious, I can tell from just skimming back through this spouting off here. And it's not really inside my head that something has been switched on, either, it's much deeper than that, a more spiritual perception of the completeness, the wholeness and connectedness of all that is this planet Earth, our world, and the relationship of our human race with the planet and with each other and so much FUBAR random shambles that plainly should not and would not be, if only.

I ramble, an unquestionably unedited stream of consciousness is all this is, and not a very repressed stream by any means. I ought not post it, but I will anyway, because it is what it is, and it is my blog after all, so what the hell? It strikes me as odd, though, how envisioning so much badness in the context of ostensibly being within walking distance, doesn't make me even more huffy, rather than mellowed-out about everything. I would think it should have the opposite effect. It doesn't, though, not for right now anyway. I don't know why.

Maybe for the time being, this indescribable flash of awareness I'm experiencing is just wonderment to me, is all. Nothing here I didn't already factually know, of course, but this transcendence of the habituated world-oneness rhetoric lucidly brought home, I suppose, is still sinking in. When sunk, I could even go overboard being aggravated about the way of things, I suppose, but I doubt that will happen. I figure most likely this quasi-supernal hooey shall pass on in a day or so, and I'll just go back to my normal degree of bother and snark, griping about stuff. At least I might appreciate a broader view.

Your Own Path

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 07:04:00 +0000

This, with an overly-emphasized virtual h/t to my friend Rainlillie for the bestest find ever. Like the guy says, "Stepping outside the norm is the greatest liberation that most people can find." You go, Sir John Whitmore! Nic Askew go, too.

Overthinking Gay-friendly

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 03:52:00 +0000

The other day on Facebook, a friend of mine brought up an interesting issue that I hadn't really considered before. He got a mite peeved in one post, about gay-friendly businesses advertising themselves as such, which, so far as I had always imagined, was a nifty thing to do.

I'm pretty sure that I would probably opt for one place over another, online or in real life, that would proudly assert welcoming my kind's patronage. Not necessarily that the other company wouldn't likely be just as glad pocketing some coin, gay or no, it's just that the extra measure saying so seems like an indeed cordial thing to do.

John brought up the point, though, by asking how appropriate would it be showing off about being Muslim-friendly, for example, or black-friendly, Jew-friendly, Latino-friendly, et al.? Any discriminated-against group of folks should be delighted at being singled out and courted by such accepting establishments, no?

Put that way, I see his point; it doesn't seem quite right somehow. It really shouldn't, I suppose, affect where I buy my stuff, whether or not a company auspiciously touts its gay-friendliness. Despite maybe having the noblest of intentions, it might be considered rather condescending, actually, when you think about it. I'd expect they should probably be friendly to all of their patrons regardless.

John wrote that "people use [gay-friendly] all the time to defend people who aren't bigots. Why do we need to recognize people who treat the LGBT community as equal, like that's something special?" True, and I agree it ought not be that way, viewed as something special. But I have to admit that for some reason, I'm still partial to spending my money at the gay-friendly whereabouts.

I have way too much time on my hands to have overthunk this for the past couple of days, I know. I just hadn't ever looked at it from any objective perspective before, and I found it thought-provoking. Plus I did some Googling about various x-friendly places, and despite some of it seeming pretty incredible to me, it's not that unusual after all for drumming up business.

I don't know. I suppose so long as there is unfairness and inequality toward any particular demographic, just being publicly acknowledged and accepted supersedes what could be tagged condescension. John rightly questions why we need to recognize people who treat the LGBT community as equal, like that's something special. Maybe the answer is in the question itself, because until things change, we still do need to.

Easter and the Jesus Christ Action Figure

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 05:02:00 +0000

There's a lady over at eHow concerned about children thinking Easter is all candy and bunnies. She says, "rather than allow children only to think that it is a 'fun' holiday, it may be time to start thinking about telling them the true meaning of Easter", so she put together this list on how to do that.

Yawn. I say, get the kids involved! Kids love pretending and, of course, action figures! Why not make play-time lesson-time, with this awesome Jesus Christ action figure play set instead? Don't forget the resurrection bit, though, arguably the most important part. You'll probably want to splurge for the cross, too.

Sniks and Stones

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:42:00 +0000

Snippets from the ramblings of an irregular three percent; to wit, the archetypal lunatic fringe. For your consideration, format and emphases my own, content via Sipsey Street Irregulars, the gathering place for a merry band of Three Percenters:

"Pelosi and her ilk apparently do not understand that this Intolerable Act has some folks so angry that they are ready to resist their slow-rolling revolution against the Founders' Republic by force of arms.

"They certainly do not hear the soft 'snik-snik' of cleaning rods being used on millions of rifle barrels in this country by people who have decided that their backs are to the wall, politics and the courts no longer are sufficient to the task of defending their liberties, and they must make their own arrangements.

"[I]f we are to avoid civil war, we must get their attention BEFORE the IRS thug parties descend upon us each in turn -- when we will be forced into dozens of defensive slaughters and then, to end it, forced yet again to call Pelosi and the other architects of this war upon their own people to final account.

"We can break their windows. These windows are not far away from where you are reading this right now. In virtually every city and county in this land, there is a local headquarters of Pelosi's party -- the Democrat party. These headquarters invariably have windows.

"Before we have to resort to rifles to resist their 'well intentioned' tyranny. So, if you wish to send a message that Pelosi and her party cannot fail to hear, break their windows. Break them NOW.

"Break them and run to break again. Break them under cover of night. Break them in broad daylight. Break them and await arrest in willful, principled civil disobedience. Break them with rocks. Break them with slingshots. Break them with baseball bats.

"But BREAK THEM. It is, after all, more humane than shooting them in self defense.

"And if we do a proper job, if we break the windows of hundreds, thousands, of Democrat party headquarters across this country, we might just wake up enough of them to make defending ourselves at the muzzle of a rifle unnecessary."

Arguably a bit overhasty, the decree, considering it was posted two days prior to the health care bill even being signed into law. On the other hand, it really was a given that it would be, of course, so I suppose why not get ready the troops?

Plus it allowed time for the scheming, sharing tips for those needing a little more anonymity, for example. Crazy might not be exclusive to any particular party, I know; but folks like these, nuts amongst Wingnuts... straight up unglued, they are. Not to mention just a little bit scary.

Perspective, Redux

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 05:23:00 +0000

I first posted this on the blog a couple of years ago, for different reasons back then. The point of it, though, is eternally relevant; whether two years or two hundred, ago or future, a forever germane truth here. I have to remind myself sometimes, getting all riled up and ranting about stuff, I probably should also make a point keeping things in perspective, at the end of the day:

ed kowalczyk and live. white, discussion. one of their many greats, one my favorites. from throwing copper, 1994.

i talk of freedom
you talk of the flag
i talk of revolution
you'd much rather brag

and as the decibels of this disenchanting discourse
continue to dampen the day
the coin flips again and again and again and again
as our sanity walks away

all this discussion
though politically correct
is dead beyond destruction
though it leaves me quite erect

and as the final sunset rolls behind the earth
and the clock is finally dead
i'll look at you, you'll look at me
and we'll cry a lot

but this will be what we said
this will be what we said
"look what all this talking got us, baby"

Republicans Ranting to Repeal

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 20:29:00 +0000

Imperfect, for a fact, but it's finally over; the health care reform bill passed and ready for Obama to sign off on. I'm not wetting my pants about it or anything, but I am glad, for what it's worth. For all my bitching about the details of the plan and for the peremptory stunts pulled getting it through, it is at least something useful, bringing the United States' health care setup closer to better.

I suppose it's really not ended yet, of course. Already the Republican claptrap has started up vowing to legislatively repeal the "monstrosity", which might be interesting to watch them try, seeing as how to repeal the bill they would need to bring in 60 votes in the Senate and a majority in the House.

And as Paul Abrams at HuffPo pointedly asks, what exactly in the bill would they scrub? In part,

"They will again allow discrimination based on pre-existing conditions, wiping millions off of insurance rolls? They will reinstate lifetime caps on health care reimbursement, driving hundreds of thousands of families into bankruptcy? They will again allow insurance companies to drop coverage when an enrollee actually gets sick? They will cancel medical insurance for 32 million people who will now have it?"

Of course, they could try to eliminate the taxes imposed by the new law, defund the subsidies and best practices studies, tax credits and such things as Abrams notes, "mickey-mouse stuff"... all inflating the deficit, totally transgressing the GOP's newfound ism of deficit reduction, post-Bush. Also, at this time anyway, probably not the best occasion they would want to bring up reconciliation to push it through.

All just posturing, pomp and circumstance is what it amounts to. Believing they now have November assured, what with Obamacare taking effect inherent with its death panels and sundry socialist heinousness, all I can think is they're only trying to put an exclamation point to how all this bad happened on the Democrats' watch. Problem is, they so far have nothing to back up the rhetoric.

I have a hunch this might backfire, that they might only end up looking more foolish than anything else, and what will be remembered instead is them stupidly dragging the whole mess out... when between now and November, people will start finding out that the big scary monster, the Obamanation of America, turns out to not really affect most of them so much after all. To boot, all the perks that kick in straight away are sort of bonuses, truth be told.

Call me queer (just don't call me "faggot") thinking that, despite fancying having it in the electoral bag this year, the Republicans might be better off stifling for the time being, and indulge the Democrats their right to whoop and crow and waggle big-ass giant gavels.

Because here's the deal: the parts of the reform law that might eventually sting at all, won't start in stinging until 2014. Depending on how things go revamping the system between now and then, there could be a better time for the GOP to get all toldja-so indignant on the issue. Basically, though, I just want them to shut the hell up about it, at least for awhile.

Calling All Asshats

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 22:06:00 +0000

So the teabagger people did their thing today in Washington D.C. raising some last-minute ruckus against the health care reform bill to be voted on tomorrow.

Reluctant leader of the pack Sarah Palin could not be there, but did implore her Facebook friends anywhere near the Beltway to show up. Handsomer-than-ever patriot Jon Voigt urged his freedom-loving American followers to join him there by the thousands. And anchor-baby Michelle Malkin, of course, rallied her lot to swarm in also, advisedly schlepping Zazzle posters along with.

Exploiting one's status, or notoriety, calling to arms the masses who subscribe to this or that particular ideology, it's done all the time. And ~~I'm sure~~ it's possible there are some perfectly reasonable tea people out there somewhere, but it really does seem that more often than not, these little get-togethers, like the one today, turn out to be mostly an assemblage of asshats. Probably the liberal media's fault I think that way, but still.

Seems to me if they truly wanted to make their point, protesting this Obamacare Socialism Whatsit that bothers them all so very much, they might consider not acting like a bunch of dorks every time they gang up. Don't know how they expect to swing any votes their way, what with the spitting on and the name-calling of the ones they are presumably trying to persuade.

Civil rights guys Emmanuel Cleaver and John Lewis got spit on and called "nigger", Barney Frank was called "faggot" and lisped at, or something. Whatever. If this was organized to be a last-ditch protest to stop the bill from passing, it seems that it would perhaps befit those there to not misbehave in such a manner to guarantee that it does.

The bill will pass regardless, of course, and I am excited about that despite my certain disappointments and frustration with getting it done, but honestly. For what today's commotion really was after all, just a last symbolic reminder that they're still here and still opposed to everything, even so, decorum ought not be totally dismissed, and name-calling is pretty childish. Asshats.

2 A.M. First Day of Spring

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 07:04:00 +0000

It was 70 degrees warm Friday. I went for a walk. I kind of worked up a stink even. I liked it very much. It has been really nice lately and I already have pretty buds here. Now it is early morning the first day of Spring. I just took this picture. It is snow. There might be a foot of it on the ground later on today. It is going to be 30 degrees instead. It sucks. The picture is still pretty cool, though.

Accommodating God

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 23:19:00 +0000

I'm not such a wise person (despite wisdom purportedly coming with age), but about certain things I do believe I have figured them out. Usually, though, I suck putting into words my knowing what's what.

Which is frustrating, because when I do have that stray deep thought, I think I should share it with people. Not that I feel called to enlighten the less-illuminated or the stupid, but mostly because I'm just proud I had one at all, a deep thought.

Like the forever question of why God allowed this or that, whenever some really horrible-bad freaky shit happens. Or any other variation thereof, if there is a God, where was God, whatever. The substance of the question is the same however it is asked, and for which I may have the answer, I just can't precisely say it.

I was listening to Morning Edition a few afternoons ago and heard some rabbi guy, Harold Kushner, speaking about this, and the guy totally nailed it. Rabbi Kushner has written a dozen books offering Biblical guidance, his best-known title is When Bad Things Happen to Good People.

Why, God, could I not have said the same thing, put so succinctly? Okay, that one's a question I can't answer other than by saying I'm probably just too incompetent; but to the other God question, for your consideration, bits gleaned from the NPR interview:

"There's always a fresh supply of grieving people asking, 'Where was God when I needed him most?'"

That's a question Kushner himself confronted as a young father when his first-born child died, leading him to rethink his view of an omnipotent God.

"It just seemed so terribly unfair and it forced me to reconsider everything I'd been taught in seminary about God's role in the world," Kushner says. "It was shattering."

He says people from a more traditional perspective have asked him whether he thought his son's death was part of God's plan. But Kushner rejects that idea.

"If that were God's plan, it's a bad bargain," Kushner says. "I don't want to have to deal with a God like that."

He says that if he had to face the fact that God was either all-powerful but not kind, or thoroughly kind and loving, but not totally powerful, he would rather compromise God's power and affirm his love.

"The theological conclusion I came to is that God could have been all-powerful at the beginning, but he chose to designate two areas of life off-limits to his power," Kushner says. "He would not arbitrarily interfere with laws of nature. And secondly, God would not take away our freedom to choose between good and evil.

"I am embarrassed to remember how I counseled some families that had a tragedy in my early years as a rabbi." He says when he tried those words on himself, he discovered they didn't comfort him. Kushner recalls offering solace to a family in his congregation whose 17-year-old son had died.

"I said something to the parents like, 'We can't understand why this happened, but we have to believe that somewhere down the road, we'll see that it made sense,' " Kushner says. "And, God, I wish I could take those words back today, 60 years later."

"My sense is God and I came to an accommodation with each other a couple of decades ago, where he's gotten used to the things that I'm not capable of and I've come to terms with things he's not capable of," Kushner says. "And we care very much about each other."

That's the ticket, perfectly put to the point of the reasons why. God does not arbitrarily interfere with laws of nature, and God would not take away our freedom to choose between good and evil, and all smooshed up together in the space-time continuum to any single moment or incident, is what it is as things go.

Either blaming God for the bad stuff, or spinning it stupidly that it will assuredly turn out to be for some awesome divine by and by purpose, both are equally silly. If that were God's plan, like the rabbi says, it's a bad bargain and I also don't want to have to deal with a God like that.

Excepting that my sense didn't come a couple of decades ago, ditto Kushner here, God and I came to an accommodation with each other, where he's gotten used to the things that I'm not capable of and I've come to terms with things he's not capable of. And yes, we do care very much about each other.

Health Care Overhaul Misadventures

noreply@blogger.com (Doug Robertson) — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 03:58:00 +0000

This is becoming almost laughable now, the whole health care overhaul misadventure. I've made it known before that if I had my druthers, Obama would have been pushing for single-payer, like he once might have done (the classic "I was for it before I was against it" political dodge), but that nonetheless, I was pleased something was going to get passed for long-overdue reform.

I can honestly say, though, that at this point I am becoming so confounded by this way or that way shoving it through, I don't really care so much anymore. Maybe if this is what government has become, anarchy is the better alternative. Probably more apt toward getting things accomplished, at least; it arguably couldn't be much worse.

When it came down to it, that the only way getting around not having enough votes to pass a final version for signing health care reform into law was to bring up the option of budget-reconciliation, I thought there was some pretty flimsy justification for using that trick. But all right, I figured it has been done before by the opposite party based on similar hinky arguments, and maybe at least this might work to finally settle the issue and put it to rest.

Of course, for that, there must first be a bill submitted to reconcile, and there is where seems to be another sticky wicket, that the Senate's version won't pick up enough votes needed in the House to approve it for sending on to be ratified under the up and down provision of a reconciliation bill. This time a few pro-life Democrats' are being stubborn over pesky bits about abortion that they are worried to have on their records as having voted for.

So now enters Nancy Pelosi proposing perhaps using the "Slaughter solution" for overcoming this latest hitch if need be, which I had absolutely no idea what she was talking about. I'm admittedly slow sometimes, but it took me forever figuring this one out, and I'm still not quite clear on exactly how this could possibly ever be a feasible back-up plan.

The Slaughter strategy would skip over requiring an actual vote on the Senate version of the bill at all, that way the few hold-outs in the House won't get in the way of ushering in a final version and can instead just pretend one is there already magically "deemed passed", going ahead and voting on only the amendments to it, thus avoiding a direct vote on the Senate version what the balky Democrats don't want, thereby keeping their records clean.

It's too overly-complicated for me, really, and it makes my brain hurt. I could be wrong about the details of how it works, but I do know I am right that the process should not be so terribly convoluted and dubious, and my question is, if that bunch in DC, on this or any issue, are allowed to continually pull off all manner of stunts and procedural gymnastics to override what are supposed to be the rules of the game, then what the hell purpose are the rules there for in the first place but to be broken?

Also, is any of this aberrant behavior even constitutional? It doesn't seem to me that much of it would be, but frankly my mind is already stretched too far trying to grasp even vaguely what all are the goings-on forcing through this damn health care bill. I sure as hell don't need to start reading over expostulation why it might or might not be constitutional, like that would make a rat's ass difference anyway.

Like I said, after all of this absurdity, I really don't care anymore what happens, I truly don't. At this point I just want it finished, thrown out if need be, the sooner the better. Health care overhaul might actually be less critical than the greater needed government reform, really, all things considered. And I also stand by my earlier contention, too, that anarchy would as likely as not, be less chaotic than this has proved the government can be. What a disaster.