Sunday, February 26, 2006

Why do I care...?

Entry for February 20, 2006

About two years ago, my father and I had an interesting discussion that I think applies here. Realize first that some in my late teens to early twenties until my father passed last year, our roles reversed. I was not the giver of advice, or rather, enlightened advice. Talk of compassion or the ways of human beings. I'd moved him far left of his bigotry over the years. In this particular discussion, he spoke of his frustration towards the goth/punk crowd. "Why did they do that to themselves. Why did they need to draw attention to themselves." Well, it took some doing, but I helped him to reshape his thinking and ask himself the same questions. Why DID they need to draw attention to themselves. Perhaps it was something painful in their past, or maybe it was just who they were. Better yet, why not ask, "Why do I care how they look?" A month or so later, he returned to the conversation, mentioning how he'd really been exploring what in himself made him give a damn. Why get so frustrated over something that had nothing to do with him. Moreover, the behavior of these people might just have been eliciting the exact response they'd hoped it would. He was actually the sap in their little scenario.

Well, I tell all that to tell you this. Growing up, the most damning and oft used term to insult another guy was, "fag" (please, whenever you read that, you need to use a near surfer-dude tone, in a deep baritone and more often-than-not an Elvis or Billy Idol lip curl). This term was tossed about so readily, it should have developed the same meaningless quality we now give to ‘In God We Trust’ on our bills. Yet, it didn’t. As, I look back at my life from the current apex, I have a great fear of my own idiocy. At merely 36 years old, I realize much of my life I’ve been at best a twit and at worst an ignorant boob. I’m somewhat ashamed of having ever used the term “fag”. A recent visit to friends who have not explored humanity the same way a student of the theatre is forced to, I was quite taken aback at the tossing about of this very term. It sadly made these dear friends shrink just a little in my eyes. The term is certainly offensive, even as well-meaning jibe, but it’s further bread of such utter unadulterated ignorance as to astound me. In this day and age it seems beyond impossible to judge a person’s manhood by their sexual preference. What makes a man is certainly a different question than it was in centuries past. I certainly didn’t build my family’s home with my bear hands. The problem with calling someone a ‘fag’, is he could still be intelligent, compassionate, manly and so on, while his response that you’re a jackass seems quite the trump card.

Let me lay it on the line for you. All I’m really saying is that as I grew up, I made no choice what-so-ever. I liked girls. There was never a time when I questioned it. It wasn’t up for debate. Those formative years were filled with the same tired old clichés we’ve all heard where my seeing even the smallest part of a girls leg from beneath her skirt and I sat there hoping against all hope not to be called up to the blackboard. For some time, when I was still more ignorant than I must be today, I couldn’t figure out why anyone would choose to be gay. I mean, girls were so round and bumpy in all the right places. They had all this great equipment guys simply didn’t have! If you ride out this thinking, before long, even the dimmest person arrives at the idea that homosexuals have made no choice, just as you have made no choice. They chose just the same as you chose. So here I am perched upon this hill of 36, madly in love with my wife and children. Being a feeling human being and believing homosexuality is just something a person is—and furthermore a thing that is harmful to no one. I’m aware, I was lucky to be born in a society who accepts my sexual preference. But I’m also struck with an interesting pondering. What if society hadn’t agree with my love of my wife? Would I love her less? Would my love for her be wrong because some believed it to be so? Would I not fight for acceptance? Would I not fight for the right to be legally bound in wedlock to her? I sure as hell hope I’d have the constitution to do so. I hope I’d have the inner strength. I hope I’d have the ability to see past the stigma, the religious dogma, and the youthful teenage taunting scars we all still carry in some form or fashion. I hope I’d be that sort of man.

So, I put out there, why is the expression of love between two people regardless of gender so unappealing as to force a turning of the channel. What resides inside you that can’t accept and even appreciate nothing more than an expression of love between two people. If you’re before your television, or sitting before a stage in a theatre, you’ve already chosen to suspend your disbelief. You’ve accepted that those people on the screen or stage are not real, you know that and accept it. Their actions are scripted and put before you by your choice for your enjoyment. Why then is it suddenly too appalling to watch? It’s not even actually happening. I would venture to say the passion between them does not repulse you. If passion repulsed you, you’d react the same way with a heterosexual lip-lock. There are many reasons why this might affect a person. I think the reality is not that the expression of love repulses you, but rather, you are allowing societies views to affect you. Just in the same way I used to readily toss out the word, “fag”. Where I would agree that public displays of affection are generally inappropriate (no matter the genders involved), shouldn’t we live in a world where the occasional snatched kiss during a shopping trip or at a sporting event should be acceptable no matter the gender of the participants. And shouldn’t we strive to define it as nothing more than it is, attaching no stigma placed on it not by our own insecurities. A show of affection. What could be wrong with that? Perhaps it should instead be celebrated or congratulated.

Monday February 20, 2006 - 09:19am (CST)

at No comments:

Grand Old Party

Entry for February 18, 2006Was Cheney drinking? We'll never know. The two-time DUI recipient was allowed to wait 14 hours before being questioned by police. Reporters were told that local authorities were informed they wouldn't be able to see him, but the local authorities claim they weren't allowed to see him. My question, "Would I receive a 14 grace period, if I were to shoot someone?"

Luckily we heard the real truth of the matter when Cheney appeared on FoxNEWS! Nothing like Britt Hume and the F-word network to get down to the truth behind this incident. As Jack Cafferty put it, "that's a little like Bonnie interviewing Clyde."

Recently, my mother mentioned how in war-time wire tapping doesn't bother her. I ask this, what war? Did we declare war on someone? By declaring a war on terror, this war never ends. Can they simply wire-tap forever? There are terrorists in every part of the world. Another question might be, at what point, do we worry? When should we be bothered by illegal wire tapping? Only when it directly affects us? Isn't this far too similar to McCarthy era thinking? How about Germany in the late 30's and early 40's? Don't forget we lost Coretta Scott King whose husband was considered a prime threat by the FBI. He was illegally wire-tapped for his radical thinking. Don't forget Bush announced famously on April 20, 2004, "[T]here are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way…"

By the way, what happened with Phase 2 of the Iraqi invasion inquiry? Wasn't that to be started over a year ago? Weren't the Democrats drug through the mud for daring to pull a closed door session to bring attention to this still yet to occur event? Wasn't it appalling to bring it up when it was to happen in two weeks? When was this? Three months ago? Oh, and, hmmm... it's been shelved again. (Just a reminder, Phase 2 is to look into how the inaccurate intel was used by the Bush administration)

To finish up today, here is the list of currently indicted GOPers:

GOP Under Investigation

26 September 2005 - gk - reactions

Just for fun, here are the following Bush Administration officials, GOP Officials, and GOP Machine Operators currently under investigation. This is is very incomplete, and it took way longer than it should have.

  • Karl Rove Deputy Cheif of Staff- Valerie Plame
    • Pending Investigation
      Special Prosecutor U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald
  • I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby Chief of Staff to the VP - Valerie Plame
    • Pending Investigation
      Special Prosecutor U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald
  • Bill Frist (R-TN) Senate Majority Leader - Blind Trust
    • Ongoing Investigation
      U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, the SEC
  • Jack Abramoff Lobbyist/Machine Head - Slush Funds, Kickbacks
    • Indicted - 11 Aug 2005: 5 counts of wire fraud, 1 count of conspiracy (along with Adam Kidan)
      Federal grand jury, Fort Lauderdale
    • Pending Investigation (along with Michael Scanlon)
      FBI, Internal Revenue Service, the Justice Department's public integrity section, the National Indian Gaming Commission and the Interior Department inspector general source
  • Ralph E. Reed, Jr. Director,Christian Coalition; Republican candidate for Lieutenant Governor of Georgia
  • Tom Delay (R-TX) Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives
  • Conrad R. Burns (R-MT) U.S. Senator
  • Grover Norquist President, Americans for Tax Reform; Pundit
    • Ongoing Investigation - Allegations of co-ordinate lobbying against his own clients
    • Ongoing Investigation - Illegal Gifts
      US Senate Indian Affairs Committee
  • David Safavian GSA Chief of Staff - Illegal Kickbacks
  • Randy 'Duke' Cunningham (R-Solana Beach) Congressman

Future Probable Investigations Based on reports in the media, and investigation transcripts, the following should be considered "Persons of Interest."

  • Bob Ney (R-OH) Congressman - Perjury, Kickbacks
    • No Pending Investigations
      Connected to Jack Abramoff, possible perjury and kickbacks. (source)
  • Susan Ralston Executive Assistant to Karl Rove
Saturday February 18, 2006 - 04:16pm (CST)
at No comments:

How Should God Behave?

Entry for December 29, 2005

On a discussion group it was asked recently, "How should God behave?" The discussion shifted to describing the perfect embodiment of a deity. I'm an atheist. I wrote the following:

The perfect god would exist to enlighten us through our own struggles. We'd forever be children pursuing understanding. He/she'd be ever-present and just when we'd grasp understanding, he/she'd shift our understanding. He/she'd be like the living walking/breathing realization of one of those old Richard Bach novels. Or a Peter Brook
explorative theatrical work (sorry if that's too obscure). He/she'd be an old professor and we'd forever be in school. Oh, and this professor would have an old casual suede jacket with patches on the elbows. I must, however, contradict the person who says this deity would make the rules, he/she wouldn't. Right and wrong exist as a constant. The deity would fully understand the concept of right or wrong beyond prejudices of certain relativities of the time, but would not control them. Right and wrong, however, would play no part in his/her teachings. Instead there would be unadulterated learning and sharing. The ultimate Socratic seminar for life.

How's that for a fantasy? Oh, and he'd make all food calerie free and
fast-food healthy. Oh, and I'd be an adonis or my current form would
(including the spare tire mid-section) would be considered perfection
and envied by all. ...eh, while I'm dreaming.

P.S. He'd never flood the world or write such a lousy book. He'd simply
have Shakespeare pen a story under his pseudonym. Greatest story ever
told? Apparently these folks are not so well read (then again that goes
without saying).

Thursday December 29, 2005 - 08:47pm (CST)
at No comments:

Either way, surround yourself with friends.

Entry for December 28, 2005

Been a rough year. I can't say I remember a year quite so bleak. I'm looking forward to a fresh start, no matter how meaningless the turning of a calendar page may be. The symbolic renewing can be as liberating as the real thing if not ignored.

In 1976 I remember, at the mere age of 6, how wonderful the world seemed to me. For years thereafter I still held this year with the bicentennial coins in high regard. Until the freedom of 6th grade camp another half of my life later, was I still thinking to that grand year. Well, here we are some 30 years on and I'm looking for another amazing year.

Here's to all my friends and family in the new year. Here's to a year of living life and learning and sharing and growing and loving a little more than in the last. And here's to no regrets, but only hope for the awareness to not only 'gather ye roses while ye may', but here's hope for the time to smell them and the wisdom to savor such time the whole year through.

Please, any friend who reads this, take a moment to comment or call ...or better yet, let's get together and enjoy one another's company. And, hey, if not with me, with another friend or loved one. You never know, this could be your lousy year, though I hope in my heart-of-hearts it's not. Either way, surround yourself with friends.

Happy New Year to All!
at No comments:

Leave it to a sinistral to screw up your morning

Entry for November 08, 2005

Leave it to a sinistral to screw up your morning, eh?

I've a serious gripe. Left-handed people should not be allowed to use twist ties. ...I'll elaborate. When am I usually confronted with the intricacies of a twist tie? Nearly never, I'll admit. But on occasion, I'll be freeing a slice of Wonder Bread from its plastic multi-colored cocoon in the wee hours of the morning when the most complicated contraption I should take on would preferably be the rampant eye booger. This is at a time of squinted-eye and fumbling limb as the body reacquaints extremities to the wonderment of blood-flow. This is certainly not the time to find yourself at the meager end of a once elongated paper-covered wire that has now been twisted to only the bitter ends of nothing because some 'leftie' has twisted the damn thing in the wrong circular direction. No sir. At this point, the ability to focus is not entirely within grasp. At this point, I should want for little more than a springing open of thin plastic baggydom and the scent of fresh bread as it wafts from behind the two-to-three martyred end pieces of bread going stale in order to save those pieces that lie beyond. I mean, really, is this too much to ask? Is it? I think not. I shouldn't be forced to wake up my brain, scrape out the eye sludge and actually FOCUS MY EYES only to discover I've twisted myself into a knot. A knot, mind you, that would have never existed were it not (no pun intended, yet still appreciated) for some unaware genetic anomaly known as the left-handed person. It's really too much for me to deal with. Either twist with the correct hand or the correct direction. Either or both is acceptable. We simply mustn't cator to the freaks, folks. (Said the tree-hugging atheist) I just want my Wonder bread. Not to wonder why I've yet to acquire bread. I've no room for tolerance. Screw everyone who sees things differently. We're not all special. Some of us just plain suck. Power to the majority. Who needs diversity? Power to the majority, no matter their ill-conceived and unconstitutional macarthyistic rantings!

Okay, that may be a case of stretching an analogy a bit too far.

My point being, some things are just too significant to ignore. I can only bend so far people. Only...so...far... before I break. I think this twist-tie thing is that point.

at No comments:
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)