The New Face of the Teaparty

On July 5, Mail Online posted an article about David Duke contemplating a run for the Republican nomination for President. Like most of the contenders in that race, he is truly delusional that he even has a chance. Hell, he can't even run. Did he forget that he was convicted of tax charges and mail fraud in 2005? Or is he conveniently leaving that fact out when courting the Tea Party voters who may not even remember or know about his inability to run.

In 1990 David Duke came to speak at our university. He was invited by the school's Young Republicans. When there was a major outcry over his appearance, they just couldn't understand what all the fuss was about. And even though an overwhelming majority of the student body demanded they find another speaker, (this was Louisiana, there was no shortage of Republicans to choose from), they stood by there decision.

The students government put together their own event to take place at the same time as Duke's speech, a tolerance rally. There were a number speakers that represented diversity in gender, ethnicity, religion, and even sexual orientation., and the speeches were about overcoming prejudices. It was standing room only for those who were lucky enough to get in.

The next day in the paper there spoke about Duke's speech. He referred to out rally as a protest, which I found amusing since he was barely mentioned at all. The other interesting point they made was that the audience that attended were all older members of the community.

I noticed at the time that his handlers always tried to play down his past. But everyone knew his time in the KKK and that he is a holocaust denier. We knew that then, and we haven't forgotten now.

Emotions, Justice, and a Little Girl

Today on FaceBook I was invited to "attend" A day of silence/support for Caylee Anthony on her birthday. I accepted and will do so not just for Caylee, but for all the other children that have been victims as well.

I have read many people today say that justice was not served today, that our judicial system is broken. These are emotional statements, and I completely understand the emotion behind them. I understand how it fuels them. I understand and feel as well the outrage of the violent loss of a life barely begun. But there is a time and place for emotional response, and the justice system is NOT that place.

I will be the first person to tell you that our justice system is not perfect. Nor can it be. It was created by imperfect beings. (I think even atheist would agree that as a species, we are far from perfect.) NO SYSTEM OF JUSTICE CREATED BY MAN WILL BE 100%! Our founding fathers knew this to be true, and in knowing this set out to not make a perfect system, but the best one that could exist. They created a system that put the emphasis on protecting the innocent over punishing the guilty. The whole basis of the system is, "innocent until proven guilty." The burden of that proof lies with the prosecution, not the defense, and must be done beyond the shadow of a doubt. Everyone has a right to legal representation, and to be tried before a jury of your peers.

I do not envy the prosecution team in this trial. From the last sighting of Caylee to the police being called to investigate, there was a 30 day gap. One month is a long time when attempting to secure indisputable evidence. It's even less help when her remains were not found for 6 months, and then after whether & animals had taken their toll. Yet with what they had to go on, the DA's Office put together a better case than anyone could have hoped for, and for that I admire them greatly. It was to the point, concise, logical and compelling. What they could not make it was iron clad, which is what it needed to be.

I do not envy the jury that served on this trial. The rules of deciding a verdict are set in stone. They must look at all the evidence from both sides, then ask themselves one question, "does it prove beyond a shadow of a doubt they did it?" It is a question that is based on facts and the facts only. There is no place for emotions & gut feelings. It would seem simple enough, but those jurors are mere morals. Though it may not have been the popular decision, it was the one they needed to make according to the laws of the land.

As a people, we desire fairness in life. A 2 year old girl is no longer with us, and the person responsible must be appropriately punished. But the world doesn't always work the way we want. Finding Casey guilty today would serve more to feed our sense of an eye for an eye.

Great Quote

In a first world country, healthcare should be a right of all citizens, not a privilege of the fortunately employed and the wealthy.~unknown

Huh? OR Our Strange Attitudes When It Comes to Art

I cannot figure out for the life of me want determines what is okay to show on MTV as far as videos go, and what is not. There does not seem like there is a clear cut set of guidelines on what show or show not be shown on the station in regards to video content.

Allow me to present my argument.

Marilyn Manson released a video back in 2004 for his song "(S)aint". The video was directed by Asia Argento. Apparently the powers that be have not only decided that it was not appropriate for MTV, but the video was banned from the US entirely.

I wouldn't necessarily disagree with not showing the video on MTV, but to ban the video entirely from the US is a bit extreme. Any adult over 21 should have the option to purchase and view the video if they wish. And the banned from MTV argument fall flat when you take into consideration of what they have shown. Case in point is The Prodigy video "Smack My Bitch Up". This video was shown for one week on MTV after 11pm, and with a warning that the video contained material that was adult in nature.Now, I have nothing against The Prodigy. I love them, and think the video is great. My problem is that the content is no better or worse the Marilyn Manson video.

Compounding my befuddlement is the fact that Madonna's "Justify My Love" video to this day has not ever been shown on MTV. And this video is a Disney special compared to the other two.

And it's not just MTV. Radio has been doing it as well.

I remember back in 1988, (or as my kids call it, "Back in the day for Mom."), there were certain songs that you just COULD NOT play on the radio, no matter what time of day it was. I worked at the time at the college radio station, of which the format was AOR. (Album Orientated Rock for those not familiar with the term, you young-ens. :P) On any album that had songs that had materials/words that were not permitted by the FCC, there was a label on them with a list of the songs not to play.

On the stations copy of Guns 'n Roses "Appetite for Destruction" the sticker listed the songs you COULD play. Of which there was 4. One of these no-play songs was "Mr. Brownstone". It was most definitely strictly forbidden. You were forever banned from the station if you played that song. Fast forward to 2011. Guess what I am constantly hearing played on the local classic rock station. That's right, that "forbidden" song.

Now, if anyone can explain this, I would love to hear your thoughts/opinions on the subject.

Wishing the world was as colorblind...Updated

I have recently been reminded of the fact that the world is not as colorblind as I am. And it is these moments that I feel so naive.

Basically, it all happened a few weeks ago. I was on my way home with some friends, (a married couple) we were discussing about some mutual co-workers and a recent party we all attended. The subject of spouses came up, and my guy friend pointed out that one of our male co-workers, a black gentleman, was married to a white woman. I blew off the comment until he asked why they would they do that. I was a little shocked by the comment. I responded by saying that love knows no color, ethnicity, religious beliefs, or gender. His response was, "Whatever. As long as they don't have kids together, I don't really care." I was very shocked at this point. I didn't even mention the 3 kids and the grandkid.

And it isn't just the subject of interracial marriage as of late. You would think that in the 21st century, the country would have no problem with having a president that is not white & not male. This should be a non issue. People should be debating whether or not the person holding the office is representing their interest, not whether or not he was born in this country, and if the above and beyond documentation he has shown us so far is enough or not.

I was never taught to hate. I was brought up to see that all people are equal, and no one is better that anyone else, especially over things that are "cosmetic". A true measure of a person is who they are, not the color of their skin, the deity they worship, their ethnic background, or their sexual orientation. I just don't understand prejudice. It baffles me.

Text Books & Character Flaws Revisited

It has been brought to my attention over the years that I am always defending my intelligence if I even perceive that someone might be attacking it. I admit, my guard always seems to be up. I guess when you’ve had to fight to prove your intelligence your whole life simply because people judge you on your gender, at some point your defenses go into auto drive. It’s the only explanation that seems logical. And it’s something that isn’t going to change overnight, but I am getting better at it as time goes by.

Here’s an example of the crap I have had to put up with, an extreme one at that. It happened my freshman year of high school. I was accepted into the Pre-IB program at my school. (For those who do not know what that is, its programs that are modeled after educational systems from around the world, without being based on any particular one. It takes high marks to make it into the program. The program was TOUGH!) I was totally stoked. One of my favorite classes was World History. In this class I had this one guy, a sophomore at that, (World History was a sophomore level course in this school), who thought he’s was the man. He was always talking about how freaking smart he was, and how his intellect was so far and above everyone else’s. Whatever, I could have cared less, I was confident in my own abilities. As the weeks rolled by, he started noticing that the cute girl who sat in front of him was getting just as many A's in this class as he was. He could just not accept this. He would constantly say that the teacher missed something in grading my homework/tests. I blew him off. When we got our first quarter report cards, he was quick to let the whole class know that he had 2 honors course, of which he was maintaining a B average in. Then he grabbed mine, (because the concept of asking for it eluded him), to see that 5 or my 6 classes were honors, and pre-IB at that. (The 6th class was JROTC, and if they have honors for that, I would have been in that as well.) He told the whole class that they misprinted my report card. To the class credit, they saw him for the jerk he was.

His crowning moment was after the unit test. The class was divided into 3 units, and there was a test for each, as well as the mid-term, second term, and final exams. So, if you aced these 6 exams, you could do so-so the rest of the class and still pass. And these were not easy exams. Oh no no! These were essay exams, six questions, six pages, answers were a page each, grammar, spelling and punctuation count. A week later we got the results. As she was passing out the graded exams, she announced that one person scored a 96, the only A. Well, the idiot behind me proudly let everyone know that he had received an 89, one point shy of an A. At this point I was looking at my exam. I had received the 96. One of my classmates asked what I got, and I told them. Everyone in the class was congratulating me, except for Mr. Ego behind me. This was so unacceptable to him; he proceeded to whack me over the head with his history book. If anyone remembers their history books, they were not thin and light. My vision actually went blurry for a few seconds. The class, including the teacher, was completely shocked. Nowadays, he would have been expelled. When I was going to school, it was only a detention. It was a crushing blow to my self-esteem, no matter when it happened.

Like I said, it was one of the more extreme cases, but it was one of many that I’ve had to deal with over the years Yet it's not just men that assume things. Women do it to other women all the time. Should they know better, possibly even having it happen to them. Yes. Do they have the same preconceived notions. Absolutely. Is it just as annoying. No, it is more so, to the point of feeling like a betrayal.

In my mid-late 20's, I worked as a Assistant Store Manager for a major retail chain. There are two things you need to know for this tail. 1.) All the managers wore name tags that in large red capital letters said "MANAGER". Basically, we were very well identified. (And I admit that there were days I wanted to hide that name tag because it felt like a bulls-eye.) 2.) Only managers could process refunds.

One morning I was working with an older gentleman that was there part time for some extra spending money. (He used the money to take his girlfriend out on really nice dates over the weekend. I know it has nothing to do with the story. I just thought it was sweet and wanted to share.) He was running the register while I was behind the counter double checking the markdown list.

A woman comes up to the counter with an item she wishes to return. I go over and ask her what the reason is for the return. Without even acknowledging me, she proceeds to tell my co-worker why. He let her finish, then informed her he could not give her a refund. When she questioned him why, he told her that only a manager could do refunds. She looked at him with annoyance and said, "Yeah, so you are the manager. Just do it." He looked over at me, almost embarrassed, pointed at my name tag and said, 'No ma'am, she is."

Not once during the time I was taking care of her return did she apologize or even admit she was wrong. Quite frankly, I didn't care if she did or not. I did receive an apology though, from my co-worker. He felt bad about the incident, like it was his fault. I told him he did nothing to form her opinions, and she had already made up her mind before she spoke to either one of us who she believed was in authority.

Can I be overly sensitive to the point where an innocent comment is misinterpreted? Well, yeah. It’s a reflex reaction; I admit it and I’m working on it. Has it been easy? I had no illusions that it would be. And though my daughters face some of the same challenges that I did, it is getting better, as it seems to do with each new generation. I know that one day, we will get there.

My Cat Yuna

This is my furry baby, Yuna. Like all cats, she has her our unique personality. We like to call it part dog, part monkey, part human, and sometimes she remembers that she is a cat. She has been a part of our family for just over 4 years now. We cannot imagine what life would be without her. This is the story of how she came to be a part of our lives.

She was not originally suppose to be with us. For years my kids had constantly asked for a kitty, and for reason that really don't matter now, I had to turn them down. Not that it was easy. I have been a cat lover all my life.

So, why all of a sudden did all of that change. The simple answer is I was conned.

I was having lunch with one of their grandmothers, and somehow I got talked into agreeing to at least look at some pets before I outright said no. We had had a big upheaval in our lives at the time, so it was easy to get me to agree because I was vulnerable. (Some of you are probably calling BS on that, but that's my story and I'm sticking to it.)

I was at her mercy since we had come in her vehicle, so where did she decide to go to look at pets. To the Humane Society of course! Where better to take a bleeding heart like me. (There was the first strike against me.) They took us in back to the cat room, where I would say that they had about six in at the time.

One particular cat stood out. In the corner of the room I heard the more pitiful meowing ever. It was coming from a year old cat, and the meowing wasn't the only thing that was pitiful. She was missing about half of her fur, her whiskers had been cut and she also weighted half of what she was suppose to. She shook like crazy and was a bit skittish. Despite all this, she was so affectionate. The card on the cages said that she was called Milo, and that we shared the same birthday. (Yeah, strike two.)

We left the room to check out the dogs there, but as soon as we walked away from the cage, the cries began again. And as if that wasn't bad enough, you could still hear she throughout the building. It got so bad, I started crying and saying, "We can't just leave her here. We need to take her home." (Strike three, folks!)

She has been twisting me around her little paw ever since.

One of the first things we did after getting her home was to give her a new name. This was for a couple of reasons. 1.) We wanted to give her a completely new start. The name she had was from her previous life. 2.) When anyone heard her name, they assumed she was a male cat. Yeah, not cool.

So after running through a laundry list of names from cute to cool to silly, we settled on Yuna from a character in Final Fantasy X. She is the main female character who is beautiful, strong, brave and kind even knowing what her future holds. We felt it was perfect. (Now that we have gotten to know her personality better, she is more of a Yuffie from Final Fantasy VII, a mischievous ninja.)

In the months that followed, she put on the weight, grew all her fur back, and grew new whiskers. At first she would hide constantly, but slowly but surely, she started coming out. Soon she was hanging out with us.

You can say a pet belongs to someone, but the truth is that the pet picks you. Despite getting the kitty for my kids, Yuna has decided that she is my cat. And I'm okay with that.

I hope her story will encourage people to seek to adopt pets who truly need a loving home. You give them so much, but they give so much more back.

To Misquote the Bible, The Sequel

In my research of another subject, I found yet another quote that is attributed to the Bible, but it’s not in there. And this one is a shocker.

‘Hate the sin, love the sinner.”

Wow, did that just blow your mind or what? The originator of that quote is none other that the peace loving Mahatma Gandhi. Personally, I still feel he was a man we should try to model ourselves after. The man was the source of great advice to live by. (More great quotes from him can be found here.) But no, this did not come from the Bible.

The closest thing I have come to finding a similar quote is as follows. “Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves. Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. Share with God's people who are in need. Practice hospitality. Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited. Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay,’ says the Lord. On the contrary: ‘If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.’ Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” (Romans 12: 9-21)

Pretty long, huh? This is probably why people decided to borrow Gandhi’s quote. And no wonder. It puts it in a nice package that gets straight to the point.

To Misquote the Bible...

The other day I got to be witness to, for better or worse, an argument about whether or not the quote "Spare the rod, spoil the child." was indeed in the Bible. Mostly out of curiosity, I decided to find out and put the matter to rest once and for all.

The fact is that the quote is NOT from the Bible. It from a poem called Hudibras by Samuel Butler written in the 17th Century. And...the line is actually a tongue in cheek reference to prevent conception. ( I bet you are all looking at this in a WHOLE new light, aren't you?)
The actual Bible quotes that this gets confused with are from Proverbs. "He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him." (Proverbs 13:24) "Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you punish him with the rod, he will not die. Punish him with the rod and save his soul from death." (Proverbs 23:13-14)

I would also like to take this time to remind everyone that Proverbs is part of the Old Testament. When you are asking yourselves the question, "What would Jesus do?" I don't think the Prince of Peace would EVER hit a child.

Random thoughts while ODing on VH1

While watching Metal Mania, I saw a group called Keel. They did a remake of the 10,000 Maniacs "Because the Night". No wonder groups like Anthrax & Metallica make fun of hair bands.

I also noticed while watching that heavy metal videos that, even though video production quantity greatly improved in the mid 80's, they still looked like they grabbed a camera, a friend, and threw it together in one day. Guess metal took some time to catch up.

With the outbreak of AIDS, it's amazing that a majority of the artist didn't end up with it. If any group of people were prime candidates for catching the HIV virus, it was definitely this group. The sex & drugs with these guys was legendary.

Recently re-watching "The Decline of Western Civilization Part 2: The Metal Years", I was struck once again by the scenes with Chris Holmes of WASP. I remember watching it back when it first came out, and I kept thinking that his guy is going to commit suicide by Vodka as the cameras roll. It was frightening

AIDS at 25

It seems lately that HIV/AIDS only seems to make news lately when we have reached some milestone. Last year, it was because the US had reached the 1 million mark, and the fact that Bush's predicted reduction of new cases from 40,000 a year to 20,000 through the abstinence message was dealt a great blow when the new cases reached 60,000. (I could have told him an abstinence only message doesn't work.) This year, HIV/AIDS makes the news as we reach the quarter century mark for the pandemic. A pandemic that has taken the lives of 25 million people, and infects 40 million more. The bird/avian flu gets more press coverage now, and it hasn't killed anywhere near the number. As a HIV/AIDS educator, I feel the need to put in my 2 cents about this anniversary.

I can remember a time before HIV/AIDS, but just barely. My children may never live in a world without it. I don't know anyone that hasn't been affected by it in some way.
We have made progress in these past 25 years. There are now antivirals that have given hope to people with the HIV virus. There are people infected from the start that are still with us today. There are now laws in place that protect the rights of those with HIV/AIDS. We now know for such how the virus is transmitted, and how it affects the immune system. There are possible vaccines and preventive drugs being tested.

Yet, there is still much misconception out there. Because of early media coverage, may of the early theories still remain. Some people still view this as a disease of morality, or a "gay" disease. I've had students in my classes who thought you could get it from a mosquito, or casual contact. I've talked to teens that were under the impression that as long as you don't have intercourse, and only had oral or anal sex, you were okay. My grandmother told me one day that she wouldn't have to worry about getting HIV because she'd "gone through menopause" and "couldn't get pregnant". (Side-note: my grandma has no interest in men or dating, so I'm not worried about her on that front.) My sister-in-law once asked my why they favored condoms. When I told her it was to encourage their use during oral, she was baffled as to why they would be used for such. There is still a long way to go.

Education programs are still our best weapon against the spread of this disease. I find it totally amazing that something so simple and inexpensive can make such a difference in this fight. But it needs to be a complete education plan. Just pushing the message "Don't have sex or do drugs" will not work. The fact that the numbers are still steadily climbing is proof positive of that. It's like trying to get someone to solve an algebraic equation with only part of the formula. It does not compute. You have to talk about protection. You have to talk about safe sex, and using a condom. You have to talk about always using clean sharps whenever injecting drug, legal or not. It's not who you are, it what you do. This is about saving lives. Isn't THAT the most important thing?

To anyone that says teaching young people to properly use a condom is giving them permission to have sex, I present this argument. I know how to use a gun. I was trained to do so, and I qualified as a Sharpshooter, which means I'm a darn good shot. Knowing how to fire a weapon does not mean I am going around shooting people. The only thing I have ever shot are target sheets. But if I even need to use a firearm, I am prepared to do so. The same thing applies to condoms. I have taught my oldest how to properly use one, and she knows it's not permission to get her freak on. Yet, as we all take a stroll down memory lane, I'm sure you remember your teen years. I remember mine, and that's why she knows.

Well, that's my 2 cents. I'll get off my soapbox now.

My IQ doesn't directly correlate to my bra size

This is a subject that I have been dealing with for years. I've decided to speak my mind about it.

I know that, especially lately it seems, that we have been dealing with the many forms of discrimination. Racial, sexual, religious, age, etc; you name it, somebody probably hates you for no good reason for it. The subject of this post is a beauty discrimination.

Calm down, I know what you are thinking. "Who discriminates against beautiful people?" Just me a chance to explain. What I mean is that many people assume, incorrectly I might add, that if you are and attractive person, you are not very intelligent. Not so, let me present you with a prime example. How many of you here have heard of a show called "Beauty & the Geek"? For those who haven't, here's a quick synopsis: 8 "geeks" & 8 "beauties" are put together as coupes to compete for cash & prizes by having the groups taken out of their comfort zones; the girls in intellectual stuff, geeks with "girly" stuff. At the end of just about every episode, everyone, including the girls themselves, are surprised at how smart they really are. OH MY GOD!!!

Now, I have been told numerous times throughout my 36 years that I am a fairly attractive person. (I don't personally agree with it, but that's an argument for another day) I am also fairly well endowed. AND...I have a near genius IQ. Yet, for some strange unknown reason, people are surprises, dare I say shocked, at that last statement. WHY??? The statement that dives me absolutely insane is, "You're smarter than you look." Really?!?! I didn't know that intelligence had an appearance.

I have a position at my job where, if I may not "leadership position", I do have alot of influence, authority & responsibility. Most people who I meet for the first time do treat me with respect, and do take the time to get to know me. But you have those few that I just want to say, "My eyes are further north." When I mentioned my frustrations to my dearly beloved, he asked, "Aren't you use to it by now?" Let me see...NO! This is something I never have, and never will be able to just blow off. To accept this is to give in and give up, and you cannot do that when it comes to discrimination because you validate it.

I know that I will probably still be dealing with this. I can't change how I look any more that anybody else can. But for anyone out there who sees an attractive person, do me a favor. Talk to them before you jump to any prejudgements. Maybe you'll change your preconceptions.

If Jesus was on Earth today, the "religious right" would call him a liberal...

I got to thinking about this subject this week because of the release of "The DaVinci Code". The inability of many "Christians" to view anything other that what is written in the Bible. Not that I don't believe in the Bible. I do believe in the Holy Trinity; that is where my faith lies. I just could say I am a Christian, but lately that has become a dirty word. And this is very sad to me.

When I was going to Sunday School, I was always taught that Jesus was loving and accepting of everybody. It didn't matter your race, gender, social status, ethnicity, sexual preference, etc. How he preached about tolerance, loving your fellow man, turning the other check. How he cared not for his own glory or gain. How he was tried, humiliated, and died a long, painful torturous death so we could be saved. Not everyone believes he was the Messiah, but all agree he was a man of love & peace. So how did his message get so skewed?

As of late, his most vocal "followers", (and I use that term VERY loosely), are the ones lying, starting wars, destroying the planet, and profiting from pain? It boggles the mind. Then, to have people come up to me and say it's good to have leaders in this country with good Christian values. WHAT? Did I miss something? Like the part when, apparently, the priest said don't do as Jesus did? I don't remember being taught THOSE values. I've actually been to church recently,and it hasn't changed. I promise you. Still love, peace and tolerance. (At least at my church.)

The funny thing about the whole "DaVinci Code" thing is you would think by the way they are reacting that this is the first time a movie has come out challenging the traditional interpretation of the Bible. How soon we forget "The Last Temptation of Christ" & "Dogma". (The latter of which I absolutely loved.) Let's take them one by one.

I remember very clearly the release of "The Last Temptation of Christ". I was in college, and the town where we were was NOT going to carry the movie. The closest theater showing the film was 90 minutes away. Now, anything that gets protested as much as this movie was is guaranteed to make people want to see it, especially college students. So, the weekend it was released, there was many a road trip made just to see this movie. I didn't go because I had no real interest in seeing the movie in the first place. I'd seen trailers and such, and it did not peek my interest. But I must confess to wanting to see it after all the fuss that was made about it. And what was the fuss about? The fact that, while on the cross, Jesus THOUGHT about living life as a normal man. OOOOHHHH, he thought... And what was the end result of these thoughts? He still chose to die for our sins. I don't know about you, but wouldn't the fact that he chose to still sacrifice himself when presented with the choice to forsake his destiny make his actions that much more powerful?

The previous controversy was nothing compared to the witch hunt that ensued over "Dogma". Hell, we even had death threats over this movie. I guess the religious fanatics couldn't handle the that Jesus's blood line remands to this day, much less worked at an abortion clinic, an apostle, a thirteenth one, could be black, and all sorts of other stuff that to list it here would probably spoil the movie for those who haven't seen it. This movie challenged people to think on their own. And the fact that it was written and directed by someone who was and is a devout Christian gives the film that much more credibility in my book. This film has brought people back to there faith, not turn them away from it.

As I also recall from my early days at church, Jesus was open minded. He LISTENED to what the masses had to say, and he did not pass judgement. Most of these movies' critics were people who never even seen them. Doesn't sound Christ-like to me.

I work for a non-profit, humanitarian organization. I believe we should save the planet, and aid everyone no matter gender, race, ethnicity, sexual preference or religious beliefs. I believe in the efforts of peace, and in forgiveness. And I have been called a liberal for this, like it was a bad word. I have watched the teaching of Christ be twisted and corrupted, and wonder how it could have gotten to this point. It breaks my heart.

Has Free Speech Reached it's Death Knoll????

I was just reading entries on Kevin Smith's blog on MySpace, (if you have not put in a friend request to him, I highly suggest doing so. He accepts everybody.), and I was surprised at the subject of one of the posts. Basically, he was mentioning that he was doing one of his famous, (or infamous, depending on your point-of-view on the subject), college talks. He did a 15-30 minute bit on Jason Mewes' battle with and victory over drug addiction. (He does a 9-part series on his blog about it called "Me & My Shadow". It will take a couple of hours to read, but it is well worth it.) A website called "thesuperfical.com" wrote up an article about the conversation, but the part of the conversation that became the focus of their story was the part when Kevin mentioned that Mewes told him that he had sex with Nicole Richie in a bathroom. Now, if that's all he was talking about, MAYBE this might be considered inappropriate college lecture speak. But for those who know the whole story, it was part of a bigger, more significant point Kevin was trying to make about the positive changes that have been made apparent by his friend's 3 years of sobriety. (I will admit that doing Nicole Richie may be considered, by some, not to be the wisest thing. It's not so much the who when you read/hear the whole story.)

After this website posted this story, the critics were in full force against Mr. Smith. What pissed me off more than the story being taken out of context, was that when people who were actually there tried to set the story straight, they were viciously attacked for doing so.One posted ,we found out later, had his post removed because it "upset some of the site's readers." I read the post in question. The stuff that was allowed was sooooo much more offensive. Why was if removed? Because the posters chose to believe the original story over the truth. THE TRUTH!!!

This made me think about one of my favorite comedians right now, Bill Maher. He has been labeled, as of late, as a "free speech martyr". This is not a self-proclaimed title, (like a certain pop star), and everyone from every political, social, and economical arena in America is calling him this. Why? Because he was fired from ABC for speaking THE TRUTH.

In a post-911 episode, he mentioned that destroying the towers was very very bad and unacceptable, but we needed to look at the fact bin Laden was once on our side. We trained him, and armed him. For saying this, he lost his show. Yes, 911 was a devastating day for us all, one that NEVER should have happened. But we do need to look at the reasons it did, no matter how unpleasant some of the reasons why might be.

I thought it was a sad day when "Falwell vs. Flint" had to go all the way to the Supreme Court to decide a simple free speech case that shouldn't have had to go that far just because some people don't have a sense of humor, (or, at lease, a twisted kind like Mr. Flint). I know I am not alone in wondering if on 911, along with the thousands of innocent people, free speech also died. That truly makes it a tragic day indeed.

A couple of weeks ago on South Park, they aired a two-part episode about this same subject. The story behind the episode was that they originally wanted to air an episode featuring an image of Mohammed. Because of the riots after the cartoon that ran in Denmark, Comedy Central told them they would not air it because they feared for the safety of people if it aired. The episode they wrote and aired was the response to this.

They chose to have another cartoon be the "offending" show, and had the people of South Park represent the American people. Their response to the image being broadcast was that the citizens of South Park were going to bury their heads in the sand when the episode aired, (literally). Butter's dad stood up at that time to say that the more the images of Mohammed are shown, the less threatening showing them becomes. That it had been so long since we have had to fight to defend our rights, we got comfortable. We now are faced with it, and it's up to us to do it. The citizens of South Park decided they rather stick their heads in the sand. This moment made me laugh and angry at the same time. It was a funny gag, and a commentary of the state of our country today.

To bow to their threats is their victory. It what they hoped would happen, and it did. I thought we were fighting them over there so we wouldn't have to fight them here, because they hate our freedom. Then things like this happen, and I think, "What freedom?" When something is important enough to defend, sometimes you actually have to fight for it. And people will get hurt and/or killed. It's the nature of the beast. I watched Iraqis go to the polls, risking death, to vote. I've watched student riots all over the world for basic human rights, risking harm to themselves. I watched on my 20th birthday as Nelson Mandela was released from prison for daring to speak up for his people. Freedom is not free, and when we are "asked to pay" for it, we would rather just give it up.

I hope that America still has some fighting spirit left. The optimist in me refuses to believe it's completely gone.

MySpace

Okay, so I joined MySpace a couple of months ago to see what the big deal is about. I created my page, asked friends to join, etc. Okay, it is kinda cool, but how much crap can one person put on a page? Trying to find things on some of these pages is an all-day event. Good grief, Charlie Brown.

Anyway, I asked my one daughters to show me how to do a background change to my page, since I've never been one to do anything without a little pizazz. (Just look at my personal website for that.) So, she shows me how to do that, and a few other things as well, and before you know it, I have one of those pages. It's freaking addicting. And, lets face it, they are asking you to reflect your whole personality on ONE page. Are any of us that simple? Funny how sometimes we become what we thought was so silly before.

Who comes up with this stuff...

Well folks, apparently Florida has a law in place that states after taking and failing your driving test 5 times, not only do you lose your driving permit, you can't reapply for it for a year. A YEAR!!! How do I know this, you ask. Simple, I have just become an example of this unknown-to-anyone-except-the-DMV law. It boggles the mind. Doesn't this make you wonder who makes up these laws to begin with. Especially when you take into consideration that Reckless Driving is a 60 day suspension, and DUI is only 180 days. Fail your driving test 5 times, 365 days. What are they, the driving Nazis? No driving for you. Come back in a year. Is anyone else as dumbfounded as I am?

Happy Holidays

I just want to wish anyone stumbling across my blog, (which would be stumbling since I haven't had the time to announce it yet), the happiest of holidays.