The Wrangler is a symbol, indeed a bulwark that stands against the contemporary and all that change entails. The decor hasn’t changed much in 30 years and the food hasn’t changed at all.

Imagine: you drive up to a 60’s strip mall and true to form there is no vegetation in the parking lot. Apparently all the trees where cut down by The Wrangler to feed the interminable fire that smokes all their meat deep and black. It is the only place I know that smokes food only with oak. That might be by necessity since Southern California has no other plentiful source of hardwood. Carrying on, you approach the storefront and see by the cheeseball sunworn cartoon decals that this ain’t Starbucks, it ain’t froo-froo; priggery simply isn’t tolerated here.

Inside one is immediately struck by the blandness of color and texture. You sense that someone put an eight-track in a loop and it has been playing ever since. Even the radio dial hasn’t changed. There is a water spot in the ceiling that hasn’t ever been fixed. The cement block wall lining one side of the long room has been painted and repainted in the same cream–no–soft mustard hue. The knick-knacks on the walls have been updated to kitschy country circa 1983. Rafia. Pie plate art. Painted wood scrollwork.

The food is well-smoked. For the longest time it was one of the very few places in San Diego county where one could get pit-smoked authentic barbeque. Beef, ham, and beef ribs are listed as the main entrees. The beef is sometimes a little dry, but always has good flavor. The baked beans are good, dark, a tad spicy, but a little too sweet. The slaw is well done, no weird stuff in it, and not too sweet. I don’t order the other side dishes enough to recall them, but I would expect similar results. The iced tea is not overly strong. They do soup pretty good too.

For barbeque the prices are excellent. The most expensive thing on the menu is the combo platter at $10.99 (December 2008) which is a good load of all three entrees. Lunch item for about $5 include a sandwich and a side and drink.

Strangley, there is no place to leave dirty dishes even though you aren’t served at your table. This leaves you with the idea that you should clean up after yourself but at a loss as to where to leave your leavings. I’ve concluded that they want you to bus your own food, though if you leave your mess on the table they’ll gladly clean up after you.

Take the time to use the bathroom as a pretext to see the large brick lined pit in the back. It impresses me.

Eat your food at the restaurant if possible because the smells contribute greatly to the flavor.

No big deal, it looks like a fridge, but woah, whats this!!!

It looks like someone got their letter posted up on the fridge next to the kids’ drawings. Yayyy!

Enjoy.

The main reasons humanity is on earth comes to us from Genesis 1: “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” Not much in Judaism or Christianity conflicts with this edict. Also please do not understand this in 21st century ecological terms, though I will not argue that now. All the world’s purpose is to rule over the earth. I suspect that means we are to make it like a beautiful garden filled with every good thing. But what precisely it means isn’t necessary for the purpose of my point.

The proximate cause for our existence isn’t to be happy, or even to be good; it is to be kings and queens over a great earth. Goodness of course is the way we are made to be. It is impossible for us to have been made for evil. Happiness is like food and sex: a great thing to possess but by no means a necessary trait for ruling. And yes food for some people is not required.

Yet don’t you think many people who are against homosexual marriage are against it merely because they are against homosexuality? At best, at least, the point should be reiterated: homosexual marriage directly conflicts with our stated purpose. You cannot be a fruitful homosexual. Homosexuality requires a great turn inward and you cannot subdue the earth when so positioned.

The Church says be happy when it should say “Rule this place the way you know it should be ruled.”

Just image a person going to work not knowing what it is they are supposed to do. They get different directions from three people, attend a meeting they know nothing about, and accomplish nothing. Imagine doing that job for a lifetime. It would confound the soul utterly. Yet we live like this.

There is more to say on this, this writing is a bit fragmented.

According to lots of Obama supporters, that puts him in the running for the POTUS. “Intelligent” they proffer, when queried about the biggest reason to vote for him. “Brilliant” TMWO (Oprah) has bellowed. But you know Jesus wouldn’t get the same treatment. So what is the real reason to vote for him? What is the elephantine idea in the 2008 election room? I really want to know but if I had to guess I’d say… he doesn’t judge you.

Now I happen to think that Obama judges people a-plenty. It must be done. But in certain areas - sexual behavior, US image, money problem people and Islamofacist relations he comes across as the candidate who empathizes and cares.

Is there more to it? Am I wrong?

It is obvious Poppins dabbles in alchemy. Now, I’m the first person to say that alchemy per se is not within the realm of the dark one. Some very fine scientists have dabbled in it. But Old Scratch isn’t far from the alchemist’s elbow. There are always greedy temptations buffeting the serious alchemist’s heart. So what alchemy has she done? She can turn bread and water into tea and cakes, using nothing more than sugar. I have this on the witness of Bert, George Banks, and others. She can also change the flavor of medicine at will.

Poppins seen flying in an undated photo. Looking a bit long of tooth here.

Consider the magic she is steeped in. She practices levitation. Remember the time she charmed Uncle Albert’s tea table? She also knows all manner of incantations and spells. SupercalifragXXXXXXXXX- saints preserve me I almost typed the whole word. She is no stranger to the dark world of necromancy. She animates dead things like chalk drawings and snow globe people. She can fly and I’m not talking about hot air balloons. That’s right she flys with her umbrella, much like witches in the New World fly on broomsticks. Poppins is clearly a beast-talker though she doesn’t seem to have reached the level of beastmaster. She has been known to communicate with birds, both live and reanimated. She can also speak dog, though not as well.

But you may ask what crimes has she committed? She has murdered dozens of people or at least maimed them. Consider the case where she caused tornadic winds to actually blow away a large number of women, to their destruction it can only be assumed.

Poppin’s elemental familiar is fire. She can control fire and smoke quite easily, such as causing smoke to form unnatural shapes like stairs, and solidify, just to name one thing. Water is the opposite of fire and thus she cannot easily control it. Water might even be her enemy, as it is the enemy of other dark sisters like the Wicked Witch of the West. She therefore has a very difficult time controlling rain, and oceans.

Not only does she practice these things, but she teaches them to others. She squirreled herself into the George and Winifred Banks’ home and turned their children into her acolytes. She did this primarily by showing them how to animate objects in the nursery using only finger snaps. She thus charms children by making the mundane special. This is the hook she uses to establish herself as an authority over them. Once it is set she is free to toy with her victims however she chooses, much like how the hag did with Hansel and Gretel.

Every black magic witch has a twisted sexual perversion, and judging from Poppins queer affinity for corsets I think we can safely say she is into bondage and M&Ms.

I hope this is enough to discourage you from ever inviting this “Mary” Poppins into your own home. Don’t even read books or see movies about her, curiousity is never fully sated and you will only thirst for more black art once you get a taste. And don’t even think about Poppin’s god(devil?)daughter, Pippi Longstocking.

The bill was bad not only because of the aforementioned reasons, but also because it would have established several other days that are inane. California Poppy day. John Muir day…. I like a good holiday like anybody else. But these special days, weeks and months cease being special when every day is a special day. You did celebrate California Dried Plum Digestive Health Month, didn’t you? Well you won’t get the chance to do it again because it was only for January 2008, saints be praised.

Kids aren’t going to learn much about the high Sierras or California nature by hearing about John Muir. They have to go there. Hike over Mono Pass. See brown bears up close. Laze in a chilly mountain river in August. Having special days revolving around mundane things simply seems too timid an approach to life. Instead of taking an entire day talking about the wonders of the California poppy and cutting out poor craft paper imitations of them, get the kids on the bus and go to the park. There are plenty of poppys to be found. Incidentally then it could be poppy day, field mouse day, hawk day and kite day all in the same day.

I’m responding in absolute sincerity and love. I want to know the truth and promulgate it as much as possible and I cherish such interactions as this one. Marcia, I disagree with the substance of your last email and I want to say why. This post got a little long, I wish it could be shorter. I decided to post it on this blog so that those who really wanted to read it would and those who didn’t care to read it would have a less cluttered inbox. Thanks for your patience.

For those who haven’t been in this from the beginning: Lou suggested that we call in and tell the gov-e-nah to vote no on California’s AB 2567. Marcia then suggested the following:

******
Hi Lou,
I lived in San Francisco when Harvey Milk was a city council person.  He was a colorful and wonderful guy that straight and gay people embraced.  He was courageous in a time when to be gay meant you had to hide your true self.  When he and George Moscone were murdered by nutcase Dan White (who claimed the “twinkie defense”,) we were very sad and shocked.

I don’t know what Arnold is going to do, but it’ll be interesting.  Judging from the language one hears on any elementary, middle, or high school campus, California kids are aware of gay people.  Perhaps learning about tolerance and civil rights from another perspective will be healthy. I remember when ultra-conservative groups tried to prevent Martin Luther King Day from happening.
With warmest regards,
Marcia
**

My response to Marcia follows:
To clarify the substance of this discussion, AB 2567 would make a day to honor Harvey Milk, a promoter of homosexual issues. On this day children would be taught about Harvey and/or homosexuality.

God bless California for being such a strong advocate of home school, charter school and other alternatives to the travesty that is public education.

There a couple reasons why it is at least reasonable to consider the possibility of Harvey Milk day.

First: homosexuals have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness (LLP). They are not committing felonious acts. Like adultery, sodomy has been legalized. So if they aren’t felons and they aren’t aliens, then they are citizens and that gives them every right that every other citizen has.

Second: Harvey Milk was instrumental in helping ensure a better way for homosexuals to pursue LLP after coming out. For example, he helped defeat the Briggs Initiative which would have banned LGBTs (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transvestite) from teaching. It was reasonable for him to do so since homosexuals are granted the same rights as all citizens.

No Day of Recognition for Harvey Milk

However, Harvey Milk doesn’t deserve a day of recognition, and this bill, AB 2567, should be vetoed. (Even if you believe that homosexuality is good, the following arguments still hold a great deal of water.) There are several reasons for this: assassination or murder is not a sufficient reason to honor someone, I question the virtuosity of Mr. Milk, and there are long term ramifications to glorifying homosexuality such as the confusion of children and the undermined family that would lead to further problems.

I want to make it clear that I don’t hate people who are gay-I have had great times with gay friends.

Assassination

Assassination or murder alone does not qualify anyone for a special day. No one honors the Archduke Ferdinand yet his was a most notorious assassination. John F. Kennedy doesn’t get a special day either. There must be more to honorific days than assassination. How virtuous was Mr. Milk?

Milk’s Work and the Virtue of Homosexuality

What Harvey Milk had done and what has been done since in the name of gay rights is not exceedingly virtuous, and in some cases it is downright unjust. The comparison has often been made between the civil rights movement for black people and the efforts made for LGBTs. The comparison is not valid in at least two respects.

First, blacks were liberated from a situation where life was made a daily hardship, and death was more commonly a part of life, by virtue of skin color alone. But skin color was only the signpost. Whites didn’t discriminate against skin color, they discriminated against black people - their mind, culture, habits and other ways. If significant discrimination occurs today it is most often against homosexual acts and other sexually aberrant acts, and not against the homosexual (recall the sing-song saying: hate the sin, love the sinner). Sexual behavior, in contrast to skin color, is controllable. Regardless of what is thought about being “true to your self”, LGBTs never were forced into behaving as such. They could make it and live the dream without harassment. I won’t comment on the genetic versus behavioral causes of homosexuality-I only say that it is reasonably possible to not behave as a homosexual even if one has desires. Furthermore, I’m not being gruffly indifferent here: Jesus calls people to deny themselves constantly and I’m sure everyone reading this post knows exactly how painful that is. Second, what homosexuals are fighting for isn’t equal rights. It is other rights. They want to be in a class by themselves. Witness, among several issues, hate crime law. If someone kills me they are prosecuted as a common murderer. If someone kills my gay friend they can be prosecuted as a hate crime murderer. Now, all murder is hate as anyone who has been to Sunday School knows. Why make the effort to point out a special kind of hate, and why start punishing based on motive, but only for certain kinds of victims?

Second, honoring a homosexual man for his sexuo-political agenda will confuse children and encourage moral acceptance of homosexuality. Kids are sometimes told on the one hand that homosexuality is wrong and on the other hand that it is good to promote homosexuality. Children are very smart but I do not expect them to understand and discern betwixt the finer points of human sexuality and political motivations as such. Kids are already and will become more confused about the nature of the family and marriage. Already I have heard of kids asking whether you’ve got one mom or two, etc. The quickest way to tear a person (and country) apart is to remove family from her life at as early an age as possible. I won’t argue the virtues of one man and one woman as being the kernel of family but I assume for the sake of this post that such a family is the only sustainable one. I have a close friend whose mom came out, divorced his dad and moved in with her lesbian lover. He was devastated, and is strong today only by being saved into the kingdom and normal everyday function pretty much by Jesus’s grace.

Tolerance, or, ACCEPTANCE?

Finally, a word on the notion of tolerance. Tolerance is a beautiful virtue that has helped build the western world into what it is today. However there is and has been for the last forty years something masquerading as tolerance that is not. I would call it religio-secular bigotry and the gay version goes like this: “You must accept homosexuality as a good thing. If you do not you are a small-minded bigot and action will be taken against you sooner or later.” Recently the Boston Archdiocese’s Catholic Charities stopped providing adoption services because the state insisted that they provide adoptions for homosexual people.

Under religio-secular tolerance behavior must not only be tolerated, it must be accepted. Herein lies the biggest rub. For something to be acceptable it must be seen as being good or right. Any judgement resulting in the object being deemed wrong and people say “you are judging me.”

Why is this bigotry secular? Because it takes it’s values from secular humanism. One credo of secular humanism is that it is okay to do anything you want as long as you don’t hurt anybody else. Another is “do what feels good.” Anyone that pronounces negative judgement on your personal pleasures is evil.

The Humanist Manifesto I should clarify this:
“Religious Humanism considers the complete realization of human personality to be the end of man’s life and seeks its development and fulfillment in the here and now. This is the explanation of the humanist’s social passion.”

This claim has been modified over the years but it is essentially propagated by broad swaths of culture today.

The Humanist Manisto II is even more to the point:
“In the area of sexuality, we believe that intolerant attitudes, often cultivated by orthodox religions and puritanical cultures, unduly repress sexual conduct. The right to birth control, abortion, and divorce should be recognized. While we do not approve of exploitive, denigrating forms of sexual expression, neither do we wish to prohibit, by law or social sanction, sexual behavior between consenting adults. The many varieties of sexual exploration should not in themselves be considered “evil.” Without countenancing mindless permissiveness or unbridled promiscuity, a civilized society should be a tolerant one. Short of harming others or compelling them to do likewise, individuals should be permitted to express their sexual proclivities and pursue their lifestyles as they desire…… no group has a monopoly of wisdom or virtue.” [Except of course, the humanists who wrote this.]

Why is this bigotry religious? Because it’s doctrine appeals to religious values of respecting and loving your neighbor and even enemy. Try as they might, secular humanists haven’t made many direct conversions yet and most people in this country are still religious, so this is the humanist’s in. This is largely how humanist ideals are justified for the religious crowd.

Make the Call?

If you made it this far, thanks for hanging in. Homosexuality doesn’t deserve a boost and hope you will tell Arnold. I don’t really know how much weight this holds, but it can’t hurt:

The number to call is : 1 916-445-2841, call it after hours as it almost always is busy during the day.
Press 1 for English
Press 2 “To voice your opinion” on AB2567.
Press 1 for AB2567
Press 2 for NO on AB2567

Also, you can donate to the cause here.

Sincerely,
Brandon