28 July 2004

Well, what's the divorce rate now?  Isn't it over 50%?  So wiping out 66% of marriages wouldn't be hard.  Maybe I'm on to something here...

See, the leap of faith thing is what I don't have under control.  I've a history of slightly over 2 year relationships that are working fantastically until they completely fall apart.  Admittedly, leaving for grad school or a job in North Dakota doesn't necessarily promote the future of things, but still.  So how can I have faith that things won't change that completely again?  I guess it boils down to doing your research and knowing the skills to work things out.  The list of questions is kind of like reading the Consumer Reports tests and talking to friends before buying a blender or VCR (okay, I know no one buys VCRs anymore).  You should have seen me before I bought my couch.  If you ever need information on furniture construction, I'm your woman!  I like to know the facts as much as possible.  And I'm not saying that two potential partners need to agree on everything, but shouldn't you know if you're at opposite ends of the expectation spectrum?  For example, if you want kids and your SO doesn't, that's mostly a break-it.  If you want to live in Manhattan and your SO wants the Green Acres life, also probably an unfixable disconnect.  But for all the in-between things, if you start out knowing that your on page 6 and your SO's on page 4, at least you have a baseline for where to begin discussions, which may make said discussions more productive.  At least you've discussed before whether you should pay cash or use credit for major purchases.  There will always be surprises, and there will always be disagreements, but if you have a history of being able to work things out, you have something to draw on.  I guess that's the important part: can you communicate with this person you're proposing to spend the rest of your life with??  Honestly?

I've a phone growing out of my ear today.  I'm tired and cranky and need a nap and still love my job.  Life is weird.

So, as far as your technological utopia, I've found a piece of it.  I finally admitted that, if I wanted valuable advice on how to deal with my SO's kid, I was going to have to look at sites with the dreaded "stepmother" in the title or description.  Denial is a powerful thing, and since I'm not in any way ready to consider marriage, it was scary.  Regardless, I found a step-parents message board that includes other people like me (i.e. those dating a parent) and other people experiencing the exact same b.s. that I am!  It was amazing to talk to some of these people!  Just knowing that neither my situation nor the kid's reactions to me are unusual is great.  Not great that other people have to deal with teenagers, just great that I'm not somehow evil.

26 July 2004

Indeed, information is truly power.

Remember the post-marriage mantra: "It's not like I thought it would be..."

Following your rules (not that they don't make perfect sense, mind you), I reckon you'd wipe out about 66% of current marriages.  A quick glance at a popular dating site shows many people look to have taken your advice, and by that I mean mostly the now 23 yr old girls who previously got knocked up (sometimes twice over), and the guy fled the scene without even giving the expected honorary marriage a first thought.  Jeez.

Just keep in mind that you'll never be able to reason it all out.  Try as you might, when it comes down to it, you'll still have to make a leap of faith in trusting someone to spend the rest of your life with or until such point as one divorces the other and runs off with a younger model, whichever comes first.

So the Democrats are up first, starting today.  My decision tonight will be whether to watch the convention, wrasslin', or Seth MacFarlane hosting his favorite Family Guy episodes.  I imagine I'll be doing a bit of channel surfing. BTW, I now own all the Family Guy episodes released up to this point, and after listening to the commentary on the first DVD, I can only say that that show could easily have been MORE offensive than it ended up.  These guys are pretty hard core.
I think anyone who cannot debate an issue which he or she feels strongly about is worried that her/his position is tenuous.  I don't see any reason that debate on how you feel about something is wrong -- but you have to be open to new facts that may change your feelings, and you must be debating with someone who respects your feelings.  We are insecure in our own convictions if someone else's view is that threatening to us.

What kind of questions do we no longer ask, in view of marriage?  The rise of individual power trumping that of the couple is both good and bad.  If I am more important than my (hypothetical) marriage, fine.  But in return for that power, should I not also bear the responsibility of choosing a mate who looks as though he is going in the same direction as I?  Yes, things don't work out sometimes.  No one should be abused, mentally, emotionally, or physically, in a relationship.  No one should be neglected.  No one should have to stay married to an addict who isn't interested in getting help.  But on the flip side, no one who hasn't considered life with another person seriously should be allowed to get married, as it is to the detriment of the institution.  How many people get married thinking they can change their spouses?  How many couples tie the knot without discussing children, finances, life goals, housing preferences, etc.?  How many people get married knowing that divorce is always an option if it doesn't work out?  I don't know, but it seems like a lot of people have these preventable problems.  I think I'll solve it by not getting married until I'm 40.  Of course, I'm proposing 40 as a date when I should know something about life.  I thought that about 25, too, so I'm guessing I'm probably wrong.

Information is power.

23 July 2004

I mean, the deal on gay marriage is... when it comes right down to it, we're talking about a degree of weirdness that most of us just aren't ready to deal with, point blank.  Doesn't make it right, because it's not.  The typical questions that is raised is "what does a gay couple teach their children about men and women and relationships?".  Now as I'm sitting here thinking about it, I'm realizing more and more that I really can NOT justify being against such a thing.  I'm no devout religious man, so I definitely won't go with the "because God says it's wrong" mentality.  As I mentioned before about being a minority and understanding how this issue is much the same as interracial marriage, I guess I really can't oppose gay marriage.  I wouldn't want them to come back and say okay, well, interracial marriage is wrong too, because it's not "normal".  I think honestly, the only reason I had any negative reaction to it at all was still residual emotions from one of my earliest dates with my ex, when we went to Universal Studios... but during Gay Week.  If you haven't experienced that, it basically comprises 80% gay people wearing about 8% clothing.  And these folks were taking the opportunity for all it was worth, lots of over the top PDA and all that.  Now on one hand, I can't say I blame them considering they're typically barred from PDA because us "normal" folks don't like to see that.  But it was a bit over the top.  And, as usual, I digress.  So this Republican says: GAY OK, marriage-wise.  NEXT TOPIC!

Actually, more on the same topic... "traditional" marriage is quite a concept.  We've done a good job these days of wrecking the most sacred tradition of all.  Although I think in years past, people just weren't allowed to get divorced, even if it would be better for one or both.  But I certainly agree with you that we don't take it nearly as seriously as we should.  Poo on us.  When you and I get married (not to each other, of course), we'll show 'em how it's done.  My eyes have been opened more and more to the horrors of divorce, or really, the horrors of thinking you knew someone only to have them turn into some sort of demon, and it is truly a terrible terrible thing when done wrong.  Again, I digress.  NEXT TOPIC!!

Is the power of the individual dead?  I mean, there are plenty of examples where one person could and has made a difference... but do you believe that people in our current society believe they can make a difference?  Do you believe that they feel their beliefs are worth fighting for?  Are we in a situation where the people in power in our country are SO powerful, the average person thinks it's suicide to oppose them?  NEXT TOPIC!!!

You have to wonder at the mentality of the "you're either with us, or against us" crowd.  Are they afraid of a world in which their ideas are wrong?

This is getting good... if we can keep this up, I may no longer be able to call myself an uninformed voter...
The constitution should NEVER be used to take away rights.  It is supposed to grant us rights and limit what can be taken from us.  What I don't understand about the opposition to gay marriage is that people who oppose it keep citing "traditional" marriage.  What I think they mean is the return to Victorian ideals that happened in the 1950s, the Donna Reed ideal (which, as nicely showcase in a Gilmore Girls episode, Ms. Reed herself didn't even live up to -- she fought and gained creative control in her career: very unwomanly).  In some "traditional" marriages, there is more than one wife.  Or, the woman has no right to leave, own property, or have control of her own body.  It is only in recent (read: post-1960s) that rape within marriage has been considered a crime.  If anyone should be blamed for the decline of what we consider "traditional" marriage values, it should be the heterosexuals of the country who, despite our intense media focus on weddings, have forgotten that marriage should maybe be taken seriously.  Blame Hollywood for its 3,000 broken marriages.  Blame Britney for her really deep and meaningful committments.  Regardless, though I'm not gay, how does the legal union of two women who love each other detract from my decision to marry a man?  How does someone else's love corrupt my own?  Lack of logic.  There was a really great Salon.com article on this, but I've lost it.

I'll look up the CDC condoms stuff for you.  It's out there somewhere, as it was recent.

I didn't disagree with anything you said, really.  What I disapree with is our lack of ability to communicate in this country, thereby creating a "with us or against us" mentality that says if you disagree with the powers-that-be, you must be wrong.  Now THAT'S un-American.

22 July 2004

Then it seems like we're pretty much stuck with the Global Ghetto.  In my own quest to find snippets of the truth, I ran into many who seem to have arrived at the same conclusion I have in that truth will most likely never be found.  Gotta look anyway, though.

Don't get me started on "reality" TV.

The Dixie Chicks forgot who their audience was.  I want to feel bad for them, but I kinda think they should have seen that coming (Can't go around screaming "DIE, NIGGERS!!!" at your local NAACP convention, y'know?), not that they necessarily deserved what happened to them.    But I do agree that we can't go around silencing anyone that speaks out against the Powers That Be.

Okay, now I have some examples of being force-fed morality.  Problem is, I don't know much about some of these issues.  Toss me some links, if you will, to places where I can start looking, or if you're up to it, explain to me what these are about in your own words.  But I'm thinking the general gist is these affairs got hit with a Right (wing) cross.  What is this about the CDC websites being changed?  Last I knew, condoms were 97% effective, right?  Has that changed?  And no longer supplying condoms to folks in Africa helping to fight AIDS definitely doesn't sound right, what's that all about?

Now the whole deal with defining marriage to be between a man and a woman and nothing else... the conservative side of me sees very quickly one or two reasons why you might want to do that, the liberal side acknowledges the inherent unfairness of doing so right away (and as a member of a minority group, I understand even more how wrong such a thing can be).  I'd like to say I'm all for it, and... you know what... I'm going to pass on this one for now... let's move onto something I can talk about a bit more easily.

Ask yourself... what are the sources of apathy?  I think many of us that are apathetic fall into my category: people who try to discover the truth, but find themselves pinned between two opposing forces screaming at the top of their lungs that their side is the right side.  They will bring countless references, argue semantics, and typically insult each other to no end.  You want to go one way or the other, but you fear there's one little piece of evidence that you just aren't aware of that makes your choice the wrong one.  Others feel like there is no such thing as the power of the individual.  One person can NOT make a difference.  One voice will NOT change anyone's mind.  It is difficult to not feel like a small fish in a big ocean.  Still others simply don't care enough to get involved.  Life is much simpler and stress-free that way.

I'm not sure which one (if not all) of my points you DISAGREED with, but I realize some of what I typed does not actually make sense the way I intended it, case in point the #3 statement in my quick note about hating talking about politics:  I was shooting for something along the lines of disagree with the war, but support the troops; disagree with the man, but support the office... that sort of thing.  I would hate to see us still divided by party lines to the point at which we don't even work together to make things better, which is the direction I'm afraid we're headed in.  Too many people want to yell at each other, not enough want to help solve the problems.

Time to head for the pub.  I'll be looking for your response.  Remember, I'm looking to be educated here, to think about some issues I've never really had to think about before.

The problem with the global village is that Truth is not an ideal of those who created and participate in it.  We are not, in general, media savvy cultures -- we buy too much of what we see and hear without looking at the ingredients.  Thus, it sounds like Moore has allowed people to do just that.  He hasn't been shy about saying that what he's putting out is NOT a documentary, so at least he's not perpetuating the reality tv myth (another example of our gullibility, frankly -- whether you enjoy them or not, they are not reality).

Point number 2, where I am allowed to disagree, is the one that I think is currently missing in our debates (not ours personally, but ours in general).  The rise of McCarthy-like silencings of opinions (read: Dixie Chicks backlash, for example) is not what makes our country great.  Dissenting opinions can breed dialogue, if allowed to.

Examples of being forced to accept someone else's morality: the fact that we've cut off family planning moneys to China because some doctors still perform abortions.  The fact that we no longer allow certain groups fighting AIDS in Africa to purchase condoms, because condoms might encourage unmarried people to have sex (so we lie, and say they aren't effective, EVEN TO OUR SELVES -- CDC websites were revised!).  The social services centers forced to offer marriage counceling to poor, single parents.  Not childcare, career education, or even parenting classes; classes on why being married is better than being single.  The Defense of Marriage Act and the proposed constitutional amendment to "define" marriage.

I DISAGREE.  There may be no truth, but there are issues at hand, and I have opinions and thoughts on them.  You can even call me a flip-flopper (which, for the record, Bush is, too).  I think about these issues, I find new information, and I (gasp!) change my mind.  Apathy is the death of the soul.
Okay, I'll say it once again, and shut up about it thereafter:

I detest talking about politics.

But I'm learning a lot since taking time away from actually working to search for the Truth(tm).

1) As a Republican, I feel it is my duty to support the President and my party and what he/they stand for in as much as I can do so.

2) As an American, it is my duty to seek out the truth and go against the President or my own party if I discover I have reason to.

3) Should Kerry (or whoever else) win, I am prepared to support him 100% as the new President, and put all this bipartisan crap by the wayside.

I can only hope the majority of folks is thinking along the same lines.  I challenge anyone reading this to do their best to look at the election from both sides, taking account of the pros/cons of each.
A couple quick notes while my research continues...

A) One mistake Michael Moore makes is not encouraging people to find truth by examining both sides of the story, he seems to implore folks to take him at his word, and commonly denounces those of the "conservative" ilk.

B) You should read at least part of the 9/11 report that came out today.  Check CNN.  I've just been reading the Chapter 12 "What to Do? A Global Strategy" part... very informative...
The quest for the truth continues... so I visited the other side of the F9/11 coin, the MOOREWATCH website.  Aside: Have you ever noticed that any internet forum discussion (like this one) typically degenerates into the most hateful insult tossing contest?  It will literally take me right up until election day to sort out this mess.  But hey, I'm learning something.  Actually, I'm learning a lot--like ways to insult French, German, and American people, for one thing.

Allow me to explain why I've pretty much adopted a "can't trust anything" type attitude... it all started when I was a wee little lad, and it was the time of the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill scandal.  It didn't take my young mind very long to understand that the one thing that would NOT result from that trial was anyone ever finding out the truth.  Same thing with OJ, and there are millions of other examples.  In this latest case, the debate over the validity of F9/11, it hasn't taken me long at all, just a quick peek at MOOREWATCH and clicking a couple links, to realize that we will never know the real truth.  Bush lovers:  WRONG.  Kerry lovers: WRONG.  Impartials: WRONG WRONG WRONG, but at least they have the sense to stay out of this madness.  Talk is ever so cheap.  It never ceases to amaze me how many people think they KNOW what's going on outside the scope of their own personal influence.

Let me get straight to the point.  This is what America has become, one big huge Linda Ronstadt concert.  Don't forget, mind you, that not three years ago, we came as close to eradicating racism/sexism/name-your-ism in this country as we ever have before, at the relatively cheap cost of 3,000 or so lives.  Then we came to our senses and realized that we almost started caring about each other.  Since such a thing is apparently not possible in this country, we reverted to our old ways, and now find ourselves nearly split down the middle over this whole Bush thing.  Aside: I'll tell you what I want... I want what's best for my country, whatever that happens to be.  I do not personally believe in the power of the individual in this particular issue, therefore I can only hope for the best.  Again, I feel it necessary to applaud Michael Moore for one thing and one thing only: he got the ball rolling.  Whether it turns out he was right or wrong, he at least forced the issue to the forefront, where it should be.  I will continue to poke around both sides' websites, hoping to gain a glimpse of the truth--wish me luck, because I'm damn sure going to need it.

Poor me.  When I was young and idealistic, I dreamed of the Global Village through Technology.  A paper on that very vision netted me a scholarship to GT.  We now live in the Global Village.  Problem is, it seems to have amplified everything it touches.  Certain good aspects are even better.  How easy is it now to keep in touch and share our lives with our loved ones and friends through email and instant messaging?  Think of how quickly you can access information on just about any topic through the web.  Certain bad aspects have become horrific.  How much easier is it for the less scrupulous to prey on non computer-savvy folks through identity theft and deception?  The con man's game requires little to no skill these days.  Same with hacking.  Same with people who came up with pop-up ads.  Same with people who peddle pornography and care nothing for how easily a child could access it, the hits go on and on... and God Bless Free Speech, but oh the things I have seen written on the Internet... it's a hateful world out there.  When did my Global Village become the Global Ghetto?  About the same time the idealistic side of me died, actually.

I still have a Dark Side, you know.  I've tried to be cheery about life and encourage others to do the same, mostly falling on deaf ears or people thinking I just want to make myself feel better by making them feel bad about their own lives.  I just refuse to give into despair because I've been there, and that's nowhere you want to live.  This is more of where I'd like for people to be.  But I'd rather they wanted it for themselves.

21 July 2004

EVERYTHING YOU KNOW IS WRONG!

20 July 2004

Oh, I almost forgot.  The ghost of Susan attempted to contact me a couple days back, but I wasn't there.  I just know that she's out there, somewhere, fighting evil in her Mini.  And that thought alone makes it easier for me to sleep at night :)
Thought that would get your attention.  Truth is, I've already switched parties once, from Independent to Republican.  The Communist party is looking better all the time, but I think for my next change I'll either go Tory or join the Federalists.
 
I do likes me some war-mongering, but you gotta at least have a good reason.  Perhaps we should go Red Dawn on everybody else's asses.  At least they should create G.I. Joe in real life.  Not only did they keep the world safe from terrorists with really bad taste in uniforms, they taught children valuable life's lessons.
 
Elaborate on your problem with being subjected to someone else's morality that doesn't necessarily agree with your own thoughts on the subject.  Give me some examples.  As far as the environment, according to Arctic something or whatever on the Discovery Channel (in HD!!!), we're all doomed by 2050 anyhow, thanks to Global Warming, so it probably doesn't matter what we do from here on out.  Maybe, just maybe, if we time it right, we can destroy ourselves with nuclear war at the same time as polar flooding from Global Warming, right before the freaks of nature created through genetics come to eat our brains.
 
From what terribly little I know about this John Edwards guy, he seems like he's pretty okay, folks seem to like him.  Dunno about that other guy--what was his name? Cucumber?
 
The best slogan for peace I've ever heard (borrowed from the original Megaman):
 
"Fight, Megaman!  For everlasting peace!"
 
I know I'm being a tad silly in this post, but I don't have any good hard facts to contribute to the discussion right now.  But at least now you know...
 
...and knowing is half the battle!
 
GI JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOE!!!

19 July 2004

GPO4LIFE??  Bullshit.  Same goes for DEM4LIFE.  Philosopher for Life, maybe.  Buying a party line is like buying a religion: great if you've put some thought into it, but it can't last because things change.  If you reason out your best course of action through life, your ideas will change, as do everyone else's.  Hence politicians and political parties change, become mutable, and sometimes switch.... creepy, eh?
 
I don't like Bush, but it is more than that.  I don't like our current administration's policies regarding the world neighborhood.  We're the bully on the playground, and also the hall monitor at the same time.  Bad combo.  I don't like someone else's morality being shoved down my throat (while telling me what I should or shouldn't be shoving down it...).  I don't like the disregard for science regarding global ecology, reproduction, diseases, etc.  I don't know that Kerry will be better.  What I do know is that I like the hope and optimism of Edwards, and that he seems to be a safer, Southern gentleman version of what I liked about Kucinich (who is still in the race, in case anyone else still cared).  I don't want fear-mongering and war and doom.  (I like the Red Dawn idea, but because it amuses me.)  I would like to see peace and growth and progress.  Ah, how much can you tell I spent over 3 years in Eugene??
 
Okay, back to the Monday grind.  Yea.

16 July 2004

Puny woman, you not oppose me. Man always right.

So go see it already. I want a different opinion on Moore's moviemaking style.

In response to your comment regarding our apparent inability to run our own country--you have to wonder if we're in a situation where quick/easy fixes can be done, but they just aren't for reasons unknown, or if we're in a situation where things are so complicated that there are no quick/easy fixes. That said, I'm all for the "you can't love someone else if you don't love yourself" style of foreign policy.

On a related note, you also bring up a good point about fear versus caution. Where exactly do you draw the line between Big Brother and Anarchy? Like a good little American, my initial reaction to the Patriot Act was to think "well I'm no terrorist, I have nothing to hide". But after giving it more thought, it would be a shame for us to go against the very principles we fought so hard to attain in the first place. Seems to me like a damned if you do/damned if you don't situation. You have to wonder how we could have been so carefree and lax about the situation pre-9/11, and I think everyone realizes just how lucky we are to still have a country. Those guys came pretty close to starting a chain reaction that would have ended life as we know it (I mean REALLY ended life as we know it). I mean we're talking Rebel forces attacking the Death Star type stuff.

A friend and I bemoaned the fact that we never thought we'd live to see the end of America right after 9/11. Now, that possibility seems likely. I mean every civilization gets wiped out in the end, no matter how advanced, and we're still an infant as far as countries go. I always had money on some sort of racial rebellion or major race war ending it all, not to mention the ever-popular "Red Dawn" takeover. I still expect to see comunnist troops dropping in out of the sky, eventually. Who knows, maybe we'll have our own Boxer Rebellion. I'd love to run around corporate skyscrapers grabbing everything in sight.

Anyway, it's good to see things around here heating up, and these types of discussions will serve as part of the basis for my vote in November. So I don't know where everyone else got to, but speak up even if it's only to reiterate the common BUSH SUCKS GO DEMOCRATS type sentiment.

It's time to head home, I'll type more this weekend--GOP4LIFE!!!
Not having seen it, the best possible thing is that F9/11 is actually getting some people talking.    Granted, some of them are just ranting, which is different.  The dumbest thing I've seen/heard so far was some CNN or Fox News talk show where three movie critics were debating the differences and successes of F9/11 and The Passion.  WHO THE FUCK CARES?  Aren't we talking apples and oranges there?
 
Isn't it funny that we can make so many good sexually-oriented jokes with just the names of our current, extremely conservative, "save sex for marriage" administration?  I love that.
 
Anyway, I agree with you about Iraq -- we cannot just leave.  I do think several of the plans (though not being a strategist, I can't comment on their feasibility) presented by the Democratic candidates that increase the UN's involvement and somewhat decrease the U.S. presence sound like a good idea, in general.  This is now a world problem that we made worse (we didn't create it, but we exacerbated it) and we have some major responsibility, but we shouldn't think we can run everything.  Hell, we can't even run our own country very well; haven't for years.
 
Fear and caution are two very different things.  We must be cautious in daily life.  It pisses me off, but women are constantly told that they must be even more vigilant than men, because men prey on us sometimes.  Regardless, I refuse to change my daily life because of fear.  Granted, my fear of heights has kept me from hang-gliding expeditions, but it hasn't kept me off ladders or roofs.  I love that part of my job!  But I think beyond the media, we do have a very negative, fear-mongering group running at least part of the B-C campaign.  We are to fear terrorists enough that we allow Ashcroft access to our library records, phone calls, and emails.  Well, fuck Hoover, but that makes me want to check out all the banned books I can find and talk smack about the power in this country, as is my right as a U.S. citizen, protected by the very constitution that we are proposing to amend to take away some human rights.  What bullshit. 
 
I think people are basically decent, but politics, power, and mis/un-education make idiots of us all.

14 July 2004

Oh good grief, I figured you watched it LONG ago. Well--I say run, don't walk. I'm not sure what you're looking for from it, but at the very least it makes you think about the current situation. I have to admit I was a bit appalled by folks who were cheering through the entire thing, especially at the end. There are parts of the movie that are pretty funny, but overall, it ain't exactly the feel good movie of the year. As I'm sure you noticed, it pretty much pissed me off on several fronts. Enough about it for now, you need to go see it first before we can discuss it further.

I tried being apathetic and not voting before, but I think that's NOT the way to go. It really is your duty as an American to vote, and to be at least somewhat informed when you do. If we aren't going to be off fighting wars, it's the least we can do.

Problem with Iraq (at least one problem, anyway) is that now that we've started it, we can't just leave it. I'm no military expert, but something tells me it'll be years before American troops really leave Iraq, no matter what happens in the election. That is, provided we don't suffer from the purported large-scale terror attack they say is coming soon, OR we don't decide to get pre-emptive on the next country on the "Axis of Evil" list.

Blogger's Note: Did I mention I despise talking about politics?

The one thing I totally agree with Michael Moore on is the common theme through both F9/11 and Bowling, and that is that the mass media is mostly responsible for creating an atmosphere of fear in this country. I find myself wishing for the good old days when all I had to hear was "suspect is a black male" 2-3 times a day on the TV news. If there's a good side to all the constant threats of death on TV, it's that we probably are de-sensitized to it now. I think people are tired of being scared. You just can't live your life that way. And if we can't be scared, the terrorists can't win.

I'll say this... if Bush really is head of the Evil Empire(tm), he hasn't read The Rules For Being an Evil Overlord very carefully. Michael Moore should have been eliminated long ago, F9/11 should never have been made, much less released. The Bush PR machine is worthless, having no answer for all the accusations levied against him. I can only guess that these folks somehow thought the American people were SO stupid, we'd actually believe everything we were told without any proof to back it up. I can appreciate Evil, but not when it is Dumb.

The only Dick I trust is My Own.

13 July 2004

I still haven't seen F 9/11. I need to go before it leaves our one sad theatre (we do have two, but they don't share. But, in response to Mr. P:

I don't think everyone who votes Republican is an idiot. I think anyone who votes a party line, Dem, Repub, or Green, without doing a little research to at least find out what the issues are and what people stand for, should consider being apathetic and not voting.

I am NOT encouraging people not to vote; I am encouraging people to get engaged and to think! I didn't like Bush back in 2000 -- didn't trust him then, but now I have reasons not to. I support the troops, American and otherwise, who are fighting. But I think that if we truly support our troops, we should bring them home. They should not be off reenacting Matthew Broderick's War Games. That was Matt, wasn't it? There was an op-ed columnist who commented that he wouldn't feel a war was justified unless he had a good answer to give when a 7 year-old child of a solidier asked "why did my mom/dad go off to war?" We don't have that kind of reason here today. We have a lot of b.s.

I don't know that Kerry will be better. I admit to being cheered by his VP choice -- I like Edwards, have since I started following the Dems race this year. All I can do is hope that he is the shot of adrenaline that Kerry needs, because we do need a change here.

The only Bush I trust is My Own.

12 July 2004

BACK WITH A VENGENACE

I saw your precious Fahrenheit 9/11 this past weekend. Unlike some card-carrying Republicans, I'm not afraid to see the other side of the story. Let's just say the man makes some VERY interesting points. I'm not going to turn in my elephant for a donkey just yet, but I certainly will not support a war that appears to pretty much have been fought for all the wrong reasons. But I WILL support the troops that are still over there until they come home. Sounds like this Republican needs to do some research and find out why his party doesn't have better answers for what has already transpired.

As far as Michael Moore is concerned, I appreciate anyone that gets people talking about important issues. I appreciate anyone that seeks the truth and lets everyone know about it. I don't necessarily agree with the slant he gives to this latest film, and the parts of it that are staged (yes, I said it, staged) to provide the fullest tearjerker effect. I always want to see both sides of the story. Show me some soliders that actually made a difference. Show me some soldiers that do support the effort that aren't psychotic 18 year olds. (Blogger's Note: Nice, well-adjusted guys do NOT fight wars) Don't tell me that only the Republicans get all dolled up for a press conference. Don't tell me John Kerry is going to send HIS kids off to war. Look, I'll admit Dubya is pretty much an idiot--I guess I gave him WAY more credit than he deserved... mostly due to his father and me being a self-admitted uninformed voter. I think I wanted to believe in the system because of Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice, because of the historic import of the positions they are in. I figured Dubya is a moron, but at least he is surrounded by smart people. I hate that my vote allowed for the current situation. People were in the theater cheering like Michael Moore just insured a Democratic win in the election, like that's going to save the world. Don't give me that crap. Perhaps it is time for a change, and I may be all for it at this point, but no one has convinced me yet that the Democratic Party has the answer for everything. I still agree with this scene in Bulworth:

Angry black woman: Are you sayin' the Democratic Party don't care about the African-American community?

Bulworth: Isn't that OBVIOUS? You got half your kids are out of work and the other half are in jail. Do you see ANY Democrat doing anything about it? Certainly not me! So what're you gonna do, vote Republican? Come on! Come on, you're not gonna vote Republican! Let's call a spade a spade!

Not to mention agreeing with one of the other major quotes from that movie, that I won't repost here, but basically implores everyone to have... er... interracial relations until our children are so mixed ethnically that racism cannot possibly exist.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not here to bash Democrats, they're got the right ideas about a bunch of things. I just hate that this movie seems to get everyone thinking that you must be a moron to have voted Republican. It ain't that cut and dry. But y'all are welcome to try to convince me otherwise.