Daily GUIDE-ance:

Monday, January 28, 2008

flabberty jabbery

So Liz tells me I sound really mad in that last post. Yeah I could see that. Let me PS that yes I really did bail out of the discussion because if I didn't I might say something I'd regret later, plus I was seriously losing my ability to sleep, and I really do feel the level of outrage as described BUT i want to super-add that that outrage is Not directed at anybody. Really. Espcially not at any of you. My apologies if anybody felt personally insulted- such was not my intent-kiss the bible, cross my heart, hope to die.

more jabber

I'd like to explain something. Mary was right, my dropping out of our rip-roaring debate was... precipiitous??? sp?! SUDDEN. here's why:

Wthout going too much into the details very very occasionally(thank God) life requires that I have some trivial dealings with one of the people who sexually abused my wife when she was a child. On these occassions, I am not all that stable emtionally- I tend to rage. This creep and I have not been in the same building for over a decade and this is good because I honestly don't know that I would not wind up in jail. Ok what's the point you might wonder-

- well, I found out that this topic evokes very similiar feelings of - injustice, horror, revulsion, disgust and in fact rage (with the difference that in the case of Liz's abuser there is a nice human focal point for that energy, and I do not have one for the abortion issue) perhaps because we are really talking about the similiar things- the violent abuse of the innocent. I needed to take some time out before I went nuclear. I tell you this because I want you to understand the intensity of my feelings for this topic.

So I spent the last couple days reflecting, and one of the things I realized is that you can’t take the emotion out of this discussion. Or maybe I should say you should not. Lets all remember: we are not talking about if we prefer Picasso or Rembrant. This is not some high brow dinner chat about the virtues of Bach over Beethoven. It’s not intellectuo rap time about Einstein vs. Newton. We are talking about whether or not it should be legal to kill babies in the womb. If you can discuss it with out your stomach churning it means part of your soul is dead or at least heavily anesthetized. I cannot talk about it long without feeling pain and I hope it will always be so.

I dont want to drop the discussion and I kinda feel like I put a bullet in it's brain a bit by bailing and I did not intend that. For one, I think there are at least three points that we have not addressed, not to my satisfaction at least.

I think what I will post these points one at a time over the next while. It is a seriously big deep topic and we (apparently) could jam about it for a long time- I think, though, we might cover more ground if we cover the ground systematically.

Gosh. I never expected to be so serious... Its not exactly me- but I don't see any way out of it. Even if nobody comments, I think for my own peace of mind, I will have to post my various discussion points just to get them out of my system. It will take me a wee bit longer to get my thoughts organized for posting, plus I have to go to work yada yada. Again thanks for listening and thanks for caring.

(who the heck is this guy?)


Sunday, January 27, 2008

Ooompy Ooompy!

Ooompy Ooompy!

Who knew that the John Sever groupies could be such a passle of passionate, compassionate, issue-oriented, free-thinking, informed culture warriors? Well I suppose on second thought that it should come as no suprize. I mean we are all used to thinking of John as this muscle bound, cocky rockstar/Norse God who doesn't do anything except win Magic Tournaments, smart off to cops, and hang out at the beach reading sci-fi and working out--- But I think we all knew that underneath that simple fun-loving facade he was really one of the great poltical, religious, and scientific thinkers of all time. Should be no suprize that his fans would be cut out of similiar cloth.

Yeah all, I talked to him- he was really stoked about last posts discussion and asked me to tell you all Thanks so much for posting and more especially for caring. The A-word really is the issue of our time, he wanted me to tell you. He's been backwards and forwards through time and He knows man, he knows!! He says its our time's equilvalent to slavery in the 1850's (as we all know from last post), Naziism in the 1940's, The spanish inquistition of when ever that was... yeah baby.

He also had a message : "Save the babies, Save the world"

He apologizes for having to bail, but he had absorbed too much power in one of his recent battles as a super-hero and had to go off somewhere safe and sparsely populated so that he could go nuclear without doing too much damage. He may have a scar next time you see him, but I wouldn't worry too much- He is one tough beast... and I am pretty sure he also absorbed some serious healing factor that should see him through in the end, though no doubt it will cost him some heroic effort. But hey- that's what he does.

Peace out Yo!

PS: BTW you might be interested to know that this weeks tune (at right), Another one bites the dust by Queen is 3:37 minutes long, and repeats the title phrase 16 times. That means that while you enjoy this week's tune, every other time Fred says the key phrase- yeah- Another one actually does bite the dust. That's the world we live in. I'm sorry- John's working on it though.

Monday, January 21, 2008

My thoughts

Happy MLK day. Several years ago I read MLK’s autobiography, and while I can’t say I am an MLK expert, I found his book to be… inspiring, and the man impressed me. (He was a Baptist preacher BTW- weren’t we just talking about Baptists?) Christianity gave us Martin Luther King Jr, Islam produced Malcolm X. Make of it what you will. (MLK was also influenced considerably by Gandhi who was, I believe, a Hindu) Anyhow if you have never watched his “I have a dream” speech, here it is. I cried the first time I watched it, believe it or not.


I’m not sure MLK would be really pleased with what has happened to his movement since his death. In my inexpert opinion, he really was a uniter, and so much of the so-called civil right movement of today seems to be focused on division. It’s sad.

So on a slightly related note, for several years I have been wanting to write out some thoughts I have had about… well I will tell you in a sec- and today seems like a good day for it. Here goes:

Another thing I am not an expert on is the Civil War, and the years and attitudes leading up to it. But, I’m not a total numskull there either- I have read several books on the subject, and I find that period of history very interesting indeed. And I think it is monstrously relevant to our time.

One thing that is continuously astonishing to me, as I look at the past, is how so many people were able to justify in their minds and souls that which is universally recognized by us as a deeply evil practice: Slavery. Half the country accepted and defended the idea that a human being could be property. Half the country not only put up with the practice, but, were deeply, even passionately convinced that they were in the right to do so. How?! People are very good at tricking themselves but what kind of person can convince themselves that slavery is ok? It wasn’t just a few mentally ill sickos- it was a topic that half the country was willing to go to war with the other half over. It was a topic debated with all gravity by the most respected thinkers of the time. Fredrick Douglas in his “Narrative of the life of Frederick Douglas” (he was a runaway slave, his book is awesome) states that it was commonly known among the slaves that you were far better off with an irreligious master than with a churchman for a master- because the religious masters were convinced on a religious level that slavery was a moral practice.

Question: If you had lived in those times, which side of the slavery issue would you have been on? If you were a white born in the south, are you the type of person who evaluates yourself honestly and deeply enough that you would have rejected slavery? Would you have been like Robert E Lee- a man who thought slavery was wrong, but fought to defend it anyway? Would you have been like Lincoln- believing slavery to be wrong, but who ran for president as a moderate- in essence saying “Yes its bad, but there is nothing we can do about it today“? Would you possibly have been an ardent abolitionist? Maybe you would you have been like John Brown?

You can’t really know what you would have done or thought, but I believe I have a yardstick that is a good indicator of what side of the slavery issue you would have been on and it is this:

Where do you stand on the abortion issue of in our time?
I believe that history will look back on abortion in our time with the same revulsion and horror that we regard slavery with in our time. I believe that if you are pro-choice now, you probably would have been all about states rights in the 1850’s.

Take a look with me at the arguments in favor of each- If you embrace one, you embrace the other.
1) A Negro is not exactly human, so we can treat it differently.
An embryo is not exactly human, so we can treat it differently.

2) While slavery is not desirable, it is an economic necessity. (Not true as it turns out)
A young girl would be justified in getting an abortion, so she can get an education, for reasons of economics.

3) A woman’s body is her property and she can do as she wishes with it.
A slave is a man’s property and he must be allowed to as he wishes with it.

Slavery was an issue that divided the country. Half thought it was wrong, half thought it was right. There was no middle ground acceptable to either side. The tragedy is that we found a middle ground anyway, for so long. And while it was debated, the atrocities continued to pile up. There are enough abortions committed in America to make a 9-11 disaster every week. Easily.

We have our John Browns today. He was the man who thought he had been ordained by God to start a war that would purge slavery from the land, so he just started shooting. It didn’t work. We have people who bomb clinics. Not a good idea.

But I do believe it is as pressing an issue in our time as the slavery issue was then. It’s been almost 150 since the war, and we almost have the mess cleaned up. That’s why I am as rabidly pro-life as I am. This next president may appoint Supreme Court judges with a clear eye on this issue- he will certainly appoint lesser court judges. And there are many other things a president can do- President Bush has refused to allow US tax money to fund programs that sponsor abortion, for example.

I’m not exactly saying vote Republican. What am I saying is this :
Evaluate yourself rigorously.

Thursday, January 17, 2008



That was certainly fun! And I thought nobody would want to talk politics. We even drew Big E out. >:) (and yeah E- I thought it was cool too.)

I am glad that we got several diverse viewpoints- It would have been much less fun if we all just slapped each other's backs and agreed ad nauseum. It's how you get smarter- by having your assumptions challenged. My thanks to everyone who participated in last post's hailstorm discussion. Fun, thought provoking, informative etc.

And no one had to get nailed to anything. (Sorry Timpani I couldn't resist)

So I had one more discussion point that I wanted to toss onto the stack of that discussion(as a fast effect) but I figured since I am the boss, I would instead put it in a new post.

Religion and Poltics- Romney, Huckabee and Obama.
I think that it is a good idea to know about a canidate's religon. I think it does have a bearing on the type of president the canidate will be. If a canidate's religon has no bearing on what type of president they would make, that also says something about the canidate.

Long and short:
Romney's attitude towards his faith seems to make him a better man and a better potential president.

Huckabee's faith I am not so sure about- most comitted non-mormon christains that I have known have been truly class acts... but I am not sure how geniune Huckabee's personal faith is. "When was the last time that Huckabee's faith was not connected to his profit motive?" is the question I find myself asking.

Obama's church appears to be built largely on racist principles- and when racism mingles with religon, you get one ugly, scary combination.

No more at present.

Friday, January 11, 2008

Politics-Sorry. Has to be done.

Politics is not a game. Its war. And the scent of Blooooood is in the air.

So here is my line up with some light reasoning as to why.*

1) Fred Thompson-

Right now he is my number 1 choice for President because...

a:He does not believe in killing the unborn.

b:He seems to understand the concept that the less government messes around with our lives, the freer we are.

c: Of all the canidates, Mrs. Thompson would probably make the best looking first lady: http://www.fred08.com/About.aspx

2) Mitt Romney-

He is my number two choice because I am basically convinced that he really is pro-life now:


He is not number one because his talk about health care for everyone scares me. The government sucks at everything it tries to do except those few things (the military, law enforcement, etc) that no one else can do. (He's LDS. That cuts no ice with me. I've known too many mormons.) (I are a mormon, for those of you not keeping score)

3) Mike Huckabee-

I would probably vote for Huckabee if he got the GOP nod because he is at least nominally pro-life. But he is historically a tax raiser. He doesn't get it- leave my money alone, leave me alone.
(The fact that he once was a paided preacher cuts no ice with me- I've known too many preachers)

4) John McCain-

If McCain got the GOP nod, I may very well vote against him for some radical third party guy. McCain's philosophy historically has been "If you can't beat em join em. If you can beat em join em" He is a wuss.

5) Rudy Guliani-

If he gets the nod, I will definitely vote against him because of his anti-life stance. (do you get the picture yet that killing babies rubs me wrong?)

6) John Edwards-

Why does he even run? The last thing we need is an ambulance chaser in the white house.

7) Hilary Clinton-

Reminder: The Clintons are the ones that drop bombs on other countries to draw headlines away from Monica. They are the ones who let Osama go. The ones who stage everything, who commit perjury, raise taxes and make our country a laughing stock. Voting for Hilary strikes me as an abysmally foolish thing to do indeed.

8) Barak Hussein Obama-

*General disclaimer: I am still researching!

Saturday, January 5, 2008


Various Negative thoughts at 1:30 am

Sometimes I worry that I am a bit too negative about things and stuff in general. Like my last post for example. Or like what I think I am about to write about. It is 12:30am so non-linear thought patterns may be arising in this post, but hey I like non-linear.

Its 12:30 am cause some friends took us out- dinner and a movie- for Liz's birthday which was admittedly in June, but the food was good. Japanese. Negative: Raw fish is revolting as are raw fish eggs. Liz tried one and said it was good, so I tried one and it was horrid. Like biting down on an eyeball. (there's an image for Liz-she is so easily grossed out by eye related things) But really that was what is was like. But the rest of the food was very good and there was plenty of it. There- I counterbalanced with a postitive. Oh to the devil with it- I like negative! To The Abyss with it! And the company was good and that was the main point.

Movie- "PS I love you" Liz and Dawn picked it while I protested. Now- I actaully can enjoy a girlie romancie flick so dont try to make this in to a man prejudice thing- but the movie sucked. Seeeeeeeeeeeeriously. Avoid at all costs. So bad I had to get up and leave the theater part way through and stroll for a good half hour. And I dont walk out on movies much. Occassionally though, one just turns my stomach such that I can't stay. this was one. BARF BARF BARF BARF BARF BARF BARF. a million Barfs will not suffice. (ok I feel compelled to demonstrate that I am not just man prejudiced against love/death girl movies but that this movie actually did SUUUUUUCK- I will do it by naming 2 such movies that were good : The Lakehouse and Shall we Dance?- I can give both of those fairly positive reviews and even can state that they are both quite clean, which is soooo nice.)

Argh. Anyhow.

Ah more negative comments: I'm so glad Hilary came in third. She is seriously the most annoying person on the planet and the main reason I hope she does not get the nod is because ... she's like ... PeeWee Herman and Marsha Stewart and Queen Latifah and a nice bucket of headlice and everything else irritating and just OH SHUT UP FOR ONCE all rolled into one Annoying-zilla thing, and I really would just rather not have to look at her for another year. I think I'd rather have Jahoveh's Witnesses at my door every day. I rather have my tech support calls routed to India. She's like a Martha Stewart with headlice converted to Jahoveh's Witness taking tech support calls in India, for Queen Latifah's internet service, covered in skunk bile type annoying.

"Hallo my name iss Hillary would you care to order some home furnishings or become a psychopath while you wait?" "Would you like applesauce or mayonaise on your hot dog?"

So happy to see her get slaughtered.

Jimminy its now 1:30am! I think i must have been wrong about the time earlier. I know I have not babbled for an hour.

Speaking of Martha Stewart I hope she does get headlice.

I should obviously go to bed. Ah- I am reading the golden compass just out of sheer bloody mindedness- there was so much negative press going around I decided to read it and see. So far I have not been mind numbingly offended. I'm 2/3 the way through book one. It's not to my mind all that stunningly great reading either. On a par with... oh name any mediocre book, its maybe just a shade better than that. yammldy hammldy.

Ah- I thought of a new palindrome:

"Ergo, Ogre!"

a bit meaningless really.

Your faithful potentate-
Clamensa Ledoroius IV in waiting