Yes, you read that right!
I am publicly thanking all of my liberal friends and readers to my blog! I also thank all of my liberal Facebook friends for continuing to be my FB friends even after I've posted my non-liberal views both here and on FB.
So why am I saying all this now? It's because I came across a FB notice asking if I wanted someone to be my FB friend. I thought "That person already is my FB friend!" But when I checked my list of FB friends, I saw that she was not. So what happened? Most likely, I got de-friended over a non-liberal comment that I made at that time.
See friends, this has happened to me over the time that I've been on FB. The number of my friends has gone up and down over the months and years that I've been on FB. It happens, and it's not unexpected, because I've gone through this in the course of my real life.
Most of you who are regular readers to my FB page and to my blog know that I've made mention that I was born and raised by baby boomer Marxist parents. Now, be sure you understand that: I don't mean that they were just liberals - these people were hard-core liberals - Marxists! In other words, I've gone through more liberal teachings in my life than most of you probably ever will!
And yet, I have chosen to reject nearly all of it to become very conservative. So conservative that I am a Christian (non-denominational, although because of my Greek heritage, my family history has been of the Greek Orthodox faith) and I am prolife. So in other words, I am a conservative Christian prolifer born of atheist Marxist prochoicers. How is this possible, you ask? Well, why not? If my parents could be raised in the very establishment Republican 1950s and choose to reject it, then why can't a child of hippies choose to reject her own parents' views and attitudes?
So why am I bringing up all of this? Two reasons:
One, some of my readers - mainly new readers - don't know all this about me yet, so once in a while I bring that up about me so that they get the context of my upbringing and why I am the way I am now.
And two, it's so that you understand that when I say "thank you" for still being my FB friend even though you know this about me, you'll know that I mean it.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not apologizing for being a Christian prolife conservative - that ain't gonna change, baby! No, I'm just glad to see that those liberal friends who stay on as my FB friends are able to appreciate me and my writings and humor to stay on as my FB friends.
Those who dump me over non-liberal comments that I've made show that they don't have the strength of character and convictions when it comes to their own views, so they dump me the minute that I challenge them. Well, that's something that they'll have to deal with on their own.
I'll admit that I exploit my knowledge of the liberal mindset and their views to take apart their arguments like an engineering student takes apart a toaster. I'm like that, because I believe liberalism is that bad for this country, and for the world. But it doesn't mean that I'm out against any of you liberals personally.
No, I enjoy the company of most liberals, and many of them are even my friends, both in real life and on my online life. Unlike those who would dump me for expressing my views, I'm able to separate the person from their views. And if you're still my friend even after I've picked apart your liberal views, then you're able to make that separation as well of me and my conservative views.
If this world is ever going to turn itself around and get back on the path of peace and prosperity, then it's going to need more people like us.
So again, thank you, friends!
Showing posts with label real life news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label real life news. Show all posts
Friday, February 3, 2012
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Stop SOPA: It's my Internet, too!
Good intentions do not always translate into good law. It also goes to show that while the music and film industry will sell out on our morals, values, and traditions, what they won't compromise on is their profit margins, so to hell with the rest of us if it's cutting into their bottom line! Well, we say the hell to you, greed mongers of the film and music industry!
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
God Week: Being a believer in God means rebelling against your human nature
Last time I had discussed the belief in God, I had made the comment that those who believe in God are actually rebelling against their own human nature. Now I will explain a little more on what I mean by that.
But first, a little kudos to a couple that I am often critical of, and that’s my own Marxist parents. Despite their wrong-headed beliefs about politics and the world in general, I give them credit for one thing: When they said that they would allow their children to forge their own paths, they truly meant it – even when it meant that one of those kids would eventually take up views contrary to their own. Despite our many disagreements, they are always respectful of my conservative views even if they wholeheartedly oppose them. Boy, was I ever a test of that particular philosophy - and they lived up to it! So, based on their example, I am respectful of their views in return. Heck, I recently admitted that I admire their styles of protest, and would even imitate their style if I ever lead an Occupy movement. If that ain’t a compliment, I don’t know what is!
Another example I learned from them is that just because you are being respectful of someone else’s views doesn’t mean that you can’t occasionally be vocal about your own views! As hard as it is to believe, you can be both loud about your views and still be respectful of the views of others. They did it all the time, and I try to do the same. Mainly, what I learned is that passion for one’s views is no sin, but actually a virtue; for if you don’t have the passion to fight for your beliefs, then why do you believe in them? That’s a lesson that I try to pass on to others. There ya go, Mom and Dad! A public compliment from me to you! :-D Luv ya! <3 <3 Mwah! <3 <3
The reason that I’m bringing up my parents here is because they are atheists, but despite that, atheism wasn’t what they tried to force down my throat. They did tell me of the “dangers” of believing in God, but they still let me decide the matter for myself. Mainly, I think they realized that God is very prevalent throughout our society and our culture, so there was not going to be any avoiding him unless they completely isolated me from the world - which was the last thing that they were going to do. So instead of trying to deny that he exists, they instead tried to give reasons as to why believing in God can often lead to heartache and disappointment. It was their reasoning that I would eventually see it for myself.
Well, I did see that for myself. I did indeed see that believing in God can lead to heartache and disappointment. Ha! I bet you didn’t expect me to agree to that, did ya? However, believing in God can also lead to joy and inspiration. The trick is on how you do this. What I mean is this: it all depends on what you believe God is, and what you expect him to do. Last time I had made mention of the term that I’ve heard atheists use in reference to God, and that's as a “magic genie in the sky that grants all your wishes.” If that is someone’s idea of God, then yes, it’s definitely a recipe for heartache and disappointment. But God is no genie.
Now, what I’m about to present here is my own take on God, and this is based on my own research of history (one of my great loves) and the “footprints” he left along the way in the parade of history, as well as my own experiences. He is there, if you know what you are looking for. Let’s take two examples of people who left their marks in history. One is Genghis Khan, who is alleged to have many descendants in the world because he had a very large harem, and because his sons also had very large harems. Because of that, Khan’s “footprints” are everywhere around the world.
Another historical person with footprints all over the world is Jesus Christ. Before I continue, I know some of you are probably thinking “Uh oh – she’s about to go preachy on us and evangelize her Christianity on us.” I know this, because I know how you guys think. LOL Anyway, I’m bringing Jesus up not to “push” him on you, but to discuss him from a historical standpoint, so I hope you bear with me and hear me out before dismissing me outright, because otherwise you’ll miss a point that I’m trying to make. I also know that some of you deny Jesus existed, but for argument’s sake, let’s say that he did. And for the record, I believe that he existed – which I would have to; otherwise, why would I call myself a Christian?
With that out of the way, let’s look at Jesus Christ. He died young – aged 33 – and left no descendants. Unlike Khan, he never traveled far from the country of his birth. And yet, his thoughts, his words, and his examples are still being lived and discussed to this day. Granted, some of his followers are not doing as good a job in following his examples as others are, but that’s true for any sort of organization; that is, every organization has its zealots and its slackers.
On the one hand, Khan left his “imprints” on history, and yet, what has that done for us – beyond the factual curiosity of a large number of descendants? There is no Ghengishan religion based on his thoughts and his actions. This is because Khan did not see what he did as something that was going to change the world for the better. Instead, he was looking out for himself. Well, he got his very large harem of women and the many children that came out of that, but once he died, he was dead, and no amount of mass copulation was going to change that. He lived according to his human nature and got what came out of that: many moments of physical pleasure for himself, and a large amount of descendants that came from it.
Contrast that with Jesus’ example of love and selflessness. He wasn’t setting out to leave a large number of descendants like Khan did, but instead to leave a large number of followers. And his message of selflessness contrasts with human nature, for it’s our nature to look out for ourselves first. His message of selflessness is difficult to follow – even for his followers – but at the same time, true believers can see how society as a whole can benefit from following his message of love and selflessness.
So how can a message of selflessness draw so many followers – especially in contrast to Khan’s much easier message of following your human nature? What is it that is so appealing to his followers that it quickly spread from his home country to all around the world in a relatively short amount of time? Friends, that’s what I’m still trying to figure out.
And yet, I can’t deny the results. I also can’t deny the appeal of his message of love, despite the difficult standards of selflessness that comes with it. Despite this difficult standard, I can see why this message is appealing, because I can reason out the positive results of what would happen if everyone puts the welfare of others ahead of themselves. In summary, to me God is no genie, but instead is the person of Jesus Christ and his message of love and selflessness in the service of others. That's a deity that's a lot more accessible than some distant spirit in the clouds.
So getting back to my initial statement, being a Christian in the true sense of the word is to be a rebel – a rebel against your human nature of selfishness. So in that light, it can be shown that Christianity is actually “progressive” in the true sense of the word, because progress is what would arise out of serving others before yourself.
Now contrast that with what today’s “Progressives" desire; which is actually REgressive, because they seek “doing your own thing”. This should sound familiar, because that’s what Genghis Khan did. Doing your own thing is the same thing as satisfying yourself first, and with the same results as what Khan got. I leave you with these questions: Has society benefited from liberals' message of "sex, drugs, and rock & roll"? How is such a philosophy better than a philosophy based on selflessness in the service of others?
-----------------------------------------------------
My apologies for this extending into another week, but this post initially was longer, and after looking it over, I chopped off a big chunk of it and will save that part for later, because it’s actually more of a Christmas message than a discussion of what I brought up during my God Week. There’s other things that I wanted to bring up, but I’ll save those topics for another time.
But first, a little kudos to a couple that I am often critical of, and that’s my own Marxist parents. Despite their wrong-headed beliefs about politics and the world in general, I give them credit for one thing: When they said that they would allow their children to forge their own paths, they truly meant it – even when it meant that one of those kids would eventually take up views contrary to their own. Despite our many disagreements, they are always respectful of my conservative views even if they wholeheartedly oppose them. Boy, was I ever a test of that particular philosophy - and they lived up to it! So, based on their example, I am respectful of their views in return. Heck, I recently admitted that I admire their styles of protest, and would even imitate their style if I ever lead an Occupy movement. If that ain’t a compliment, I don’t know what is!
Another example I learned from them is that just because you are being respectful of someone else’s views doesn’t mean that you can’t occasionally be vocal about your own views! As hard as it is to believe, you can be both loud about your views and still be respectful of the views of others. They did it all the time, and I try to do the same. Mainly, what I learned is that passion for one’s views is no sin, but actually a virtue; for if you don’t have the passion to fight for your beliefs, then why do you believe in them? That’s a lesson that I try to pass on to others. There ya go, Mom and Dad! A public compliment from me to you! :-D Luv ya! <3 <3 Mwah! <3 <3
The reason that I’m bringing up my parents here is because they are atheists, but despite that, atheism wasn’t what they tried to force down my throat. They did tell me of the “dangers” of believing in God, but they still let me decide the matter for myself. Mainly, I think they realized that God is very prevalent throughout our society and our culture, so there was not going to be any avoiding him unless they completely isolated me from the world - which was the last thing that they were going to do. So instead of trying to deny that he exists, they instead tried to give reasons as to why believing in God can often lead to heartache and disappointment. It was their reasoning that I would eventually see it for myself.
Well, I did see that for myself. I did indeed see that believing in God can lead to heartache and disappointment. Ha! I bet you didn’t expect me to agree to that, did ya? However, believing in God can also lead to joy and inspiration. The trick is on how you do this. What I mean is this: it all depends on what you believe God is, and what you expect him to do. Last time I had made mention of the term that I’ve heard atheists use in reference to God, and that's as a “magic genie in the sky that grants all your wishes.” If that is someone’s idea of God, then yes, it’s definitely a recipe for heartache and disappointment. But God is no genie.
Now, what I’m about to present here is my own take on God, and this is based on my own research of history (one of my great loves) and the “footprints” he left along the way in the parade of history, as well as my own experiences. He is there, if you know what you are looking for. Let’s take two examples of people who left their marks in history. One is Genghis Khan, who is alleged to have many descendants in the world because he had a very large harem, and because his sons also had very large harems. Because of that, Khan’s “footprints” are everywhere around the world.
Another historical person with footprints all over the world is Jesus Christ. Before I continue, I know some of you are probably thinking “Uh oh – she’s about to go preachy on us and evangelize her Christianity on us.” I know this, because I know how you guys think. LOL Anyway, I’m bringing Jesus up not to “push” him on you, but to discuss him from a historical standpoint, so I hope you bear with me and hear me out before dismissing me outright, because otherwise you’ll miss a point that I’m trying to make. I also know that some of you deny Jesus existed, but for argument’s sake, let’s say that he did. And for the record, I believe that he existed – which I would have to; otherwise, why would I call myself a Christian?
With that out of the way, let’s look at Jesus Christ. He died young – aged 33 – and left no descendants. Unlike Khan, he never traveled far from the country of his birth. And yet, his thoughts, his words, and his examples are still being lived and discussed to this day. Granted, some of his followers are not doing as good a job in following his examples as others are, but that’s true for any sort of organization; that is, every organization has its zealots and its slackers.
On the one hand, Khan left his “imprints” on history, and yet, what has that done for us – beyond the factual curiosity of a large number of descendants? There is no Ghengishan religion based on his thoughts and his actions. This is because Khan did not see what he did as something that was going to change the world for the better. Instead, he was looking out for himself. Well, he got his very large harem of women and the many children that came out of that, but once he died, he was dead, and no amount of mass copulation was going to change that. He lived according to his human nature and got what came out of that: many moments of physical pleasure for himself, and a large amount of descendants that came from it.
Contrast that with Jesus’ example of love and selflessness. He wasn’t setting out to leave a large number of descendants like Khan did, but instead to leave a large number of followers. And his message of selflessness contrasts with human nature, for it’s our nature to look out for ourselves first. His message of selflessness is difficult to follow – even for his followers – but at the same time, true believers can see how society as a whole can benefit from following his message of love and selflessness.
So how can a message of selflessness draw so many followers – especially in contrast to Khan’s much easier message of following your human nature? What is it that is so appealing to his followers that it quickly spread from his home country to all around the world in a relatively short amount of time? Friends, that’s what I’m still trying to figure out.
And yet, I can’t deny the results. I also can’t deny the appeal of his message of love, despite the difficult standards of selflessness that comes with it. Despite this difficult standard, I can see why this message is appealing, because I can reason out the positive results of what would happen if everyone puts the welfare of others ahead of themselves. In summary, to me God is no genie, but instead is the person of Jesus Christ and his message of love and selflessness in the service of others. That's a deity that's a lot more accessible than some distant spirit in the clouds.
So getting back to my initial statement, being a Christian in the true sense of the word is to be a rebel – a rebel against your human nature of selfishness. So in that light, it can be shown that Christianity is actually “progressive” in the true sense of the word, because progress is what would arise out of serving others before yourself.
Now contrast that with what today’s “Progressives" desire; which is actually REgressive, because they seek “doing your own thing”. This should sound familiar, because that’s what Genghis Khan did. Doing your own thing is the same thing as satisfying yourself first, and with the same results as what Khan got. I leave you with these questions: Has society benefited from liberals' message of "sex, drugs, and rock & roll"? How is such a philosophy better than a philosophy based on selflessness in the service of others?
-----------------------------------------------------
My apologies for this extending into another week, but this post initially was longer, and after looking it over, I chopped off a big chunk of it and will save that part for later, because it’s actually more of a Christmas message than a discussion of what I brought up during my God Week. There’s other things that I wanted to bring up, but I’ll save those topics for another time.
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
God Week: Did you "get" the Tommy story?
There is a saying used in reference to the belief in God that goes "For those who believe, no explanation is necessary; for those who don't believe, no explanation is possible." I bring up that quote, because that's what came into my mind when I first read the story about Tommy that appeared in my previous blog post.
For those of you who believe in God, then you were likely moved, maybe even to tears. With the belief in God, then death makes sense - that it's not the end, but just the beginning of a different phase of life. Although life after death is usually called "the afterlife" (because it's after the death of the physical body), it's more accurately described as "eternal life". That is to say, our bodies are mortal, but our souls are immortal.
For those of you who don't believe in God, you probably shook your head in disbelief. You might have even said that Tommy's response was actually a natural human response in a time of great emotional stress - to reach out to someone "on the other side" so that death does not look so frightening. For this crowd, death is the end, and that's it. There is no otherworldly paradise, and there is no magic genie in the sky who grants all our wishes. There is no heaven and no hell, and at our death, we simply cease to exist.
The idea, the concept, the belief in God and his existence shapes our lives and our thinking, and that applies even if you don't believe in God. For my part, I do believe in God. Being raised Marxist, it wasn't always that way, of course. So what got me started on the path of belief in God? A couple of things. For one, it was just plain ol' teenage rebellion to tick off my atheist parents. But another was because I was such a student of history. This allegedly non-existent entity has managed to shape our world in ways that no human person has managed to do.
A study of the belief in gods seems to suggest that it is part of our human makeup to seek something beyond us; something beyond the day-to-day humdrum patterns of our everyday lives. After all, back then, in the days before much of our knowledge of medicine and biology came about, death came early and often. Death was so early and frequent that families had to have a lot of children in the hope that some of them would survive infancy - infant mortality rates being so high back in those days.
Think about that for a minute, to a time that a woman could have like 8 babies and 6 of them die before they turn a year old. And perhaps one of the remaining two – or even both - is sickly for the rest of his or her life. Also, think about what they didn’t know about basic personal hygiene like brushing your teeth, or cleaning and bandaging their wounds before they become infected. And also think about how human wastes were dealt with before the days of indoor plumbing. Given all this, it’s no wonder life spans were so short!
With such rampant disease and death, how to you make sense of it all? What's the point if death was going to come quickly, either by war (another constant in ancient times) or disease? It's very easy to fall into that trap of "the futility of our existences" mindset.
From the atheist standpoint, there is no sense to it all. Our lives are what they are, and nothing else. And if history shows anything, it’s that we can accomplish anything if we put our minds to it – no need to pray to a “supreme being” to make it happen. The atheist side would also say that the lot of humanity improved because of men with drive and vision, who were able to see beyond the here and now and had the courage to think on how things might be different.
And yet, these men weren’t driven to improve the lot of humankind in the name of atheism. If anything, atheism doesn’t encourage helping your fellow man, but instead only looking out for yourself. Ayn Rand is a classic example of this type of thinking. If an atheist helps anyone besides themselves, it’s to eventually benefit themselves later on. If this life is all we have, then what benefit is there to such ideas and charity and philanthropy?
Before I get comments from atheists about this, this is not to say that there aren’t atheists who give to charity and philanthropy; just that such selfless ideals aren’t generally part and parcel of their usual type of thinking. In fact, some atheists embrace atheism precisely to get away from that societal expectation (usually based on some religious belief) of “helping your fellow man”. If there’s no God, then there’s no sin, and if there’s no sin, then there is no need to worry about eternal punishment in some fiery pit called hell.
So in light of that, looking out for yourself not only makes sense, it makes the only sense if this one life is all you got. And from a human standpoint, looking out for yourself is completely natural, because in a sense, we all do that. It really takes a special insight to be able to see beyond yourself. In light of that, being a believer in God and embracing the idea of selfless acts of charity and philanthropy are actually counter to our human nature. So in a very real sense, believers in God rebelling against their own human nature!
For next time, I'll explain what I mean when I say that believers in God are rebelling against their own human nature - at least I'll try to explain it from a Christian perspective, since I am not as familiar with the Jewish, Muslim, or the other faiths of those who believe in God.
For those of you who believe in God, then you were likely moved, maybe even to tears. With the belief in God, then death makes sense - that it's not the end, but just the beginning of a different phase of life. Although life after death is usually called "the afterlife" (because it's after the death of the physical body), it's more accurately described as "eternal life". That is to say, our bodies are mortal, but our souls are immortal.
For those of you who don't believe in God, you probably shook your head in disbelief. You might have even said that Tommy's response was actually a natural human response in a time of great emotional stress - to reach out to someone "on the other side" so that death does not look so frightening. For this crowd, death is the end, and that's it. There is no otherworldly paradise, and there is no magic genie in the sky who grants all our wishes. There is no heaven and no hell, and at our death, we simply cease to exist.
The idea, the concept, the belief in God and his existence shapes our lives and our thinking, and that applies even if you don't believe in God. For my part, I do believe in God. Being raised Marxist, it wasn't always that way, of course. So what got me started on the path of belief in God? A couple of things. For one, it was just plain ol' teenage rebellion to tick off my atheist parents. But another was because I was such a student of history. This allegedly non-existent entity has managed to shape our world in ways that no human person has managed to do.
A study of the belief in gods seems to suggest that it is part of our human makeup to seek something beyond us; something beyond the day-to-day humdrum patterns of our everyday lives. After all, back then, in the days before much of our knowledge of medicine and biology came about, death came early and often. Death was so early and frequent that families had to have a lot of children in the hope that some of them would survive infancy - infant mortality rates being so high back in those days.
Think about that for a minute, to a time that a woman could have like 8 babies and 6 of them die before they turn a year old. And perhaps one of the remaining two – or even both - is sickly for the rest of his or her life. Also, think about what they didn’t know about basic personal hygiene like brushing your teeth, or cleaning and bandaging their wounds before they become infected. And also think about how human wastes were dealt with before the days of indoor plumbing. Given all this, it’s no wonder life spans were so short!
With such rampant disease and death, how to you make sense of it all? What's the point if death was going to come quickly, either by war (another constant in ancient times) or disease? It's very easy to fall into that trap of "the futility of our existences" mindset.
From the atheist standpoint, there is no sense to it all. Our lives are what they are, and nothing else. And if history shows anything, it’s that we can accomplish anything if we put our minds to it – no need to pray to a “supreme being” to make it happen. The atheist side would also say that the lot of humanity improved because of men with drive and vision, who were able to see beyond the here and now and had the courage to think on how things might be different.
And yet, these men weren’t driven to improve the lot of humankind in the name of atheism. If anything, atheism doesn’t encourage helping your fellow man, but instead only looking out for yourself. Ayn Rand is a classic example of this type of thinking. If an atheist helps anyone besides themselves, it’s to eventually benefit themselves later on. If this life is all we have, then what benefit is there to such ideas and charity and philanthropy?
Before I get comments from atheists about this, this is not to say that there aren’t atheists who give to charity and philanthropy; just that such selfless ideals aren’t generally part and parcel of their usual type of thinking. In fact, some atheists embrace atheism precisely to get away from that societal expectation (usually based on some religious belief) of “helping your fellow man”. If there’s no God, then there’s no sin, and if there’s no sin, then there is no need to worry about eternal punishment in some fiery pit called hell.
So in light of that, looking out for yourself not only makes sense, it makes the only sense if this one life is all you got. And from a human standpoint, looking out for yourself is completely natural, because in a sense, we all do that. It really takes a special insight to be able to see beyond yourself. In light of that, being a believer in God and embracing the idea of selfless acts of charity and philanthropy are actually counter to our human nature. So in a very real sense, believers in God rebelling against their own human nature!
For next time, I'll explain what I mean when I say that believers in God are rebelling against their own human nature - at least I'll try to explain it from a Christian perspective, since I am not as familiar with the Jewish, Muslim, or the other faiths of those who believe in God.
Monday, December 5, 2011
Today starts God Week: A story about Tommy
In the past few days for some reason, I've been involved in a lot of dialogue with family, friends, GFs, and on FB regarding God, religion, and spirituality in general. That got me thinking that, with the start of the Christmas season, I might devote a week to discussing God and various religious topics. So with that, I am starting God Week as of today!
Interesting and perhaps a bit ironic that someone like me would discuss God and religious topics, given that I was raised by atheist Marxists! (Have I mentioned before that I was raised by Marxist parents? LOL) Yes, even those raised by Marxists think about God and his effect on our world at large. My take on God is that I believe in his existence. I will certainly cover this more as the week goes on. However, let's start God Week with the story below.
The story below was forwarded to me from the boss, who got it from someone else. Since it's long, I'm going to limit today's blog post to just this story. That will allow you time to read it, and to think about it a bit before I discuss my thoughts on Tommy and the story.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
John Powell a professor at Loyola University in Chicago writes about a student in his Theology of Faith class named Tommy:
Some twelve years ago, I stood watching my university students file into the classroom for our first session in the Theology of Faith. That was the first day I first saw Tommy. My eyes and my mind both blinked. He was combing his long flaxen hair, which hung six inches below his shoulders.
It was the first time I had ever seen a boy with hair that long. I guess it was just coming into fashion then. I know in my mind that it isn’t what’s on your head but what’s in it that counts; but on that day I was unprepared and my emotions flipped.
I immediately filed Tommy under "S" for strange ... very strange. Tommy turned out to be the "atheist in residence" in my Theology of Faith course. He constantly objected to, smirked at, or whined about the possibility of an unconditionally loving Father-God. We lived with each other in relative peace for one semester, although I admit he was for me at times a serious pain in the back pew.
When he came up at the end of the course to turn in his final exam, he asked in a slightly cynical tone: "Do you think I’ll ever find God?"
I decided instantly on a little shock therapy. "No!" I said very emphatically.
"Oh," he responded, "I thought that was the product you were pushing."
I let him get five steps from the classroom door and then called out: "Tommy! I don’t think you’ll ever find him, but I am absolutely certain that He will find you!" He shrugged a little and left my class and my life.
I felt slightly disappointed at the thought that he had missed my clever line: "He will find you!" At least I thought it was clever. Later I heard that Tommy had graduated and I was duly grateful.
Then a sad report, I heard that Tommy had terminal cancer. Before I could search him out, he came to see me. When he walked into my office, his body was very badly wasted, and the long hair had all fallen out as a result of chemotherapy. But his eyes were bright and his voice was firm, for the first time, I believe. "Tommy, I’ve thought about you so often. I hear you are sick!" I blurted out.
"Oh, yes, very sick. I have cancer in both lungs. It’s a matter of weeks."
"Can you talk about it, Tom?"
"Sure, what would you like to know?"
"What’s it like to be only twenty-four and dying?"
"Well, it could be worse."
"Like what?"
"Well, like being fifty and having no values or ideals, like being fifty and thinking that booze, seducing women, and making money are the real ‘biggies’ in life."
I began to look through my mental file cabinet under "S" where I had filed Tommy as strange. (It seems as though everybody I try to reject by classification God sends back into my life to educate me.)
But what I really came to see you about," Tom said, " is something you said to me on the last day of class." (He remembered!) He continued, "I asked you if you thought I would ever find God and you said, ‘No!’ which surprised me. Then you said, ‘But he will find you.’ I thought about that a lot, even though my search for God was hardly intense at that time. (My "clever" line. He thought about that a lot!) But when the doctors removed a lump from my groin and told me that it was malignant, then I got serious about locating God. And when the malignancy spread into my vital organs, I really began banging bloody fists against the bronze doors of heaven.
But God did not come out. In fact, nothing happened. Did you ever try anything for a long time with great effort and with no success? You get psychologically glutted, fed up with trying. And then you quit.
Well, one day I woke up, and instead of throwing a few more futile appeals over that high brick wall to a God who may be or may not be there, I just quit. I decided that I didn’t really care ... about God, about an afterlife, or anything like that. "I decided to spend what time I had left doing something more profitable. I thought about you and your class and I remembered something else you had said: ‘The essential sadness is to go through life without loving. But it would be almost equally sad to go through life and leave this world without ever telling those you loved that you had loved them.’ "So I began with the hardest one: my Dad. He was reading the newspaper when I approached him."
"Dad". . .
"Yes, what?" he asked without lowering the newspaper.
"Dad, I would like to talk with you."
"Well, talk."
"I mean. .. It’s really important."
The newspaper came down three slow inches. "What is it?"
"Dad, I love you. I just wanted you to know that." Tom smiled at me and said with obvious satisfaction, as though he felt a warm and secret joy flowing inside of him: "The newspaper fluttered to the floor. Then my father did two things I could never remember him ever doing before. He cried and he hugged me.
And we talked all night, even though he had to go to work the next morning. It felt so good to be close to my father, to see his tears, to feel his hug, to hear him say that he loved me. "It was easier with my mother and little brother. They cried with me, too, and we hugged each other, and started saying real nice things to each other. We shared the things we had been keeping secret for so many years. I was only sorry about one thing: that I had waited so long. Here I was just beginning to open up to all the people I had actually been close to.
"Then, one day I turned around and God was there. He didn’t come to me when I pleaded with him. I guess I was like an animal trainer holding out a hoop, ‘C’mon, jump through.’ ‘C’mon, I’ll give you three days .. .three weeks.’ Apparently God does things in his own way and at his own hour. "But the important thing is that he was there. He found me.
You were right. He found me even after I stopped looking for him."
"Tommy," I practically gasped, "I think you are saying something very important and much more universal than you realize. To me, at least, you are saying that the surest way to find God is not to make him a private possession, a problem solver, or an instant consolation in time of need, but rather by opening to love. You know, the Apostle John said that. He said God is love, and anyone who lives in love is living with God and God is living in him.’ Tom, could I ask you a favor? You know, when I had you in class you were a real pain. But (laughingly) you can make it all up to me now. Would you come into my present Theology of Faith course and tell them what you have just told me? If I told them the same thing it wouldn’t be half as effective as if you were to tell them."
"Oooh . . . I was ready for you, but I don’t know if I’m ready for your class."
"Tom, think about it. If and when you are ready, give me a call." In a few days Tommy called, said he was ready for the class, that he wanted to do that for God and for me. So we scheduled a date. However, he never made it.
He had another appointment, far more important than the one with me and my class. Of course, his life was not really ended by his death, only changed.
He made the great step from faith into vision. He found a life far more beautiful than the eye of man has ever seen or the ear of man has ever heard or the mind of man has ever imagined.
Before he died, we talked one last time. "I’m not going to make it to your class," he said.
"I know, Tom."
"Will you tell them for me? Will you . . . tell the whole world for me?"
"I will, Tom. I’ll tell them. I’ll do my best."
So, to all of you who have been kind enough to hear this simple statement about love, thank you for listening. And to you, Tommy, somewhere in the sunlit, verdant hills of heaven: "I told them, Tommy . ... ...as best I could."
Interesting and perhaps a bit ironic that someone like me would discuss God and religious topics, given that I was raised by atheist Marxists! (Have I mentioned before that I was raised by Marxist parents? LOL) Yes, even those raised by Marxists think about God and his effect on our world at large. My take on God is that I believe in his existence. I will certainly cover this more as the week goes on. However, let's start God Week with the story below.
The story below was forwarded to me from the boss, who got it from someone else. Since it's long, I'm going to limit today's blog post to just this story. That will allow you time to read it, and to think about it a bit before I discuss my thoughts on Tommy and the story.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
John Powell a professor at Loyola University in Chicago writes about a student in his Theology of Faith class named Tommy:
Some twelve years ago, I stood watching my university students file into the classroom for our first session in the Theology of Faith. That was the first day I first saw Tommy. My eyes and my mind both blinked. He was combing his long flaxen hair, which hung six inches below his shoulders.
It was the first time I had ever seen a boy with hair that long. I guess it was just coming into fashion then. I know in my mind that it isn’t what’s on your head but what’s in it that counts; but on that day I was unprepared and my emotions flipped.
I immediately filed Tommy under "S" for strange ... very strange. Tommy turned out to be the "atheist in residence" in my Theology of Faith course. He constantly objected to, smirked at, or whined about the possibility of an unconditionally loving Father-God. We lived with each other in relative peace for one semester, although I admit he was for me at times a serious pain in the back pew.
When he came up at the end of the course to turn in his final exam, he asked in a slightly cynical tone: "Do you think I’ll ever find God?"
I decided instantly on a little shock therapy. "No!" I said very emphatically.
"Oh," he responded, "I thought that was the product you were pushing."
I let him get five steps from the classroom door and then called out: "Tommy! I don’t think you’ll ever find him, but I am absolutely certain that He will find you!" He shrugged a little and left my class and my life.
I felt slightly disappointed at the thought that he had missed my clever line: "He will find you!" At least I thought it was clever. Later I heard that Tommy had graduated and I was duly grateful.
Then a sad report, I heard that Tommy had terminal cancer. Before I could search him out, he came to see me. When he walked into my office, his body was very badly wasted, and the long hair had all fallen out as a result of chemotherapy. But his eyes were bright and his voice was firm, for the first time, I believe. "Tommy, I’ve thought about you so often. I hear you are sick!" I blurted out.
"Oh, yes, very sick. I have cancer in both lungs. It’s a matter of weeks."
"Can you talk about it, Tom?"
"Sure, what would you like to know?"
"What’s it like to be only twenty-four and dying?"
"Well, it could be worse."
"Like what?"
"Well, like being fifty and having no values or ideals, like being fifty and thinking that booze, seducing women, and making money are the real ‘biggies’ in life."
I began to look through my mental file cabinet under "S" where I had filed Tommy as strange. (It seems as though everybody I try to reject by classification God sends back into my life to educate me.)
But what I really came to see you about," Tom said, " is something you said to me on the last day of class." (He remembered!) He continued, "I asked you if you thought I would ever find God and you said, ‘No!’ which surprised me. Then you said, ‘But he will find you.’ I thought about that a lot, even though my search for God was hardly intense at that time. (My "clever" line. He thought about that a lot!) But when the doctors removed a lump from my groin and told me that it was malignant, then I got serious about locating God. And when the malignancy spread into my vital organs, I really began banging bloody fists against the bronze doors of heaven.
But God did not come out. In fact, nothing happened. Did you ever try anything for a long time with great effort and with no success? You get psychologically glutted, fed up with trying. And then you quit.
Well, one day I woke up, and instead of throwing a few more futile appeals over that high brick wall to a God who may be or may not be there, I just quit. I decided that I didn’t really care ... about God, about an afterlife, or anything like that. "I decided to spend what time I had left doing something more profitable. I thought about you and your class and I remembered something else you had said: ‘The essential sadness is to go through life without loving. But it would be almost equally sad to go through life and leave this world without ever telling those you loved that you had loved them.’ "So I began with the hardest one: my Dad. He was reading the newspaper when I approached him."
"Dad". . .
"Yes, what?" he asked without lowering the newspaper.
"Dad, I would like to talk with you."
"Well, talk."
"I mean. .. It’s really important."
The newspaper came down three slow inches. "What is it?"
"Dad, I love you. I just wanted you to know that." Tom smiled at me and said with obvious satisfaction, as though he felt a warm and secret joy flowing inside of him: "The newspaper fluttered to the floor. Then my father did two things I could never remember him ever doing before. He cried and he hugged me.
And we talked all night, even though he had to go to work the next morning. It felt so good to be close to my father, to see his tears, to feel his hug, to hear him say that he loved me. "It was easier with my mother and little brother. They cried with me, too, and we hugged each other, and started saying real nice things to each other. We shared the things we had been keeping secret for so many years. I was only sorry about one thing: that I had waited so long. Here I was just beginning to open up to all the people I had actually been close to.
"Then, one day I turned around and God was there. He didn’t come to me when I pleaded with him. I guess I was like an animal trainer holding out a hoop, ‘C’mon, jump through.’ ‘C’mon, I’ll give you three days .. .three weeks.’ Apparently God does things in his own way and at his own hour. "But the important thing is that he was there. He found me.
You were right. He found me even after I stopped looking for him."
"Tommy," I practically gasped, "I think you are saying something very important and much more universal than you realize. To me, at least, you are saying that the surest way to find God is not to make him a private possession, a problem solver, or an instant consolation in time of need, but rather by opening to love. You know, the Apostle John said that. He said God is love, and anyone who lives in love is living with God and God is living in him.’ Tom, could I ask you a favor? You know, when I had you in class you were a real pain. But (laughingly) you can make it all up to me now. Would you come into my present Theology of Faith course and tell them what you have just told me? If I told them the same thing it wouldn’t be half as effective as if you were to tell them."
"Oooh . . . I was ready for you, but I don’t know if I’m ready for your class."
"Tom, think about it. If and when you are ready, give me a call." In a few days Tommy called, said he was ready for the class, that he wanted to do that for God and for me. So we scheduled a date. However, he never made it.
He had another appointment, far more important than the one with me and my class. Of course, his life was not really ended by his death, only changed.
He made the great step from faith into vision. He found a life far more beautiful than the eye of man has ever seen or the ear of man has ever heard or the mind of man has ever imagined.
Before he died, we talked one last time. "I’m not going to make it to your class," he said.
"I know, Tom."
"Will you tell them for me? Will you . . . tell the whole world for me?"
"I will, Tom. I’ll tell them. I’ll do my best."
So, to all of you who have been kind enough to hear this simple statement about love, thank you for listening. And to you, Tommy, somewhere in the sunlit, verdant hills of heaven: "I told them, Tommy . ... ...as best I could."
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Not an Onion story; this is fer realz: Occupy Oakland deposits 20k into - Wells Fargo!
This is one of those stories that conservative blogger Michelle Malkin would call "snortalicious". "Snortalicious" is a contraction of the words "snort" (as in "snort derisively in laughter") and "delicious" (as in "delicious irony", like today's story).
Today's snortalicious story, and probably the most snortalicious story for a long time to come, is this one about the Occupy Oakland group depositing $20k into Wells Fargo, one of their bloodsworn enemies:
Occupy Oakland Attacks Wells Fargo, Then Deposits $20,000
See gang, this is the kind of education that your taxes are paying for. Scary, ain't it? And yet, it's also hilarious, since it's these liberal types that are always harping on how stupid the rest of us are and how brilliant they are. Apparently, they are so brilliant that they think the "rules" don't apply to them, including the irony of their depositing that much money into one the very banks that they've protested.
Okay, I have to finish with this:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Today's snortalicious story, and probably the most snortalicious story for a long time to come, is this one about the Occupy Oakland group depositing $20k into Wells Fargo, one of their bloodsworn enemies:
Occupy Oakland Attacks Wells Fargo, Then Deposits $20,000
See gang, this is the kind of education that your taxes are paying for. Scary, ain't it? And yet, it's also hilarious, since it's these liberal types that are always harping on how stupid the rest of us are and how brilliant they are. Apparently, they are so brilliant that they think the "rules" don't apply to them, including the irony of their depositing that much money into one the very banks that they've protested.
Okay, I have to finish with this:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Monday, November 7, 2011
To the Occupiers: From me to you with love! An Occupy logo!
Unlike most liberals when it comes to the free speech rights of conservatives, I believe that liberals have free speech rights. They have every right to go out there and do their Occupy thing. And I've said before that I love liberals. I really do! So why am I so hard on them? Call it tough love. :-)
However, I also believe that if they are going to spread their message, then they should at least be honest on what they're really about. With that, I asked the boss to craft this little logo for me to represent what the Occupy movement is really about. And now to explain the symbols!
The first symbol, of course, represents President Obama. This sort of "uprising" is what he really wants to do, instead of dealing with the nuances and minutiae of our legislative system to get his desired goals made into law. Right now, he has to actually work to get this done, and he has to accept compromises, which makes him look bad in the eyes of his fellow anti-capitalist leftists.
The next two symbols are the classic Communist hammer and sickle, and the letter U with SSR in it are in reference to the old USSR, the birthplace of the Communist movement. This, folks, is what the Occupy movement is really about. These people want to substitute our legal system with the old, archaic, and so-last-millennium Communist philosophies that has failed everywhere it's been tried - including the old Soviet Union. But for some reason, these old-school leftists think that they can get it right this time.
And the pie is basically to represent what they believe will happen when things go their way. Their pie-in-the-sky delusional fantasies, in other words, of a free and open society where we are all equal and we all love each other and no one has more than anyone else, and there is no longer any pain and misery and suffering because we have legislated it out of existence.
The exclamation point is what it looks like - an exclamation point! It's to symbolize the passion of the movement - wrongheaded as it is. Somehow they believe that if they shout "OCCUPY!" then everyone around them - the "99%", - will totally gist on what they're about and join them in an uprising of the worker against the oppressive capitalist system. All while benefiting from the fruit of our capitalist system of course, with their iPhones, laptops with Wi-Fi, iPads, and so on - and totally oblivious to the irony of it.
So to my liberal friends out there, feel free to utilize the freedom of speech that our country provides; just be honest about what you're truly promoting, and you can do that by using this logo. One stipulation however: You must not profit from its usage. Get some rich liberal One-Percenter to fund the creation of t-shirts, bumper stickers, etc, and tell them to hand it out all free. To make any sort of profit from its usage would betray the spirit of the Occupy movement, after all!
Now go out there and Occupy!
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Liberals: Let's make a deal. I'll support your cause that corporations are not people if...
I've written on this blog and posted on Facebook long enough that I think most of you will have a pretty good feel for my style of writing. You all know that when it comes to the issues that I feel strongly about, I'll try to utilize all the passion, wit, wisdom, intellect, and powers of observation that my heart and soul can muster.
Liberals, you know how I've taken on your sacred cow issues and attacked them like you do Republican presidential candidates. However, what if I were to take all my passion, wit, wisdom, intellect, and powers of observation to use *in favor* of one of your sacred causes? Imagine me tearing into this issue with all the fervor that you see me take on your other hallowed delusions! Wouldn't that be awesome - to have me fighting for your cause with the full brunt of my intellect going all out like a pit bull on a steak?
Okay then! Time for me to make a little deal with you on the issue of: the personhood of corporations! You know you hate that and how it benefits the wealthy and privileged in our society. Now, I can make arguments against the personhood of the corporations and be very good at it - so good that you WILL link my blog posts to your own blogs and Share and Like them on Facebook. You know that I'm very capable of this!
And I promise that I'll do this on one condition: To gain my support on your cause against the personhood of the corporation, you must support my cause FOR the personhood of the unborn. Think about that for a minute before you reject it out of hand. If you favor the personhood of the unborn, you will greatly strengthen your own argument against the personhood of the corporation. If you'll allow yourselves to truly ponder this with the open mind that you say that you have, you know that I'm right.
The unborn are living persons that you will eventually see, hear, touch, and love. Corporations can never be that kind of person. The personhood of the corporation is legislative mythology, while the personhood of the unborn is grounded in fact - despite the denial of its personhood also being brought about by legislative mythology. Funny how that worked out for you guys, isn't it? In the process of manufacturing the argument against the personhood of the unborn, you inadvertently created the means of establishing the personhood of entities that exist only on the boards of the stock exchanges on Wall Street. What a bit of irony to bite you in the ass, eh?
As you can see, I've already started, and I can go much, much further in crafting arguments in favor of your cause - if you will only support me in mine. How will I know that you've accepted my deal? When I see you guys doing Occupy Planned Parenthood! Otherwise, I won't believe your "conversion" to my side. But you've seen the skill of what I'm capable of doing when I got my heart set on something, so I'm hoping that your desire to see the end of the "personhood of the corporation" will be such that you'll consider my offer. In the process, you'll see that I'm absolutely right about your arguments against the personhood of the corporation being strongly bolstered by your acknowledgment of the personhood of the unborn. And as an added bonus, you'll get to see me kickin' ass for your cause! :-)
It will be only after such a revelation that you will see that by agreeing with my deal, you won't be "making a deal with the devil", but instead "siding with the angels". To be honest, knowing liberals like I do, I don't expect any "takers". But who knows - you may surprise me. And I hope you do! :-)
Liberals, you know how I've taken on your sacred cow issues and attacked them like you do Republican presidential candidates. However, what if I were to take all my passion, wit, wisdom, intellect, and powers of observation to use *in favor* of one of your sacred causes? Imagine me tearing into this issue with all the fervor that you see me take on your other hallowed delusions! Wouldn't that be awesome - to have me fighting for your cause with the full brunt of my intellect going all out like a pit bull on a steak?
Okay then! Time for me to make a little deal with you on the issue of: the personhood of corporations! You know you hate that and how it benefits the wealthy and privileged in our society. Now, I can make arguments against the personhood of the corporations and be very good at it - so good that you WILL link my blog posts to your own blogs and Share and Like them on Facebook. You know that I'm very capable of this!
And I promise that I'll do this on one condition: To gain my support on your cause against the personhood of the corporation, you must support my cause FOR the personhood of the unborn. Think about that for a minute before you reject it out of hand. If you favor the personhood of the unborn, you will greatly strengthen your own argument against the personhood of the corporation. If you'll allow yourselves to truly ponder this with the open mind that you say that you have, you know that I'm right.
The unborn are living persons that you will eventually see, hear, touch, and love. Corporations can never be that kind of person. The personhood of the corporation is legislative mythology, while the personhood of the unborn is grounded in fact - despite the denial of its personhood also being brought about by legislative mythology. Funny how that worked out for you guys, isn't it? In the process of manufacturing the argument against the personhood of the unborn, you inadvertently created the means of establishing the personhood of entities that exist only on the boards of the stock exchanges on Wall Street. What a bit of irony to bite you in the ass, eh?
As you can see, I've already started, and I can go much, much further in crafting arguments in favor of your cause - if you will only support me in mine. How will I know that you've accepted my deal? When I see you guys doing Occupy Planned Parenthood! Otherwise, I won't believe your "conversion" to my side. But you've seen the skill of what I'm capable of doing when I got my heart set on something, so I'm hoping that your desire to see the end of the "personhood of the corporation" will be such that you'll consider my offer. In the process, you'll see that I'm absolutely right about your arguments against the personhood of the corporation being strongly bolstered by your acknowledgment of the personhood of the unborn. And as an added bonus, you'll get to see me kickin' ass for your cause! :-)
It will be only after such a revelation that you will see that by agreeing with my deal, you won't be "making a deal with the devil", but instead "siding with the angels". To be honest, knowing liberals like I do, I don't expect any "takers". But who knows - you may surprise me. And I hope you do! :-)
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Occupy Stormwind!
Yes, that's right, the "Occupy" movement has reached the fortress city of Stormwind! I'm here in Stormwind as my level 75 human hunter reporting from the mob at Stormwind's entry gates. I'm now talking to Ella Anderson of Gilneas, one of the founding members of the Occupy Stormwind Movement (OSM). So Ella, what are you and your group protesting?
Ella: The fact that the Alliance has been leading our good men and women into many battles costing us untold numbers of lives and taking a severe drain on the economy! Our military forces are in the Outlands, at Northrend, in the various battlegrounds across Azeroth, and now we're sending our soldiers to fight in the Firelands! When does it end? Why can't we make peace with the Horde and all work together?
Me: The leader of the Horde, Garrosh Hellscream is not exactly a peaceable man - in fact, he hates the Alliance equally as much as King Varian Wrynn of Stormwind hates the Horde. How could peace be made between two equally hot-tempered leaders?
Ella: That I can't say, except to ask: Are they even trying? It's like all the citizens of Azeroth are pawns in their little game of enormous egos! But we are pawns only so long as we allow ourselves to be pawns! We now want more control over what happens to our lives! (turns to the crowd behind her): Free Azeroth! Free the people! The citizens of the world demand to be heard! (roar of approval).
Me: But what about the recent actions of the dragon Deathwing, and of the mysterious Twilight Cult? How can King Wrynn deal with these problems while trying to satisfy the demands of OSM?
Ella: That's just it! The answer's always the same! Throw our lives away so as to protect the pocketbooks of the Alliance's robber barons! Who needs the Horde's greedy goblin cartels when we got our own greedy owners of the war industries? Do you know how many orphans our constant wars create? Do you know how much less life and coin we would be using up if we could at least work with the Horde?
Me: So the answer is...
Ella: The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind - the answer my friend is in the winds of change! And that change is that the people won't stand for being used and abused by its leaders any longer! No more "For the Alliance" or "For the Horde"! It's now "For the people of Azeroth!"
Me: So what are you going to do if an invading Horde force comes down the road here?
(Voice from the crowd): You know, we should totally connect with members of the Horde so that they can start an Occupy Orgrimmar movement!
(Another voice): Yeah! I bet they're even more pissed at Garrosh than we are at the king!
(Yet another voice): Ella, you should totally get with Jaina Proudmoore about this! She knows Thrall, and I bet she can convince Thrall to join our cause!
Me: Wait, so Jaina is part of this?
Ella: Not officially, of course, but she keeps up with our cause.
Me: Anything else you want to mention before I log off?
Ella: Yeah! We also want to protest the utter unoriginality of all the "mom" jokes in Trade Chat! Dudes, can't you come up with better insults than to constantly be ragging on the moms? And rape isn't funny, no matter what context you try to put it in! Don't refer being wiped in a battleground as being raped - just say that you got your asses kicked! And last, no more [Anal] jokes in Trade! Damn, that's so juvenile!
Me: Well, good luck with that. Trade Chat is pretty much a subculture. I'll report more on this story as it develops. Now to log off and go back to reality - by logging on to Facebook! See you there!
This has been Andromeda the level 75 hunter reporting from the gates of Stormwind!
Ella: The fact that the Alliance has been leading our good men and women into many battles costing us untold numbers of lives and taking a severe drain on the economy! Our military forces are in the Outlands, at Northrend, in the various battlegrounds across Azeroth, and now we're sending our soldiers to fight in the Firelands! When does it end? Why can't we make peace with the Horde and all work together?
Me: The leader of the Horde, Garrosh Hellscream is not exactly a peaceable man - in fact, he hates the Alliance equally as much as King Varian Wrynn of Stormwind hates the Horde. How could peace be made between two equally hot-tempered leaders?
Ella: That I can't say, except to ask: Are they even trying? It's like all the citizens of Azeroth are pawns in their little game of enormous egos! But we are pawns only so long as we allow ourselves to be pawns! We now want more control over what happens to our lives! (turns to the crowd behind her): Free Azeroth! Free the people! The citizens of the world demand to be heard! (roar of approval).
Me: But what about the recent actions of the dragon Deathwing, and of the mysterious Twilight Cult? How can King Wrynn deal with these problems while trying to satisfy the demands of OSM?
Ella: That's just it! The answer's always the same! Throw our lives away so as to protect the pocketbooks of the Alliance's robber barons! Who needs the Horde's greedy goblin cartels when we got our own greedy owners of the war industries? Do you know how many orphans our constant wars create? Do you know how much less life and coin we would be using up if we could at least work with the Horde?
Me: So the answer is...
Ella: The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind - the answer my friend is in the winds of change! And that change is that the people won't stand for being used and abused by its leaders any longer! No more "For the Alliance" or "For the Horde"! It's now "For the people of Azeroth!"
Me: So what are you going to do if an invading Horde force comes down the road here?
(Voice from the crowd): You know, we should totally connect with members of the Horde so that they can start an Occupy Orgrimmar movement!
(Another voice): Yeah! I bet they're even more pissed at Garrosh than we are at the king!
(Yet another voice): Ella, you should totally get with Jaina Proudmoore about this! She knows Thrall, and I bet she can convince Thrall to join our cause!
Me: Wait, so Jaina is part of this?
Ella: Not officially, of course, but she keeps up with our cause.
Me: Anything else you want to mention before I log off?
Ella: Yeah! We also want to protest the utter unoriginality of all the "mom" jokes in Trade Chat! Dudes, can't you come up with better insults than to constantly be ragging on the moms? And rape isn't funny, no matter what context you try to put it in! Don't refer being wiped in a battleground as being raped - just say that you got your asses kicked! And last, no more [Anal] jokes in Trade! Damn, that's so juvenile!
Me: Well, good luck with that. Trade Chat is pretty much a subculture. I'll report more on this story as it develops. Now to log off and go back to reality - by logging on to Facebook! See you there!
This has been Andromeda the level 75 hunter reporting from the gates of Stormwind!
Monday, October 17, 2011
Clues for the clueless demonstrators of Occupy Wall Street (and for free!)
After one month, the dirty, horny dumbasses of Occupy Wall Street still don't have a clue as to what they're protesting! It's unbelievable that such an allegedly wired and social media-connected group of protestors still don't know what they're doing there! Don't you people read your own damn Twitter page?
Well morons, let me help you out! Here's What The Wall Street Protesters Are So Angry About
Take it to heart and memorize it, so that you don't sound like an idiot when the press asks what you've been doing for a month other than being a public health hazard with your month-long drinking, doping, f**king, defecating, urinating, etc out in public!
Now don't say that I never did anything for you!
Well morons, let me help you out! Here's What The Wall Street Protesters Are So Angry About
Take it to heart and memorize it, so that you don't sound like an idiot when the press asks what you've been doing for a month other than being a public health hazard with your month-long drinking, doping, f**king, defecating, urinating, etc out in public!
Now don't say that I never did anything for you!
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Stupiddist prowtestilers evar!
Not only are the Wall Street Occupiers clueless, they're also stupid!
Werst portessturs evah!
Werst portessturs evah!
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Al Gore 24/7! Whoohoo!
Starting on Wednesday, we are going to be treated to a 24 hour Al Gore-athon of him telling us that we need to be more environmentally conscious! Whoohoo!
Hey, Al! You want us to be more environmentally friendly? Why don't you set the example and do something about your fucking energy hog of a house???
Among liberal circles, hypocrisy is hypocrisy unless one of their own does it.
Hey, Al! You want us to be more environmentally friendly? Why don't you set the example and do something about your fucking energy hog of a house???
Among liberal circles, hypocrisy is hypocrisy unless one of their own does it.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
It's a quest from God!
Hey, y'all! The universe has gone World of Warcraft, and you all just got a quest from God! With a questgiver like God, how could you refuse? I wonder what quest he has for you? :-O
Monday, August 8, 2011
Paper or plastic? The solution to the great environmental debate of grocery bags
Many moons ago, grocers gave you paper bags to cart your groceries home. For decades, that's how things were done. Then some whacko environmentalists decided that paper bags were bad for the environment because they have to cut trees down to make them, and cutting trees down is bad for the environment because then there are less trees to absorb carbon dioxide, which then builds up in the atmosphere, which then helps to widen the hole in the ozone layer, which then makes things hotter for us down here on earth. And before you know it, we'll have hell literally on earth!
So plastic bags were invented, and they were as convenient as a Swiss Army Knife! Probably the most recycled item on the planet is the plastic grocery sack! I bet you can think of the many ways you used those sacks just off of the top of your head. However - uh oh! - they're bad for the environment as well! So bad, that some cities are attempting to ban them! They're bad because they are mostly non-biodegradable, which is bad for the environment, because they sit in our landfills almost forever, which makes that land such that trees won't grow on it, which is bad because then there are fewer trees to absorb carbon dioxide, which then... well, you know the drill by now...
Well then, pardner, it would seem that paper bags are the solution after all, because paper bags are biodegradable! Oh, wait! No! Bad idea! Trees have to be cut down to make them, and we went through all that in the first paragraph! Weren't you listening??
One solution to this dilemma had been a "third way" in the form of the reusable cloth bags, but there has been the problem that they can accumulate bacteria, because they are used to carry food, and the food bacteria can build up after many uses. Plus, many of the cloth bags are made in China, and as we all found out, China puts lead in everything from cloth grocery bags to dog food, because it cuts down on the cost of manufacturing them. Well, they gotta get rid of all that lead somehow, and if they can make some money off of it in the process selling them to us gullible Americans, then all the better! Pretty sneaky of those Communists to be thinking like capitalists!
Okay, I have a solution for all this. It's so simple that you'll kick yourself for not thinking of it first!
My solution is this: Require that all fashion designers everywhere to design our pants and skirts to have HUGE cargo pockets! In fact, just have a row of cargo pockets to wrap around the whole waistline of the pants and skirts! It will be like Batman's utility belt, except the pockets will be designed as part of the pants and skirt! You can have the smaller pockets on the front so that you can still sit down, and the larger ones - for 1 gallon milk jugs or 2 liter sodas - on the sides and back.
The pockets can be designed to have insulated interiors to insulate you from the hot and cold grocery items, and also so that you can wipe them down aftewards to reduce bacteria build-up. To help with all the weight of these groceries, designers might try to bring suspenders back into fashion.
Yeah, it may look a little silly walking around with very loaded pockets, but I have a solution for that as well: Get some celebrities to do this first. If you get Justin Bieber to wear such pocket-laden pants, then you'll already have tween girls screaming for such pants. And if you get Kim Kardashian to wear those, then damn, you'll have the dudes scrambling to buy them as well, because then they'll think that they'll be babe magnets! And with the tween and young dude market setting the trend, the rest of us will follow.
Being a evil, nasty, free-market capitalist, I would try to get a cut of the potential profit into this idea of mine, but I am so concerned for the environment that I'm offering my idea to the fashion designers for free, which is why I am posting it to my blog where it can be read. The resultant cleaner environment will be thanks enough, and as a superhero, I tend to do a lot of my helpful work for free anyway.
One last note: Can I encourage some of you artists to create some pro bono examples of these fashions? You can use Justin and Kim as your models. I ask pro bono, because we are doing this for the greater good. Think of the environment, you guys!
Ah, I feel good! :-)
So plastic bags were invented, and they were as convenient as a Swiss Army Knife! Probably the most recycled item on the planet is the plastic grocery sack! I bet you can think of the many ways you used those sacks just off of the top of your head. However - uh oh! - they're bad for the environment as well! So bad, that some cities are attempting to ban them! They're bad because they are mostly non-biodegradable, which is bad for the environment, because they sit in our landfills almost forever, which makes that land such that trees won't grow on it, which is bad because then there are fewer trees to absorb carbon dioxide, which then... well, you know the drill by now...
Well then, pardner, it would seem that paper bags are the solution after all, because paper bags are biodegradable! Oh, wait! No! Bad idea! Trees have to be cut down to make them, and we went through all that in the first paragraph! Weren't you listening??
One solution to this dilemma had been a "third way" in the form of the reusable cloth bags, but there has been the problem that they can accumulate bacteria, because they are used to carry food, and the food bacteria can build up after many uses. Plus, many of the cloth bags are made in China, and as we all found out, China puts lead in everything from cloth grocery bags to dog food, because it cuts down on the cost of manufacturing them. Well, they gotta get rid of all that lead somehow, and if they can make some money off of it in the process selling them to us gullible Americans, then all the better! Pretty sneaky of those Communists to be thinking like capitalists!
Okay, I have a solution for all this. It's so simple that you'll kick yourself for not thinking of it first!
My solution is this: Require that all fashion designers everywhere to design our pants and skirts to have HUGE cargo pockets! In fact, just have a row of cargo pockets to wrap around the whole waistline of the pants and skirts! It will be like Batman's utility belt, except the pockets will be designed as part of the pants and skirt! You can have the smaller pockets on the front so that you can still sit down, and the larger ones - for 1 gallon milk jugs or 2 liter sodas - on the sides and back.
The pockets can be designed to have insulated interiors to insulate you from the hot and cold grocery items, and also so that you can wipe them down aftewards to reduce bacteria build-up. To help with all the weight of these groceries, designers might try to bring suspenders back into fashion.
Yeah, it may look a little silly walking around with very loaded pockets, but I have a solution for that as well: Get some celebrities to do this first. If you get Justin Bieber to wear such pocket-laden pants, then you'll already have tween girls screaming for such pants. And if you get Kim Kardashian to wear those, then damn, you'll have the dudes scrambling to buy them as well, because then they'll think that they'll be babe magnets! And with the tween and young dude market setting the trend, the rest of us will follow.
Being a evil, nasty, free-market capitalist, I would try to get a cut of the potential profit into this idea of mine, but I am so concerned for the environment that I'm offering my idea to the fashion designers for free, which is why I am posting it to my blog where it can be read. The resultant cleaner environment will be thanks enough, and as a superhero, I tend to do a lot of my helpful work for free anyway.
One last note: Can I encourage some of you artists to create some pro bono examples of these fashions? You can use Justin and Kim as your models. I ask pro bono, because we are doing this for the greater good. Think of the environment, you guys!
Ah, I feel good! :-)
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Epic Rap Battles of History: I'm a fan!
This is an example of how I wish I had listened to my GFs sooner about something that they knew that I would love. In this instance, it's Epic Rap Battles of History! One of my GFs has been pestering me for months to watch them, and finally I did.
Okay, they're probably NSFW, but they are freakin' hilarious! I watched them all! It's hard to pick my favorite, but if I had to, it would be Sarah Palin vs. Lady Gaga.
Here are some other epic rap battles that I hope they consider. Feel free to suggest others!
Where's Waldo vs. Carmen Sandiego
Marie Antoinette vs. Queen Victoria
Smurfette vs Tinkerbell
Winston Churchill vs. Julius Caesar
Amy Winehouse vs Britney Spears
More to come for sure! :-D
Okay, they're probably NSFW, but they are freakin' hilarious! I watched them all! It's hard to pick my favorite, but if I had to, it would be Sarah Palin vs. Lady Gaga.
Here are some other epic rap battles that I hope they consider. Feel free to suggest others!
Where's Waldo vs. Carmen Sandiego
Marie Antoinette vs. Queen Victoria
Smurfette vs Tinkerbell
Winston Churchill vs. Julius Caesar
Amy Winehouse vs Britney Spears
More to come for sure! :-D
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
This whole Anthony Weiner business really has me wondering about you guys.
Only you guys can tell me this, because sometimes your thinking patterns escape me. I speak, of course, of Anthony Weiner and the scandal that he is in. What would possess a man to shoot pics of his junk and send it out electronically where others can see it? Can one of you explain that for me, please?
And while we're at it, can one of you explain why men like Anthony Weiner thinks that women want pics of their junk. There was even a PSA about it, but I forgot the name of it. Anyway, if any of you can explain any of this, then I would appreciate it.
And while we're at it, can one of you explain why men like Anthony Weiner thinks that women want pics of their junk. There was even a PSA about it, but I forgot the name of it. Anyway, if any of you can explain any of this, then I would appreciate it.
Friday, May 27, 2011
My prediction about the upcoming Palin film
Friends,
I've told you many times that I know my liberal friends' thinking inside and out, having been born and raised by Marxist parents. Thus, here is my prediction of how the media will respond to Sarah Palin's upcoming film (**especially** if it helps rocket her popularity among the voters):
It will be compared to Leni Riefenstahl's film, Triumph of the Will.
And if you try to cite Godwin's Law to those who compare Palin's film to Triumph, they'll just dismiss you with "This is different!"
You watch. I'm going to be right about this. :-)
I've told you many times that I know my liberal friends' thinking inside and out, having been born and raised by Marxist parents. Thus, here is my prediction of how the media will respond to Sarah Palin's upcoming film (**especially** if it helps rocket her popularity among the voters):
It will be compared to Leni Riefenstahl's film, Triumph of the Will.
And if you try to cite Godwin's Law to those who compare Palin's film to Triumph, they'll just dismiss you with "This is different!"
You watch. I'm going to be right about this. :-)
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Dear Amy Myers: You're being used to ridicule female politicians!
Today's blog entry goes out to Amy Myers, the 16 year old that is the center of recent news stories calling out Michelle Bachmann to challenge her because of her mistake of where the famed "shot heard round the world" was fired. According to this article, Myers is now running for class president. I doubt Myers or Bachmann will ever read this blog post, but what the hey - I had to get the following off of my chest.
-------------------------------------------------------
Dear Amy,
First, let me wish you well on your pursuit of class president of your school. Awesome! Best of luck! :-D
And I do hope Michelle Bachmann takes up your challenge, as well as all holders of office. They ALL should have a good knowledge of our country and its history. However, in the pursuit of Bachmann, you need to know that you are being used in a way that I am sure that you did not intend. I say this because in the article linked above, you state that you were angry that so many of the most visible female politicians were seen as fodder for jokes and ridicule. I'm afraid that this is not quite accurate.
Women like Sarah Palin and Bachmann are not being ridiculed because they are women, they are being ridiculed for being conservative - who happen to be women. What you are noticing is that the critics of such conservative women are taking what would be called cheap shots at them, and it is a cheap shot because they are ridiculing them in ways that they would not ridicule men - or even women who are politically liberal - by taking shots at their looks, their clothes, or even their children.
Had you publicly challenged Nancy Pelosi or Elena Kagen, then you would have been a non-story to the press. No one in the national press takes cheap shots at Pelosi or Kagen, because they are politically liberal, and they don't tolerate anyone else taking cheap shots at them, either. And they certainly wouldn't report on some 16 year old teen from New Jersey publicly challenging them over a factual mistake they made, no matter how bad the mistake was. My dear, publicly criticizing liberal women just isn't done by the press.
Criticizing politically conservative women is a whole 'nother matter, however. In the eyes of the left-leaning (and they are left-leaning, no matter how much they deny it) press, conservative women such as Palin and Bachmann are fair game for all manners of crass, crude and unprofessional insults. Not only that, they are not above using you as a potential opportunity to further humiliate Bachmann. It's why you haven't heard from Bachmann yet; because she doesn't want to give the press the satisfaction that they successfully prodded her into responding to you.
Not only that, to take up your challenge would end up hurting her in two ways: One, she kicks your butt. Then the press will say, "Oh, look. Big mean Bachmann takes it out on a poor defenseless child!" (and they WILL call you a child in order to make Bachmann look even worse. Then there is the second way, in which you defeat Bachmann. Then the press will say, "Oh, look. Bachmann is so stupid that she can't even win against a child! Therefore she shouldn't run for office." Either result is a losing scenario for her.
Truth be told, Amy, all politicians make the kinds of mistakes Bachmann made. For example, back when President Obama was campaigning in 2008, he claimed to have visited all 57 states in the country (and with one still to go!). I think that kind of factual error is actually greater than Bachmann's historical error, but again, all candidates make these kinds of mistakes. The reason? They're all human. Even the female candidates. So if President Obama can be forgiven for momentarily thinking that we had 58 states, then I think Bachmann can be forgiven for an historical error.
Ultimately, though, what this shows is that the liberals share the same fear that they say conservative men have, and that's the fear of powerful women. As you run for office at your school, you might encounter that fear from others as well - and not just from boys but from girls as well. Just know that you are not alone. Know that women such as Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and Hillary Clinton encounter this all the time.
The way to counter this is not to run away, because that's what they want you to do. Instead, stand tall and proud, because that's the best way to fight off bullies. And yes, those that would take cheap shots at powerful women like Palin and Bachmann are indeed bullies. Bullies ultimately are cowards, because cheap shots are what bullies use against their targets, and bullies are also not above using others to do their bullying. This is why I am asking you to not be used by them.
However, I am not going to ask you to retract your challenge to Michelle Bachmann, but instead to expand your challenge to any lawmaker willing to take you on. That would show that you are a woman with guts! Just be prepared to not be a story to them any longer, because then you will no longer have a use to them for their bullying tactics (because again, no one challenges one of their own liberal kind). But at least you will have stood up for yourself and freed yourself from being used by them.
So stop being a tool for bullies, Amy. Instead, be a force for good and righteousness by standing up to those who would use you for their own selfish ends. Once you take this lesson to heart, then you will have taken an important first step in being a true leader in our society; something our society will need in the future. God bless you on your strength and courage, Amy Myers. Stay on the right path, and good things will come your way. :-)
-------------------------------------------------------
Dear Amy,
First, let me wish you well on your pursuit of class president of your school. Awesome! Best of luck! :-D
And I do hope Michelle Bachmann takes up your challenge, as well as all holders of office. They ALL should have a good knowledge of our country and its history. However, in the pursuit of Bachmann, you need to know that you are being used in a way that I am sure that you did not intend. I say this because in the article linked above, you state that you were angry that so many of the most visible female politicians were seen as fodder for jokes and ridicule. I'm afraid that this is not quite accurate.
Women like Sarah Palin and Bachmann are not being ridiculed because they are women, they are being ridiculed for being conservative - who happen to be women. What you are noticing is that the critics of such conservative women are taking what would be called cheap shots at them, and it is a cheap shot because they are ridiculing them in ways that they would not ridicule men - or even women who are politically liberal - by taking shots at their looks, their clothes, or even their children.
Had you publicly challenged Nancy Pelosi or Elena Kagen, then you would have been a non-story to the press. No one in the national press takes cheap shots at Pelosi or Kagen, because they are politically liberal, and they don't tolerate anyone else taking cheap shots at them, either. And they certainly wouldn't report on some 16 year old teen from New Jersey publicly challenging them over a factual mistake they made, no matter how bad the mistake was. My dear, publicly criticizing liberal women just isn't done by the press.
Criticizing politically conservative women is a whole 'nother matter, however. In the eyes of the left-leaning (and they are left-leaning, no matter how much they deny it) press, conservative women such as Palin and Bachmann are fair game for all manners of crass, crude and unprofessional insults. Not only that, they are not above using you as a potential opportunity to further humiliate Bachmann. It's why you haven't heard from Bachmann yet; because she doesn't want to give the press the satisfaction that they successfully prodded her into responding to you.
Not only that, to take up your challenge would end up hurting her in two ways: One, she kicks your butt. Then the press will say, "Oh, look. Big mean Bachmann takes it out on a poor defenseless child!" (and they WILL call you a child in order to make Bachmann look even worse. Then there is the second way, in which you defeat Bachmann. Then the press will say, "Oh, look. Bachmann is so stupid that she can't even win against a child! Therefore she shouldn't run for office." Either result is a losing scenario for her.
Truth be told, Amy, all politicians make the kinds of mistakes Bachmann made. For example, back when President Obama was campaigning in 2008, he claimed to have visited all 57 states in the country (and with one still to go!). I think that kind of factual error is actually greater than Bachmann's historical error, but again, all candidates make these kinds of mistakes. The reason? They're all human. Even the female candidates. So if President Obama can be forgiven for momentarily thinking that we had 58 states, then I think Bachmann can be forgiven for an historical error.
Ultimately, though, what this shows is that the liberals share the same fear that they say conservative men have, and that's the fear of powerful women. As you run for office at your school, you might encounter that fear from others as well - and not just from boys but from girls as well. Just know that you are not alone. Know that women such as Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and Hillary Clinton encounter this all the time.
The way to counter this is not to run away, because that's what they want you to do. Instead, stand tall and proud, because that's the best way to fight off bullies. And yes, those that would take cheap shots at powerful women like Palin and Bachmann are indeed bullies. Bullies ultimately are cowards, because cheap shots are what bullies use against their targets, and bullies are also not above using others to do their bullying. This is why I am asking you to not be used by them.
However, I am not going to ask you to retract your challenge to Michelle Bachmann, but instead to expand your challenge to any lawmaker willing to take you on. That would show that you are a woman with guts! Just be prepared to not be a story to them any longer, because then you will no longer have a use to them for their bullying tactics (because again, no one challenges one of their own liberal kind). But at least you will have stood up for yourself and freed yourself from being used by them.
So stop being a tool for bullies, Amy. Instead, be a force for good and righteousness by standing up to those who would use you for their own selfish ends. Once you take this lesson to heart, then you will have taken an important first step in being a true leader in our society; something our society will need in the future. God bless you on your strength and courage, Amy Myers. Stay on the right path, and good things will come your way. :-)
Monday, May 16, 2011
Turning "Skeletoes" into Phat Lewtz for Nerdz!
Over the weekend my friends, inspiration hit me!
When I was out shopping for shoes, I happened to see some shoes called Skeletoes, which are basically running shoes meant to replicate running barefoot without being barefoot. Why would someone make such a shoe, much less wear it? Well, according to the theory, feet were meant to be bare. Shoes actually hinder the muscles and tendons of the feet to develop as they should, but not everyone can go around everywhere barefoot. Thus, some wise guy came up with Skeletoes, which attempt to replicate going around barefoot.
So, you might ask, what inspiration hit me when I saw these shoes? I'm gonna tell ya! You'll love it!
Now, it's no secret that a lot of you nerds out there are out of shape from all your teching and gaming and comic reading and other such nerdery. Still, my little nerdlings, you do need to take care of yourselves - if for no other reason than to keep on teching, gaming, and reading comic books! So how do we get nerds used to a sedentary lifestyle to take up some physical activity? Here's where the inspiration comes in!
Take these Skeletoes, make them skin colored and with hair on the top and call them Hobbit Feet! And then promote them as Phat Lewtz for Nerdz! This might inspire the pudgy little nerdlings into trying them out, even if they run around in costume to complement the shoes. Yeah, there's the risk of the sight of a lot of nerds running around dressed as hobbitses, but at least you're getting them out of the house and exercising, right? And with exercising, we all know that half the battle is getting your ass out there and exercising. Well, now the nerds will have some motivation to go try them out! It's win-win, if you ask me...
Sigh... I feel that I've done a great thing for mankind and nerdkind. No thanks are necessary - the satisfaction of a job well done is gratitude enough. :-)
Now go out there nerds, and tone up those feet! (and don't forget to shower after exercising....)
When I was out shopping for shoes, I happened to see some shoes called Skeletoes, which are basically running shoes meant to replicate running barefoot without being barefoot. Why would someone make such a shoe, much less wear it? Well, according to the theory, feet were meant to be bare. Shoes actually hinder the muscles and tendons of the feet to develop as they should, but not everyone can go around everywhere barefoot. Thus, some wise guy came up with Skeletoes, which attempt to replicate going around barefoot.
So, you might ask, what inspiration hit me when I saw these shoes? I'm gonna tell ya! You'll love it!
Now, it's no secret that a lot of you nerds out there are out of shape from all your teching and gaming and comic reading and other such nerdery. Still, my little nerdlings, you do need to take care of yourselves - if for no other reason than to keep on teching, gaming, and reading comic books! So how do we get nerds used to a sedentary lifestyle to take up some physical activity? Here's where the inspiration comes in!
Take these Skeletoes, make them skin colored and with hair on the top and call them Hobbit Feet! And then promote them as Phat Lewtz for Nerdz! This might inspire the pudgy little nerdlings into trying them out, even if they run around in costume to complement the shoes. Yeah, there's the risk of the sight of a lot of nerds running around dressed as hobbitses, but at least you're getting them out of the house and exercising, right? And with exercising, we all know that half the battle is getting your ass out there and exercising. Well, now the nerds will have some motivation to go try them out! It's win-win, if you ask me...
Sigh... I feel that I've done a great thing for mankind and nerdkind. No thanks are necessary - the satisfaction of a job well done is gratitude enough. :-)
Now go out there nerds, and tone up those feet! (and don't forget to shower after exercising....)
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Death Panel 2.1? As Palin would say, "You betcha!"
This article can try to explain that Obama's new deficit reduction plan won't become "death panel 2.1", but don't fool yourselves, folks. In order for all that the author is describing to work as he's describing it, a lot of people have to do their job right, and if the government has trouble keeping those damn air traffic controllers awake, then how can we expect them to run this program in the way that the author describes? Somewhere along the line, some lazy bureaucrat is going to cut time and costs to leave people out of necessary medical care, and we'll have a de facto "death panel" as a result. Socialized medicine, under whatever guise it comes in, is an epic fail, and I'll keep saying it until it sinks in.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)