Two Days of Gore is Always Great

Wednesday night, Al Gore came to Portland for a two day stay. The big event was his book tour and lecture at Keller Auditorium (just a five minute walk from my apartment). I was on the fence about going, because the cheapest tickets were $45, which was a bit pricey for me...but on the plus side, the price includes a copy of his new book, Our Choice: A Plan to Solve the Climate Crisis. So, I decided to "splurge" if tickets were still available the day of the event. I'll consider it an early Christmas gift to myself.

In October 2006, Gore brought his An Inconvenient Truth "slideshow" presentation to the Rose Colosseum, which I was quite excited to see. I had already seen his documentary in theaters twice, but it was even better in person. Well, he pretty much presented everything the same way as he did in the documentary, so that was kind of surreal to watch (there were only a few differences that I could tell, but it was pretty exact in what he said, how he said it, and the order of the information). What made the event truly worth paying the price for was that he had a question and answer session afterwards. I remember one young man stating that he had created an online petition for people to add their names to if they want Gore to run for president in 2008. He told Gore that if he could get a million people to sign the petition, would Gore consider running? Gore, of course, thanked the young man for his kind words but indicated that he considered himself to be a "recovering politician" and couldn't foresee a future run.

Here we are three years later. Amazing how things changed. True to his word, Gore did not jump into the Democratic candidate pool once the new year began in January 2007. I knew that he wouldn't, mostly because by nature, Gore is loyal (out of all the politicians I've read about, Gore has the most similar personality as me, thus why I view him as a great role model for me as well as feel the most defensive whenever people criticize him for his personality). Like most people, Gore probably knew Hillary was planning to run in 2008 and the conventional wisdom was that she would be the Democratic nominee. Gore did not want to stand in her way. Had Gore run, though, I believe he would have won the Democratic primary and selected Obama as his running mate and won the election. Our country might even be better for it, as it would give Obama a great training ground for the presidency. Instead, we have an inexperienced president who has to clean up a huge mess and a rabid right seeking to bring his presidency down (though Gore most likely would have inspired the same right-wing outrages because they can't accept any Democrat as president).

I was actually relieved that Gore decided not to run again. He re-found his passion and is doing something vitally important for our planet. He is a true visionary leader and a global statesman (on par with Mikhail Gorbachev and Nelson Mandela). By stepping aside of national politics, he allowed the Democrats to have a historical and exciting primary season (I doubt we'll ever see an election as great and emotional and unprecedented as 2008) and we now have a young and energetic president who inspires people around the world.

As I watched the lecture, I couldn't help reflecting how different I feel now than I did in 2006. There was still some lingering pain over the 2000 election when I heard him speak during 2006's An Inconvenient Truth lecture tour. Now, I no longer felt it. We simply would not have a President Barack Obama without a President George W. Bush. Not that I will ever believe that Bush was the legitimate winner of 2000, but now that his administration is no longer part of our present, I'd just as soon bury Bushism in the past and focus on the future. Gore is probably glad that he won't have to clean up Bush's mess. He is doing what he most loves and it shows!

I waited outside Keller Auditorium until they let people inside. It was a crazy carnival atmosphere. Across the street from Keller Auditorium is a cool waterfall fountain that is a very popular place during the summer months (people are allowed to jump into fountains in Portland). On the upper level, there is also a park. In honour of Gore's lecture, a group of teabaggers were holding a "protest." A band was playing "patriotic" songs. The guy with the loudspeaker admitted that he was a paid operative of a group called Americans For Prosperity, which is a corporate lobbyist astroturf organization. He admitted that the teabaggers were from the Puget Sound (Portland's way too liberal for any teabaggers to feel comfortable in. Awhile back, even Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps brought his bigoted church group to Portland for a protest and failed to find an audience to agitate). The AFP guy said that he had the honour of meeting Rush Limbaugh and some other stupid comments. It was all "God", "freedom", "no taxes", and "the troops." I get the impression that those words are designed specifically to rally the faithful like Pavlov's dogs.

Other groups were protesting in favour of Gore. These included a group of environmentalists and sustainability groups. Even PETA showed up, in which one young lady dressed as Mother Earth and held a sign that inexplicably claimed "Gore loves meat more than me." I couldn't figure out the movtivations of one group of people that chanted as they marched: "What do we want? Global warming! When do we want it? Now!" They also had signs that said "$10 is too much" and other weird things. The paper mentioned that this group was actually making fun of the AFP and teabaggers, kind of like the Billionaires For Bush group that was seen at anti-war rallies.

At 6:30, I was glad to get inside, away from the crazies, get my copy of Gore's book and find my seat on the balcony level. It was a packed audience, though there were still some empty seats left in the upper balconies. I had an hour to kill, so I started reading the book. I couldn't help but think of Rush Limbaugh's gushing endorsement of Palin's book as "the best public policy book" he's ever read. Yeah, right. If Rush really wants to read a "public policy book", how about Gore's Our Choice? It is 415 pages (to Palin's 413) with double columns on the page and packed full of all kinds of environmental information. Its a very wonky book. That's what a real public policy book looks like, not Palin's petty, backbiting and score settling dish rag.

In Gore's introduction pages, he even mentioned the willful ignorance of certain people who ignore all the facts and documents that verify that Obama was born in the U.S. in favour of a forged birth certificate produced by a conspiracy theorist. His 2007 book The Assault on Reason covers in great detail the problem with modern politics when ignorant people mistake their uninformed opinions for being equal to the opinions of those who study politics in depth and made a career in the public realm. That's the problem with teabaggers. They mistake an uninformed opinion for the truth. Maybe it reflects our "reality show era" in which average Americans become instant celebrities because of a show created around their personalities. Sarah Palin is the natural outgrowth of this kind of aberration: when politics goes rogue.

For this lecture, Gore just spoke on the stage...entirely without notes. For ninety minutes. No slideshows, no illustrations on an overhead projection. Just Gore in professor mode. After 1992's Earth in the Balance and 2006's An Inconvenient Truth, I was actually shocked when I walked into Powells a few weeks ago and saw that Gore had a new book out. I didn't buy it then because of the advertisement of the upcoming Gore lecture that included a copy of his book with the ticket. What more could he say about the environment, I thought.

I can't remember when I first heard about Gore, but it might have been sometime between 1990 and 1992. I had bought his Earth in the Balance book at the Stars and Stripes bookstore at the Navy base in Naples in 1992 but I can't remember if I bought it before or after Clinton had selected him as a running mate. I was impressed with Gore's serious devotion to the environment. The book wasn't what I expected a politician would write, thus why he grew in my esteem as the politician I most admire. I knew then, after I read that first book, that I wanted him to be president someday and that I wanted to work for him. Though it never happened exactly that way, at least I was one of his 15 interns for a semester, in 2000. I'll always cherish that experience.

In the lecture, Gore talked briefly about the topics he covers in his book. He began his talk the same way as his 2006 lecture: "I'm Al Gore and I used to be the next president of the United States." I can't believe that line still gets laughs. When the laughter dies down, the follow up is, "I don't find that particularly funny." I'm glad that he's still joking about it, though.

His lecture was pretty heavy on the science, so I'll have to read his book and digest it all. Basically, too much carbon is not a good thing; we need a new energy grid that utilizes energy from multiple renewable resources (solar, wind, hydro, and geo-thermal); we need more electric cars; Portland is great and he loves coming here; and most of all, legislative action is the most important thing we must do to change our world. He criticized the U.S. Senate for being the least effective body for enacting visionary change (I've read that he never felt at home in the Senate the way someone like Ted Kennedy did). There was a funny moment when he almost censored himself on the word "evolution" until he said, "well, this is Portland, so I can say evolution, right?" He joked about a new Scopes trial in Tennessee conducted on climate change.

The most heartfelt moment was near the very end, when his voice cracked a little about how deeply he feels in the urgency of his message. It was a touching moment, as you get to see the man at his most passionate issue. Many have said that had he displayed this kind of passion in 2000, he would have won a more decisive victory over Bush. However much he wanted to talk about climate change, his handlers and pollsters saw it as a dead issue in the mind of voters at the time. I have plenty of beefs with his campaign operations, from the time I was an intern, when I joked with low level Gore staffers about the high cost operations of his campaign office on K Street in D.C. (where many lobbyist offices were located). I had suggested that he move to SE D.C., which caused one guy in the office to crack jokes about campaign staffers getting robbed to and from the office every day. Gore eventually moved his campaign to Nashville, though it didn't do any good. His home state of Tennesee voted for his opponent.

Near the end of his lecture, ushers collected slips of paper that was included in our programs to write down questions for Gore. It didn't take long for the question and answer session to begin, but disappointingly, only five questions got asked. I didn't turn in a slip of paper because I figured with that many people in the auditorium, someone would think to ask an interesting question and the chances of my question being asked was slim. The only question I remember was about Gore's personal influences in getting him interested in environmentalism. He said that it was growing up on the farm and learning about soil erosion from his father, and then having a mother who read a book to him at the dinner table when he was about 12 (the book is called Silent Spring, considered a classic among environmentalists). The third influence was a professor at Harvard who studied the effect of carbon on our environment and whose lectures captivated the young Gore.

On Thursday morning, I volunteered to help the Bill Bradbury for Governor campaign. Gore was attending a special fundraising event on behalf of Bradbury. Tickets were $25 or $40 at the door. $1,000 bought a special reception with Gore before the event, in which VIPs get to meet with him. I had emailed about attending the reception before I knew the cost. Of course, I mentioned my being a former intern of Gore, hoping that might get me in the door, but nope. Dang. Mentioning my internship helped get me VIP seating at a Bill Clinton event in 2008 when he spoke at the school my brother is a custodian at.

Anyhow, I volunteered and was able to see the event for free. Not bad. All I had to do was crowd control (directing people where to go). I got to meet a couple of interesting people whom I hope to be able to have the chance to speak with again at future political events.

The picture above is of Bill Bradbury. He served eight years as Oregon's Secretary of State. He was also part of the first group of 50 people of the 1,000 who were selected to get trained at Gore's farm in Carthage TN on how to do the climate change presentation. That he managed to get Gore to speak at a fundraising event for his campaign goes a long way in pushing me into the decided column.

As the governor's race started gearing up, I was actually bored with the choices. The big fish frontrunner is John Kitzhaber, who served as Governor from 1995 -- 2003. Why he wants to be a governor again is beyond me. Its seems like "been there, done that." However, he's still popular in Oregon, best known for being blunt and wearing what he damn well pleases (I believe jeans, regardless of the occasion). A female candidate whose name I can't recall was rumoured to run and if she had, I might've joined her campaign (my hope is that Democrats all over the country will run more female candidates in 2010 for governor, Senator, and members of Congress to put them in line for a future presidential campaign...since Hillary Clinton and Kathleen Sebelius will both be 68 in 2016, if I'm not mistaken).

The church members whose house I stayed in at Bend OR over Labour Day weekend knows Bill Bradbury personally. They vouched for his authenticity and said that he would make a great governor and they would support him. The only problem, though, was that Bradbury has multiple sclerosis (MS), so they don't know how that might affect him or what voters might think about that. I don't know enough about the disease to "disqualify" a candidate over it. Besides, the excellent show The West Wing dealt with a major storyline in President Bartlett disclosing that he had MS. For me, it would be a relatively minor issue. I'm more concerned about a former two-term governor wanting to get back into the governor's office again. I believe other people should have the chance to lead the state. He had his time and he should move on. However, Kitzhaber happens to be the big dog in the race, racking up endorsements and money and fawning press. He's the odds-on favourite to win. Thus, my hesitation to volunteer time on another losing campaign.

Early on, though, I read both campaign bio sheets, Facebook pages, and websites and my heart gravitated towards Bill Bradbury. His views seem more in line with my own political philosophy. So, I wavered between the two candidates in pondering who I would want to volunteer for. Now the moment of indecision is past. At the event on Thursday morning, Gore wholeheartedly endorsed his friend, Bill Bradbury. Gore gave some short remarks at the gathering, praising Bradbury, before giving the floor to Bradbury, who mentioned his own passion for the environment and wanting to make Oregon THE environmentally sustainable leader in the entire WORLD.

Bradbury also mentioned his being diagnosed with MS back in 1980 or so, and how that has not defeated him. He has managed it well over the years (through physical therapy and acupuncture) and it hasn't prevented him from serving in the state legislature or the Secretary of State office for the past eight years. He uses a Segway to get around these days.

The interesting thing about this upcoming governor's race is that Kitzhaber and Bradbury are also personal friends. In fact, Kitzhaber appointed Bradbury to a political position. Now, they will be rivals for the Democratic nomination in May 2010. In one news article, Bradbury was asked why he was "running against a tough contender like Kitzhaber." His response was awesome. He said, "Because I haven't been governor yet."

The above photo is Gore in his office at home in Nashville. When I saw that photo, my reaction was, "oh...he's one of those!" At work, our accountant guy retired recently. In the three years I worked there, I had never seen this guy's desk because it was buried under piles of paper.

At work, I like to keep my workspace neat, tidy and organized. Unfortunately at home, I am overwhelmed with paper and trying hard to maintain order against the chaos. However, I haven't been home much in the evenings during the week for several months. I don't know how or why my life became so full of activity, but it needs to stop. Or slow down. Too many interesting lectures, booksignings, church stuff, movies. This Thanksgiving, I hope to accomplish a lot at home. No interesting movies are being released for a few weeks. Perfect time to organize my things, read a few books, watch a few DVDs, and apply for more than a few jobs.

Wednesday's post might have been a little down, but it never takes long for me to swing back. A little bit of inspiration is all it takes, and since Gore is the politician I admire the most, that's a lot of inspiration over a two day period. I'd like to keep this good vibe going through the end of the year. I am always grateful to Gore for an influx of inspiration when I need it the most.

Working For a Control Freak

I wasn't going to write about this, but I figure that I might as well since I'm still ticked off about it. Last week, on Veteran's Day, I started feeling awful right after lunch. I kept sneezing like mad and then my nose got all runny for the rest of the day. Normally on a day like that, I'd go home straight after work, eat some chicken soup and rice, and jump into bed and call it a night (after reading a chapter or two in a few books I'm currently reading). But, since Applebee's was offering a free meal to veterans for that day only, I had to go or wait another year. The weather was cold and wet, so not pleasant to venture out in. Then I had to wait 20 minutes because the place was packed with military veterans of all ages.

My nose was leaking the whole time, so I'm going through tissues every minute or so. Another Navy veteran who is a member of the MAYAs group was also supposed to come, but he got an ear infection and missed out. It would've been a good opportunity to catch up as I haven't talked with him a lot lately since he got into a relationship. So, I'm there by myself, which I don't mind...if only my nose would stop running. I did enjoy the delicious meal (three cheese penne pasta with chicken). Since this Applebees is near a Dollar Store and Barnes and Noble, I decided to visit both those stores before heading back to my apartment. I got home late.

Thursday morning, I felt kind of awful, but decided to endure work and see how I felt around lunchtime. By lunch, I felt even worse, so I decided to take the rest of the afternoon off. Friday morning, I still felt sick, so I took a sick day. Though my apartment could use some organizing, and I could've made good use of a Friday to do so, I decided that rest was all I wanted to do. So, I slept most of Friday and most of Saturday as well. I was disappointed to miss out on a MAYAs event at the house of the family who took me to Bend Institute over Labour Day weekend. I was looking forward to an evening of listening to music, eating vegetarian meals, and having a discussion. This illness really struck at a bad time. By Saturday evening, I felt like the worst had passed. Interestingly enough, one lady at work had the same exact symptoms as I did and we got it around the same time, so something is going around at the office.

Anyhow, on Monday, when I got into work, my obsessive-compulsive control freak of a supervisor was acting even more controlling and intolerable as usual. She did not even ask how I felt, not once the entire day. She just lit into me with her list of demands, breathing down my neck and barking orders like some drill instructor at boot camp. Obviously, she was stressed out because I wasn't able to keep the work flow running smoothly. If one of us is gone, we usually get swamped, for it really is too much work for one person to manage. When she gets into her manic OCD moments, though, it really ticks me off. But I think I also make it worse because I'm too laid back in that I don't stress out over the things she stresses about. Management breathes down her back and makes the job a living hell for her, so she passes the shit down to me. I think she hates it when I don't share the same manic, overstressed frustrations she shares and it makes her even more mad.

On top of being an OCD control freak, she's also a workaholic. She's been known to take work home in the evenings and on weekends, even though she's paid hourly. She expects me to work when I'm sick, but thank God the Office Manager has more sense. She doesn't want a person at the office if they might be contagious! And if my supervisor expected me to work when I'm sick, I would make sure that I was contagious. There is nothing wrong with extra rest to get well. Our bodies are telling us something and we need to listen. I don't care at all about this job, so I'm not going to sacrifice my health because some paperwork isn't getting done.

Our work ethics are so different. I know she gets frustrated because I don't care enough about management or the work to bust my ass. There's a reason for it. For one, I was lied to when they offered me a job in August 2006. I accepted with the best intentions to help them through a busy season (which fall always is), but I knew that I had no plans to be there beyond a year or two. Now its past three years and I desperately need to get out of there. While I'm resigned to ending my year in this place, I really hope that I'll be out of there in January. My mental health really needs a major change of office environments. Yeah, it was good that the place fired the lady with bad energy (whom I had written about earlier this year) and that they moved my biggest nemesis to a different part of the office. However, I've done everything I can do in this place and it truly is long past time for me to move on. If God doesn't open a door or window soon, I'm going to bust a hole in the wall! I've done my time, now its time to get on with my international career!

The biggest reason for my office cool in not stressing out over the things management and my supervisor wishes I would stress out about is because this office is little different than the one I had worked in Atlanta for five years. Being numbers obsessed, that's all they care about. I've never been a quantity guy. EVER! I've always been about quality. Quality friendships. Quality relationships. Quality experiences. I've seen what the obsession with numbers can do and it left me jaded. For example, in my last job in Atlanta, that office's obsession with numbers led to a falsification of claiming 30,000 more youth members than existed in reality. For an organization that represented "80,000" youth in the Atlanta area, 30,000 fake kids is a huge chunk off that number! The office got busted when the media got wind of it in 2005. Enron wasn't the only organization falsifying numbers to look better on paper than in reality. That scandal, though, truly left me jaded and cynical about anyone who is obsessed with numbers.

I know from my economics courses in college that it is easier to measure quantity, thus why its the measure of business and organizational success. Unlimited growth is the aim, though science and reality teaches us that unlimited and unsustainable growth is virtually impossible. Boom and bust cycles are a pattern throughout history. Quality is hard to measure because people have different standards on what constitutes quality. Its far easier to keep track of the numbers (membership, donations, retention, promotion) than it is for the quality of the programs or the leadership.

On Monday, I was not in a good mood, though, because of the OCD supervisor and her unwillingness to back off a bit. Even though I like her for the most part (she has a kind heart), I'm beginning to think she's what some New Age spiritualists refer to as a "psychic vampire", which is a person who draws energy from you and just leaves you drained like you had the lifeforce sucked out of you. The "bad energy woman" who was fired back in April had told me that my supervisor fit the profile of a "Martyrdom complex." She recommended that I buy and read "The Bully at Work," which I did. I can see her point.

My supervisor does relish telling EVERYONE about her ongoing family drama. I've only worked with one person who had more drama going on than my supervisor and it was a guy at my previous job who couldn't go a single workday without a disruptive family crisis. In my current job, I have been shocked to hear my supervisor tell one co-worker about her family woes, then a few minutes later say the same exact story nearly word for word for another co-worker. Then yet another co-worker! She seems to get off on people knowing how deeply in crisis her family always seems to be in.

What I understand about a person with a "Martyrdom complex", is that its the feeling or need to be in control, of having people look at them and seeing all the sacrifices they make and how strong they are. Its a manipulative way to gain sympathy. At times, I have tried to point out that she is quite possibly attracting family crises into her life. She dismisses the thought, of course, because she claims that she does not have that kind of control. However, when I hear the sound of her voice when she tells co-worker after co-worker about her latest family drama, it does sound to me like she enjoys it.

According to the law of attraction, what you focus on, you will attract into your life. And if she suffers from a "Martyrdom complex" then that means, subconsciously, she is attracting crises into her family so that she can feel important for having fought and conquered them. Its an ongoing wave after wave of family drama. It even disrupts her work, though she tries to convince management and everyone else that she has everything under control.

My drama-free life would be way too boring for her. And calm. She wouldn't know what to do with herself. I know that many people believe that there is no possibility that a person can actually subconsciously attract crises into their lives. Things just happen. True. I once thought that way. However, I grew up in a drama-free family. I didn't really begin to understand it until I worked in close proximity to a guy at my last job where he had a personal family crisis happen every single day. It was annoying and unprofessional. Many people complained about it. In all my life, I had never worked with or met a person who had such drama / crisis going on every single day. I could tell that he loved it. He thrived on it. Maybe it made him feel like more of a man, taking care of the problems in his family, even if it came at the expense of work. I never understood how one could have so much drama, so that was when I started learning about what I now know as "law of attraction."

My supervisor doesn't believe in "law of attraction" because its what she would call "not doctrine." She's a blindly obedient Mormon lady and believes everything the LDS General Authorities tell members to believe. She's often obsessed with exact terminology, so even if we are discussing the same ideas using different words, she shows her OCD obsessions by insisting that her word is more correct. An example would be the word "rapture." She would insist that it must be called "translated" or "transfigured" (the Mormon term for that evangelical Christian concept of people "disappearing" into spirit). Another example is "eternal progression" (the LDS term), in which I prefer to use "evolution." That's just a couple examples. I wish I could think of a better one that clearly illustrates the disagreements we have over terms because of her insistence that the word she uses is more correct than a term a person in another spiritual tradition might use.

Because of her close-mindedness to any idea that does not originate with the General Authorities in her church, she won't entertain any possibility that her need to "control" (the work flow, her family, and me--her assistant) stems from the deep rooted feeling of how out of control her life really is. Its not easy to work for someone with OCD compulsions, where a personal crisis interrupts her work on a weekly basis sometimes (I don't think a month has gone by in the three years I've known her that something family related did not disrupt her work).

Its frustrating for me to be what I consider "her slave." I turn 38 at the end of the year and I keep asking God, "my life amounted to this?" When will my life begin to change? How much longer must I put up with this bullshit? It can't go on much longer because I am nearing a snapping point. I'm very concerned when I hear about people who snap (such as that soldier at Fort Hood recently). I try my best to figure out my own situation, to improve my own spiritual and psychological understanding, and to channel my rage into creative pursuits. But the time keeps on ticking. It is time for me to get on out of here. I have done my time. There is nothing left for me to do, to learn, or to be in this organization. Any day longer is a waste of my time, intellect, abilities, talents, and energy.

I was lamenting my current situation and anger at being dumped on by my supervisor on Monday when Christine called me. We had a nice talk. When I told her some of my frustrations, she was so kind and said the right things. For example, she said, "You've been depressed for a long time. But your depression is not like most people who get depressed and take pills. Your depression is situational, and even when you're depressed, you still want to accomplish things." She seemed impressed by my ability to maintain my dream of a writing and international career despite being depressed with my boring, low wage, and demeaning job in an organization I despise. What she said is certainly true, though I admit that my will to live is getting dimmer and dimmer the longer I remain in this job.

At some point, death may be the only way out...but not to worry. It won't come at my own hands. I will not allow this organization to defeat me that way. I am stronger and better than they are and I will walk out of there SOON with my head held high and never looking back. I will say "good riddance" to all of them and move on with my life. Christine mentioned that she was looking on my Facebook page and said that she was amazed by how much I have experienced life, with all the things I've done. Yes, my life does have a kind of "Forrest Gump" quality to it and I love that aspect of it. But I've felt for awhile now that my best days are all behind me.

When Christine leaves for the Netherlands in a couple weeks, I will be losing the person I consider to be my best friend in Portland...the one person I love hanging out with, talking to, and doing things with. It may be time to bear the financial burden and finally seek a psychologist to help me understand my situation. After three years and more than 32 self-help / psychology / spirituality books later, I'm still failing to understand why I am suffering through the longest, deepest, most despairing dark night of the soul of my life. When I can't see the light at the end of the tunnel after three long years, it is time to seek professional help before something snaps.

I wish God would answer just a few questions I keep asking. One is why the organization I'm working in. Why am I stuck there? I never liked this organization and never intended to work here long. It was always until something better came along (a writing or political aide career). I don't want another year to go to waste as the despair grows deeper if I'm still stuck in the same job three months from now or more.

The other question is, why direct me to BYU if all it did was get me deep in college loan debt without the larger salary a college degree supposedly promised? I'm financially worse off than I was in 1996. I'm pretty much a low wage slave until I land a better salary and I won't seriously seek a relationship that will lead to marriage until I'm in a career that pays a salary equal to my age or more (which will be $38,000 for 2010).

The final question I want God to answer is: Is there a place in this world for a person who values cooperation over competition? I'm not a competitive person at all. I hate it. I don't want to work in a corporation where people jockey for position and backstab in the climb to the top. I just want to do the work I'm passionate about and that my work ethic gets noticed by the right people who want me to work for them and thus hire me onto their team.

Most of all, though, I'm tired of my stagnant life and I want a change that I have requested since January 2007. My new mantra to God is now "Give me Liberty or Give me Death!" Being a slave to an OCD control freak is no way to live. I'm done. I'm through. She may be a nice lady who has suffered through too many personal crises, but I want my freedom to control my own work flow. There is no reason for her to treat me the way she did on Monday. Someday, in the spiritual realm when she has her life review, its going to be painful when she experiences all the emotions I feel when dealing with her unreasonable demands. I'm glad I'm not her!

Tomorrow's post will be more inspirational. I swear!

The Abstinence Teacher

Before I get to my review of the novel The Abstinence Teacher, I wanted to mention that once again, the conservative blogger who "awarded" me a "Demmy" (which I assume is its clever blending of "dummy", "Democrat", and "Emmy") has written about me on its blog. Like Average American's idols Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh, it can dish but it cannot take. I post one of its latest blog entries for the sheer hilarity, because it is whining about a liberal "attacking" it. Um...I never even heard of your boring ass blog until you made yourself known with a rather rude comment and personal attacks on your blog. But, I guess like your idol George W. Bush, you launch pre-emptive attacks against people you think don't know how to respond back. Wrong! So, I'm giving you some more time to look more idiotic on my blog.

Here's what "Average American" had to say:

As usual, liberal dems are attacking. Man, these people like the sound of their own voices, as if the massive MM echo chamber weren't enough for them! I must say, however, that the reason the blog seems so "skimpy" is that a LIBERAL computer hacker (likely a fellow Demmy recipient) wrecked my last blog and replaced it with this. Tasteful, indeed. I guess the only other worthwhile criticism this guy (?) makes is that my blog is lacking in images. This may be somewhat true, but it is because I write for a LITERATE audience. Unlike some liberal democrats, I read books. Lots of 'em. At least 2 or 3 every month. This is pretty good, especially considering that I work two jobs and participate in two sports and have two pets. But disgruntled Demmy winners (whiners) are nothing new. If only they would dream up something original to say!

1) No one has ever accused me liking the sound of my own voice. Good one!

2) Typical conservative...its always the liberal's fault. Take responsibility, man. Own up. I clicked on the blog link that supposedly got "wrecked" by a liberal hacker. Quite hilarious! "Clit commander!" Sounds to me like one of those dirty Karl Rove tricks, where you trash your own candidate's office and accuse your Democratic rival of doing the deed just to launch a criminal investigation.

3) And my blog isn't for the literate audience? Many people I know who have seen my blog always say the same thing..."its a bit wordy." Hey, I love to write. But the best blogs I've seen all have pictures, video links, blog rolls, and other cool things to make it stand out from the crowd. A blog with nothing but words isn't going to attract many readers...and judging from the amount of people that have clicked Average American's personal info, it looks like not many people are interested in it.

4) Most of my liberal friends and I read books. I have been in plenty of evangelical Christian homes, though, and the only book I saw was a Bible. Some might have other Christian type books, but I think its safe to say that the biggest book buyers aren't those who like to censor books and talk about how everyone else "needs Jesus."

Here was my response on Average American's blog:

Sansego said...

You're the one who "attacked" first...by the comments you made about me on your blog. I had no idea who you were until you outed yourself in a personal attack. You can dish but you can't take it, just like your beloved Quitter Queen.

Oh...and I love that "Clit Commander" thing. Hilarious!

I'll let you get back to your Ayn Rand and Book of Mormon now.

November 16, 2009 12:29 AM

I did peruse Average American's blog to get a better sense of the person and my impression is: conservative, young, Mormon male.

How did I get this conclusion? Well, Ayn Rand is someone who tends to appeal to adolescent males. Some wisely grow out of that phase. Those that don't become Karl Rove. The selfish narcissism of Rand's philosophy appeals to a certain male ego. Man is an island! I don't need anyone! I can make it on my own! I got mine, so screw you! Some would call this psychopathic. Next to the Bible, conservative young men do love their Rand. Interesting how an atheist woman who believes selfishness is the greatest human virtue can be seen as an equal to the selfless Jesus who sacrificed his own life. If Jesus was the hero of a Rand novel, he would have told God where to go and not have been crucified on the cross. He would have single-handedly defeated the entire Roman Empire like some hyper-masculine Schwarzeneggerish Hollywood action flick hero.

How did I know "Average American" is a Mormon? Well, I'm basing it on a post entitled "Adam-ondi-Ahman." Only a person of Latter-Day Saints heritage would be familiar with that term, and it mentioned making a pilgrimage there, as well as referencing "Joseph." To me, this was the insight I needed to understand "Average American." Remember, "Average American" discovered my blog through a Google search and did not like what I had to say about the last days in connection to the apocalypse and 2012. This blogger then wrote on its blog that one cannot be a Christian if one did not believe literally in the entire Bible. This person also accused me of "self-hatred" for being a Christian veteran with liberal views.

Let's talk about "self-hatred", shall we? Who self-hates? A Mormon who won't admit to its Mormon beliefs because it wants to appeal to the larger evangelical Christian conservatives, that's who. I've never understood why Mormons continue to be in a political party in which a vast group of evangelicals and fundamentalists HATE you and think you belong to a cult. Its the same with gay Republicans and perhaps even with Jewish Nazis (as one movie a decade ago tried to explain).

Being part of a political movement in which you cannot be who you really are, where you have to hide your religion because if you share, you'll be ostrasized, made fun of, rejected and proselytized, I just don't get it. And here I am, a tolerant defender of Mormons. I am the one person who would tell an evangelical Christian that Mormons are Christian, not cult members. But, that's not good enough. No, this self-hating Mormon had to pick a fight with someone just because it did not like my views on the Christian mythology of endtimes.

So, this is just one more reminder how foolish conservative people are. They pick allies with people who hate them because they all share in the hatred of liberals. At least on my side of the political aisle, I can be in a coalition with Buddhists, Muslims, Christians, Jews, atheists, humanists, Hindus, and other religions and there is no hating going on because we all respect each other's beliefs (the nature of liberalism is a tolerance for those who don't believe as you do). I feel sorry for someone like "Average American." Honestly, I hope you find the peace and acceptance among your evangelical Christian brethren. At least do them all and yourself a favour: be honest about your Mormon faith. Man up for your religion. Be a stripling warrior for your prophet!

Anyhoo, on to the book review...

Recently, I had the urge to read Tom Perrotta's The Abstinence Teacher and I finally read the last hundred pages this past weekend. When I bought this book, I was torn between buying that one or American Wife (the one about the novelist's interpretation of Laura Bush's marriage to George W. Bush). I'll be reading American Wife next.

The Abstinence Teacher intrigued me, though, because of the clash of narratives that is current in our culture. The novel is about Ruth, a divorced mother of two teenage girls, who is a sex education teacher at a high school in some undisclosed medium-sized town in a northeastern state (perhaps Hartford CT?). The other main character is a born-again Christian guy named Tim who coaches the girl's soccer team that one of Ruth's daughters plays for. The story gets set into motion pretty quickly when Ruth finds herself in serious trouble with the school administration for answering a student's innocent question about why some people engage in oral sex. Ruth's response was: "Some people enjoy it."

This causes a concerned group of parents to enforce an abstinence only curriculum on the school and if Ruth wishes to keep her job, she has to teach the materials she does not agree with. This leads to interesting and hilarious classroom scenarios, in which teenagers act out situations for the rest of the class. She finds herself in hot water again when she answers a student question by referring to planned parenthood for accurate information that she's not allowed to tell the class.

At a remedial class for teachers who disobey the strict guidelines of abstinence education, the prissy born again lady who introduced the curriculum has the four teachers write essays about a sexual experience they regret and demands that they share the essays to the group. Ruth believes that this is where the lady gets her sexual horror stories that she shares with adolescents at special forums to scare them into abstinence. We all know how effective teaching abstinence is. Just ask Sarah Palin! She pushed this agenda on schools and her own teenage daughter got pregnant. I'd love to make her read this novel, but she'd probably put it on the list of books to ban. There is an interesting statistic in which states that teach abstinence only tend to have a higher rate of teenage pregnancies, abortions, and sexually transmitted diseases. Coincidence?

The other part of the novel focuses on Tim, who finds himself in a controversy of his own making when he spontaneously offered a prayer after a victorious soccer match. Ruth embarrasses her daughter by making a scene and yelling at the coach for improperly using his influence as coach to proselytize his faith on his impressionable team. In the backstory, the reader learns all about Tim's own struggles with addictions that lead to the demise of his marriage and his isolation from his own daughter (also an adolescent who is a member of the same soccer team).

His struggles to deal with his addictions led him to an evangelical church with a charismatic pastor named Dennis. In one amusing aside, the reader learns that Pastor Dennis has his own problems, as he once trashed a Best Buy he had worked at during a stressful day, which ultimately led him to reject the empty materialist lifestyle in favor of born again religion. Throughout the novel, he's called "Pastor Dennis" and he holds an unbelievable influence on his flock. A few might think of him as a bit too nosy about what the people in his church do.

As I read this portion of the novel, I couldn't help but think of one of my own uncles, who was the most wild of the five boys my grandparents raised. Before he and his wife became born again Christians in the late 1980s, they were big Harley Davidson enthusiasts. When I was in the seventh grade at Logan Fontenelle Junior High School in Bellevue, Nebraska, my uncle and aunt had embarrassed me by showing up to my Speech class's performance of the play "A Triumph for Trimbley" (I had a small non-speaking part as a reporter taking notes). My uncle, aunt, and their two daughters all wore Harly Davidson t-shirts and leather pants / jackets.

After they became "born again", though, they eventually left the family church (the Community of Christ) for some evangelical church. Now, all my uncle seems to talk about is "Pastor Dave this", "Pastor Dave that." My dad thinks it sounds like a cult the way his brother lets the pastor run his life. Even more outrageous, though, my aunt was the one who "put the fear of hell" into my grandfather during his last couple weeks on earth by asking him to "accept Jesus as his Lord and Saviour." My grandfather, a deacon in the Community of Christ for decades, may not have talked religion much, but he lived his faith. It irked me that my uncle, who was raised in the church, and his wife, who converted from Catholicism to be a member in our church for two decades, now view our church as a "cult" all because of Pastor Dave, who holds more sway over his non-denominational church members than a typical pastor does in the Community of Christ.

One of the best things I love about the church I belong to is that it is not intrusive. We're all about freedom and tolerance, for the most part. Unfortunately, though, a recent crackdown in Missouri on a child porn ring or something dealing with pedophilia has revealed that three of the five men arrested and charged are priesthood members in the church. So not cool. Because this church isn't well known, a scandal like that casts a large, dark cloud over the entire membership. This is the worst thing to hit the church since Jeffrey Lundgren's cult twenty years ago.

Anyhow, the novel made me understand a little bit why a person gravitates towards an evangelical church. It has been one of the major contentions in my life because of a clash of personalities. Born agains are the most obnoxious brand of Christians. Like the whole Biblical story of Saul, the persecutor of Christians, who had a change of heart on the road to Damascus when he was blinded by the powerful light of God. He became Paul. Though he converted, he still maintained his overzealousness and intolerance of those who disagree with him. Even today, many evangelical types seem to prefer the teachings of Apostle Paul over the teachings of Jesus. That's where the strain of intolerance comes from.

The born again Christians that I've met all have the "fall from grace" background. Their personalities reveal a tendency towards "addictions." Thus, they tend to be wild and unable to control their compulsions. Because they are also rooted firmly in ego, they believe that ALL people are like them. Since they can't control their own impulses and have found evangelical Christianity to be the perfect way to control their behaviours, they mistakenly believe that EVERYONE needs their brand of controlling religion. That's why authoritarian churches appeal to these types. They need a strong pastor to scare them with threats of hellfire and damnation in order to "behave" (though they often lapse, as one can see in the examples of the Reverend Ted Haggard, Senator John Ensign, and Governor Mark Sanford).

In contrast, I've never been wild and I don't have addictions. People have often complimented me since childhood, adolescence and as a young man in the Navy that I am very well mannered and behaved. I just never had the wild streak and I tend to follow the rules. Granted, I have a mischievious streak that likes to cause a little trouble now and again (usually stirring the pot in discussions with people) but nothing that is out of control and in need of saving. I don't need a strong religious authority breathing down my neck, counseling me and checking up on me. Born agains simply cannot fathom someone who has the ability to self-moderate or one who has self-control, because they need that control in order to behave.

Thus, this novel was excellent in portraying the type of person who becomes a born again Christian. One of my favourite passages is when Ruth tells Tim:

"See," Ruth told him. "This is what bugs me. The way you people talk, it's like you're the only ones who know how to distinguish right from wrong. Just because my moral system's different from yours, that doesn't mean I don't have one. And by the way, just because something's written down in a book that's a couple of thousand years old, that doesn't necessarily mean it's right."

My thoughts exactly!

The novel does lead toward what I believe will be a spectacular clash between Ruth and Tim, but when I got to the final page, I was actually disappointed. The novel simply ends without a bang. Several plot strings are left dangling and I was curious to see how they might turn out. I didn't know if the writer didn't know how to end his novel or if he just got bored with the characters or what. It is a bit of a disappointment to reach the end after such an intriguing read.

However, I do like Perrotta's writing style and the topics he covers, so I plan to read his Joe College at some point in the near future. I'm not sure about his novel Little Children, because I was suckered into seeing the movie version due to the great reviews, but I left the theater feeling icky (maybe that was the point?). The novel and film version of his late 1990s Election eerily presented a situation similar to what our country found itself experiencing in 2000. The guy's a genius, what can I say? I'm a fan.

Music Video Monday: Breathe

This is the week that Sarah Palin is doing her "full court press" to resurrect herself in the public's eye as a person to take seriously rather than the buffoon she really is. Today is her high profile interview on Oprah and I doubt that Oprah will expose Palin for the lying fraud that she is. It'll most likey be a "safe chat" so that Oprah does not "offend" some of her large female audiences who may be Palin supporters (though I highly doubt that's the case. Palin's supporters seem more likely to be ignorant, Southern, fundamentalist, racist, barefoot and pregnant, and regular guests on Jerry Springer).

Tuesday, Palin's ghostwritten book is finally released and already, John McCain's campaign manager Steve Schmidt called the book a "work of fiction." In early excerpts from the book, it appears that Palin is settling scores by blaming the liberal media, professional campaign staff (and their "jaded auras"), bloggers, and most especially Steve Schmidt for how disasterous her public rollout had been. Interestingly, Palin said that she was led to believe that Katie Couric "suffered from low self-esteem" and only wanted Palin to like her. That's supposedly the only reason why Palin agreed to the interview, then realizing afterwards that she had been "ambushed" with "gotcha questions" (asking a politician seeking a high-profile position what they read to keep informed of the world is not a "gotcha question").

In another excerpt released in the media, Palin explains her take on the President Sarkozy prank call. She claims to have thought that he was drunk! Seriously! Never in her mind did she think that it might be a prank! She is so incredibly narcissitic that in her delusions of grandeur mind, she explains away obvious hints that it was a prank (faux Sarkozy's statements kept getting more outrageously obvious that it wasn't the real deal) by thinking he was drunk! What a stupid moron. No wonder why the idiot class in America loves her. She does not threaten their mediocre minds the way an intelligent black president does.

Rush Limbaugh has been praising her book, calling it "the best book" he ever read on public policy. Um...I wasn't aware that the book had any policy in it. It sounds like a score-settling dish rag filled with inaccuracies, outright lies, insights into her ignorant mind, and a lot of shout-outs to Jesus and the troops! You betcha! It has occurred to me that Rush probably doesn't believe half the things he says, thus why he has to take OxyContin and Viagra to stay happy. When you live an inauthentic life, I suppose the truth does wear on you. But he has to keep up his facade, being a "water-carrier" for neo-conservative lies in order control the ignorant base of followers to keep sending their money.

My prediction is that this book will be just one more nail on the coffin of Palin's political career. I just don't see any person recovering from a petty book because a politician is supposed to try and appear diplomatic. They present the big ideas to inspire people to support their vision. All Palin seems to want to do is destroy America in a divisive, never-ending cultural war. It appears that evangelical conservatives despise liberals more than terrorists and they want the Quitter Queen or no one else.

So, in reflection of the week of Palin's big media push, I'm dedicating today's Music Video to her. Its Breathe's 1989 single "Don't Tell Me Lies." I thought of going with the Eurythmics "Would I Lie To You?" but I think the answer to that question is obvious. Palin is a pathological liar. The only people who are hurt by it are her loyal legion of cult followers because she's using them to fuel her ambitions of wealth and fame. They shop at Walmart while she's moved on to Neiman Marcus and Saks Fifth Avenue. I was actually in a Dollar Store the other day and saw Lou Dobbs hardcover book in one of the bins. I wonder how long it will be until Palin's book is in the bins at the dollar store. Maybe by Valentine's Day!

Below is the cover of the latest Newsweek magazine. I love the caption. I wonder what Palin and her cult will think of that? More "liberal media lies"? Well, Newsweek is considered to be somewhat conservative, though not as much as Newsmax. Already, the week is off to a great start.

Getting Real About God

I did some thinking on Saturday about the person I wrote about in yesterday's post, and the typical mindset of people like "Average American" in how they view God and religion. According to this type of person, if one does not believe literally in the entire Bible, then one cannot be a true Christian. Yet, every Biblical literalist I met picks and chooses which passage of the Bible they believe in. They can't see their own hypocrisy or understand the near impossibility of believing everything in the Bible, because the Bible is self-contradictory!

For example, the Old Testament represents the Jewish Torah. What does Christianity really have to do with Judaism anyway? The God of the Old Testament was a jealous, angry, wrathful, hateful god who would smite you just for looking at god cross-eyed. Who would worship a petty tyrant like that? We don't admire those traits in a human being, so why would we believe that the creator of the universe would be so hateful towards His own creation? It doesn't make sense. So, let's just call the Old Testament God, "Hitler God." There's little difference between Hitler and the God of the Old Testament. Both have committed atrocious acts of mass genocide.

Conservative evangelical types love the god of the Old Testament, because they have an authoritarian mindset. Its reflective of their political choices and their religion. Its a male dominated, strong father figure, who lays down the law and expects nothing but pure obedience. The punishment for disobedience is severe. According to authoritarians, dissent is treason. No one is allowed to question the judgment of their political leader, their church leader, or their Hitler God. Doing so only incurs the wrath of the leader because we are meant to be obedient, unthinking sheep.

What evangelical Christians can't seem to realize is that such a god does not appeal at all to a person with a democratic mindset. Hitler God only appeals to the authoritarian personality. In case you're wondering how to spot an authoritarian personality, they usually also have a military fetish (though most likely too cowardice to actually serve in the military), they don't mind being lied to, and they obsess over the "immorality" of liberals, especially regarding sexuality. Examples of obedient slaves of the Hitler God include Sarah Palin, George W. Bush, Carrie Prejean, Ted Haggart, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, and probably your crazy born again Uncle.

On the other hand, the God preferred by the democratic mindset comes straight from the New Testament. Its the God that Jesus portrayed as a loving and forgiving God. Let's call this God, the Gandhi God. Authoritarians hate the Gandhi God, because there seems to be a lack of punishment. Gandhi God seems to let people get away with sin, particularly sexual sin like premarital sex or any thing that involves two consenting adults outside of wedlock. We have the example of Jesus saving an adulterous woman from being stoned to death. If Jesus was a conservative evangelical, he would have been the one stoning the woman. But he didn't. And bringing that up with evangelicals only seems to make them mad as they search for examples from the Old Testament!

The New Testament, however, is a purely Christian text, thus why its strange that evangelicals seem to prefer the Jewish portion, with the Hitler God. I know it seems odd to write about Jews and a Hitler God in the same sentence, but let's get real here. The God of the Torah and the Old Testament is not worth following. Seriously...how can one believe in a God that claims to have selected the Jews as His special children to be granted blessings, yet have allowed a Holocaust that almost wiped out the entire religion? If that's what it means to be "favoured by God"...um, no thanks! But, since when was religion ever logical?

I love the above sticker. It expresses the sentiment of many people who have rejected evangelical Christianity. Rejecting evangelical Christianity is not rejecting Jesus or God. Its simply rejecting the illogical and hypocritical nature of evangelicals. Until evangelicals realize how much their judging and behaviours and preferred political candidates turns people away, they will continue to create unnecessary divisions among people.

What's so wrong about religious tolerance? People may fault me for my open-mindedness about religion, but so what? I can meditate with the Buddhists, chant with the Hindus, pray with the Muslims, partake in the Passover seder with the Jews, celebrate Christmas with the Christians, and discuss Darwin's Theory of Evolution with the atheists. None of that bothers me very much. In fact, I love it. I consider it a good thing to be able to relate to a wide range of people and to view religion through their experiences and understanding. But just because I may not personally believe in their mythologies does not make me an enemy of God.

For the record, I consider myself a Christian. I view Jesus as the role model on how to treat other people. Of course, some Christians take issue with my rejection of the virgin birth and the resurrection, but what's it to them? I wasn't there. I didn't see it with my own eyes. And I don't have to accept those things on "faith." That's not what spirituality is about for me. Spirituality is about living life in a way that helps you become the best person you can be. Its a way of allowing yourself to open up to mysteries that science has not been able to explain. Spirituality is a personal choice.

Converting people to believe as you do is a sign of ego at work. It has little to do with your interest in the other person. I know this as a fact, from my own experience. People who have approached me to proselytize their brand of Christianity have never EVER bothered to get to know me first. They come up to me to initiate a conversation, which quickly turns into a "you need to know Jesus" judgement call, without even bothering to ask me what I know about Jesus. I know plenty lot about Jesus. Just not the way they might view him as. So, I'll trust my own salvation and you can save your sanctimonious bullshit for yourself. You need to believe it more than I do, because your authoritarian mind requires other people to believe the same as you do in order to convince yourself that something is true.

Here's a little logic game I love to play sometimes with these people. I usually ask a person: "Do you believe that God is perfect?" The answer is obviously going to be "yes." Then, I'll launch into a..."would a perfect God display traits like the ones written about in the Old Testament? Sending a flood to kill every living thing on earth that didn't fit on Noah's Ark? Banishing Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden for disobedience? Making a bet with Satan that Job wouldn't lose his faith in all his trials?" Those aren't evidence of a God of perfection. The God of the Old Testament is too human in its petty vindictiveness and abuse of power and authority. When we think of a perfect person, they display all the traits we admire and wish for ourselves. Usually, such a perfect being would be friendly, loving, kind, forgiving, and compassionate.

The other question I love to ask an evangelist is: "Do you believe that God is all-knowing?" The answer, of course, would be a yes. That means an all-knowing God would know why each person gravitates to one religion or another. Would a perfect, all-knowing God get angry because one person rejected Christianity because he or she simply could not believe in the virgin birth or resurrection? What kind of God would set the rules up for a religion to require belief in an event that happened more than two millennia ago in order to be granted an everlasting life? This does not make logical sense. Why is belief more important to God than how a person lives? An all-knowing God knows that we are all limited in our understanding of how the world formed and the meaning of life. God knows we all have biases that reflect our life experience and interests. So why would an all-knowing God fault any human for believing the wide range of beliefs that you will find on planet earth? Six billion people do not believe the same thing on every single issue. For anyone to require that is an unrealistic dictator with no grasp on logic and human nature.

An example of how evangelicals don't believe in an all-knowing God is in the story of Adam and Eve. According to this mythological tale, God created Adam from dust and then formed Eve from Adam's rib. He told this couple that they can partake of anything in the garden EXCEPT the fruit from a certain tree. As any parent with children knows, when you tell your curious child they can't have something, they automatically want it. In the story, we have a talking snake tempting Eve, who gives into temptation and realizing her violation of God's order, she offers the fruit to Adam so she won't be the only one. When God appears and asks them about it, they lie as children often do when caught. God can't be fooled by human trickery, because God is ALL-KNOWING. Duh!

The point of the story? For evangelicals, it was to blame women for leading men to ruin. The story is also used to promote the authoritarian model of God (the Hitler God). But most of all, evangelical Christians use Adam and Eve (from the Old Testament) to merge it with their view of Jesus' life so that they have this convenient little mythology: All humans contain the original sin of Adam and Eve, thus we require Jesus as our personal saviour in order to return to God.

Doesn't this sound like Scientology? The premise of Scientology is that all humans born on earth are infected with "thetans" and require expensive auditing sessions to rid ourselves of them in order to achieve enlightened status.

Sure, its easy to laugh at the absurdities of one religion, but when we've been indoctrinated since childhood into Christian mythology, it is harder to reject it. I owe my preference for logical thinking and my ability to examine my beliefs from a perspective of logic that I was able to reject such absurdities. The standard Christian mythology does not make logical sense. So a perfect, all-knowing God can't fault one of his more intelligent creations from rejecting such illogical beliefs in favour of a more expanded and universal view.

What is that view? Well...I believe that no matter where our souls are born on this planet (some to Christian nations, some to Muslim nations, some to Buddhist nations, and some to atheistic Europe), our beliefs don't matter as much as how we live our lives. There's a reason why the Golden Rule appears in every religion (and non-religion). If we live by that simple creed, we really won't have anything to fear when we reach the end of our lives.

If evangelical Christians still want to hold fast to their Hitler God, so be it. Just don't get angry because more people reject your proselytizing and religion. Tolerance, understanding, and finding the universal beliefs we all share is far more important. I guess when a person fears God, its hard for them to understand how a person does not fear God. So, all threats of hell and damnation fall on deaf ears. People like "Average American" and your ilk...you can have your Hitler God. The God I follow is a universal God of peace, love, understanding, and forgiveness. I live a life without fear. You ought to try it sometime. It'll liberate you from the demons that haunt your minds and that you mistake for God.

The Cult of Sarah Palin

I just learned that my blog has been awarded a "Demmy" from some conservative blogger who found my blog in a Google search and didn't like what I had to write about evangelical Christianity on Friday's post about the lunacy of believing in endtimes prophecies. This blogger left a comment on yesterday's post. According to this person, I'm not a Christian at all because a "true" Christian would literally believe in the entire Bible. Oh, so I guess that means this blogger does not eat pork, does not wear garments made of two different fabrics, does not play football (which is made of pig skin), and other such crazy nonsense you'll find in that book. According to this blogger, I'm also a "self-hating" person who hates the U.S. and Jesus! Wow, what a genius it must be to judge someone you don't even know based on reading one blog post entry that goes against what you believe. Your mama should be so proud to have raised such an ignorant bigot.

On the 2012 Draft Sarah Committee Facebook page, quite a few Palinistas have personally attacked me in the comments. To me, it gives me great insight into the childish thinking of a Palinista cult member. That's right. I said "cult member", which is what it has become. The truth doesn't matter to these folks, only the mythology behind Palin. Its funny to hear them call Obama supporters "cult members", but liberals generally aren't known for being loyal. Obama is in danger of losing liberal support if he continues going the safe and conservative route through his presidency. Liberals simply don't have the obsessive-compulsive gene that conservatives do. If they did, Bush would have never been president.

Anyhow, on Palin's Facebook page, one Palinista criticized the government bailout of the auto industry. I mentioned that I agreed...that I didn't want Obama to bailout out General Motors, Ford, or Chrystler. I would have preferred to see those companies go the way of Studebaker and Edsel. Well, that comment drew fire. I was accused of being an anti-American hater. What? Do these people even think straight? They are against government bailout of a company but seeing an American company go out of business because of the greedy financial mismanagement of the CEOs and Financial Officers is considered anti-American? What solution do they propose, then?!? According to capitalism, as I understand it...the government is not supposed to interfere in the free market. If a company can't compete in the marketplace, it goes out of business. Simple, right?

Oh, but not according to the Palinistas, because I dared to bring up Honda being the best selling automaker in the country. There is a reason why Americans love their Hondas. The cars are built to last and even a used Honda with over 100,000 miles on it still costs more than some brand new economy cars. The Palinista did not like this one bit and refuted me by saying that BUICK was the #1 car in the country! Buick!!! Um...just how many Buicks does one see on a daily basis, anyway? I personally see a lot of Hondas, Toyotas, Volvos, BMWs, VWs, and Hyundais. If I see any American cars at all, its usually a Ford or a Chevrolet brand.

Facts don't matter to Palinistas. She's their beloved Quitter Queen. She can make fun of Obama's experience as a community organizer because she had a "real job" with "responsibilities." Yet, what did she do this past summer? She quit her job with responsibilities to become an organizer for her loyal cult following. She Tweets, posts comments on Facebook, had her memoirs ghostwritten, gave one speech in Hong Kong, and demanded $100,000 up front as a requirement for her speaking at an event in Iowa in which presidential contenders have historically been willing to give for free as a sign of their interest in winning the Iowa caucus.

There is nothing about Palin that shows any seriousness at all. She even revealled recently another example of how insipidly stupid she is when she mentioned in a speech in Wisconsin that "In God We Trust" was moved to the edge of U.S. coins and wondered aloud who might have made that decision. She had gotten that info from an e-mail chain that is circulated by brainless conservatives, hoping to smear President Obama as the one who initiated that process. The Fox Propaganda Network even fact checked Sarah's claims and revealed that this decision was actually signed off during the Bush Administration. So, it was the evangelical Bush team that made this decision. You gotta love the whole irony of that.

But, like I said, facts don't matter to Palinistas because they are invested cult members. They will believe their beloved Quitter Queen no matter what asinine thing she says next. They can't tell the difference between a lie and the truth because they've been lied to all their lives. When you believe the lies you're told from your slick evangelist preacher to your Corporate CEO to your conservative Republican politician, its hard for them to find the truth. They view the world in black and white, good versus evil, without shades of gray, without nuance and complexity. In their minds, they are always "good", even when they support politicians who practice torture, lies, waging war on countries that had nothing to do with 9/11, and allow poor people to drown in an American city during an environmental emergency.

These aren't Christian values and Jesus often told his followers to beware of those who would profess his name. Its always the actions one must look at and see if they match the values of Christ. The Republican Party DOES NOT represent the values of Christ. I know it offends people to hear it, but they need to hear it anyway. Open your eyes and stop being such a dupe for rich people who don't give a shit about you or your mediocre lives.

You think Queen Sarah is going to make your lives better? What has she done that wasn't self-serving? Her book is released on Tuesday and we'll finally get more insight into her shallow mind. On Monday is her interview with Oprah. I'm not expecting much to come out of the interview, but I do hope her book reveals her to be the petty, vengeful person she appears to be (based on actual facts regarding her wanting to fire a librarian who would not ban the books she wanted to be banned; and her firing of a police officer who was getting a divorce from her sister). Though Palinistas were happy to see Palin's book briefly reach number 1 on Amazon.com's sales rankings, it appears that it was the result of bulk buying by rightwing think tanks, because the book is now available for $9 (marked down from $25) at Walmart...or you can get it for free with a paid subscription to Newsmax magazine (the conservative's Newsweek).

Early reports of her book mention that it only contains six chapters and does not have an index. The book is over 400 pages, so that means chapters average more than 60 pages, which would discourage people from reading a chapter a sitting. Short chapters tend to encourage a reader to read "just one more chapter" before going to bed. A 60-page chapter is a little daunting. Besides, conservatives generally aren't big book buyers. I've been in plenty of conservative people's homes and what strikes me the most is the absence of a bookcase or a diverse range of books. I've even heard many evangelical Christian types say that they only read one book (the Bible), because that book has everything in it, making any other book irrelevant. I also think the reason why conservatives don't read a lot is because they are afraid to come across anything that might challenge their narrow-minded view of the world. Its safer to read only the books that are sold in Christian bookstores, which you can bet that Sarah's book will be.

The above photo of Palin was published in Runner's World magazine. For me, it shows exactly what is wrong with Sarah Palin. The American flag that is draped over the chair looks freshly out of the box, as you can tell by the stiff creases made by folds. It begs the question why there would be an American flag hanging on her chair in the first place. It should be hung on a flagpole or folded in a triangle inside a nice shadow box. I'm guessing that this is part of the red meat she's throwing to her cult members. They see an American flag and they just salivate like Pavlov's dog. In their simpleton minds, it means "American flag = Patriotic American", even though Palin was a member of the Alaska Independence Party, which has as its primary objective to secede from the union to become its own country (to that, I'd say, "Good riddance!").

Sarah is also not above showing off her assets. Her "sexy pose" and her legs are meant to work as Viagra on red-blooded conservative males. She owes her rise to fame to her sex appeal and flirtacious manner (as witnessed in her interview with Charles Gibson and the Vice Presidential debate, with her constant winking and manner of speaking). If she was a dowdy school marm, the world would have never heard of her.

Which reminds me, another Palinista on Facebook accused me of "sexism" because I had mentioned that Sarah represented an affirmative action case that Republicans love to point out regarding unqualified women and minorities getting jobs that more qualified white men should have gotten. Supporting an un-intelligent woman with little experience because she looks hot is not considered sexism, but defending intelligent women who have got elected on their own regardless of how they look is considered "sexist"? Only in the upside down world of Palinism!

Palinistas still believe that liberals are threatened by her, which is funny. All the liberals I've talked to and the liberal blogs I've read are actually loving the way she is destroying the Republican party. It is the leaders in the Republican Party who are deathly scared of her. Conservative commentator David Brooks called her "a cancer on the Republican Party." Peggy Noonan, who was Reagan's speechwriter, has nothing good to say about Palin. Another conservative commentator had said that any candidate who quit a job before their term ended does not deserve to seek a higher office. You get to the higher office by proving yourself in the job you were elected and reelected to do. Quitting after two years for no good reason is a major disqualifier. Even Huckabee is amping up his criticisms of Sarah Palin in preparation for 2012. They both appeal to the same base of supporters, but Huckabee actually has a bit of accomplishments under his belt as a two-term governor of Arkansas.

Personally, though, I don't think Palin will run for the presidency in 2012. I think she's playing coy simply to string her cult followers along. Fame was her goal since high school and she has it now. The actual work that is required for a job like the governor's office or the presidency is too much for her to deal with. If the presidency was more like a ceremonial job, she'd be well designed for it. Its maybe unfortunate for her that America doesn't have a position for Queen, as she'd love to have that "title." Oh, but she does. She will always be "The Quitter Queen of Wasilla" to me. And her loyal cult member followers can keep on throwing their hard-earned money and love to her as she shops at Neiman Marcus and Sak Fifth Avenue, eating her Crunchwrap Supreme from Taco Bell in her two-piece Walmart pajamas while watching TLC's The Wedding Story and home improvement shows.

The following is from the blog, The Next Objective, which found my blog on a Google search and mentioned me (which I put in bold print). I posted a comment (but I wouldn't be surprised if it eventually gets deleted from that blog). There's more commentary from me after the quote and my response.

Awarding Demmies is an art form. Like a writer, the awarder has to get inside the head of his potential recipients, understand what makes them tick, justify and predict the kinds of things the deserving party will say and do. This week, as you know, Sarah Palin is back in the news. This, of course, activates the freak-out centers in most liberals' brains. It's as if the idea of a conservative mother wishing to affect public policy is so anathema to their boorish mindsets that whatever sense they had rattling around in their over-educated skulls clinks out through their cocaine-widened nostrils and into the kitty litter. So, I thought, what's the dumbest nickname someone could come up with to mock my favorite Alaskan? "Sarah-I-Don't-Care-Ah"? Doesn't make much sense, even for a liberal. Then it came to me: Nailin' Palin. Crude sexual metaphor? Check. Violent connotations? Check. Clear indication of liberal humorlessness? Double check.

So I ran it through the search and got this. Now, as far as I can tell, this guy is about as self-hating as they come. Christian veteran who hates the US and Jesus. As I've said before, YOU CANNOT BE CHRISTIAN IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE. PERIOD. I wish the libs would just give up trying to straddle the line between atheism and Christianity, between reason and faith, between patriotism and perpetual America-bashing. It makes them look, well, insane. So, SANSEGO, if that's your real name, the Demmy goes to you. Now, go find a better hobby.

Posted by Average American at 3:38 PM
Labels: Demmys

1 comments:

Sansego said...
You're so quick to judge who's the hater...just because I don't buy into the mythology of evangelical Christianity. Jesus was a Jew who did not come to form a new religion, but to reform Judaism. If you study history, you would read about the rise and fall of civilizations. There is no reason to believe why the national borders that exist right now will still be the same a hundred years from now or even a thousand years from now. We are all human beings sharing the same living sphere in a dark, cold universe. My spirituality is far deeper than you can possibly imagine, and I don't fear the wrath of God because the true God is only capable of love.

The person who wrote that calls itself "Average American." First, who thinks of themselves as "average"? That's probably the most honest thing the blogger could say about itself, as mediocre as its blog is.

Second, I checked out its blog and its pretty dull. And pretty new. Not so much hits (I'm approaching 70,000 hits since I added a counter last year). No interesting pictures to make its blog desireable to visit and look at.

Third, it mentioned the crude title of "Nailin' Palin", but neglects to mention the Republican National Convention, when conventioneers were chanting "Drill, Baby, Drill!" without any sense of irony for the sexual innuendo in that chant. So insipidly stupid are conservatives to sexual innuendos, that they've called themselves "teabaggers" and when Joe Biden mentioned during the VP Debate the "drill, drill, drill" chant at the RNC, Sarah actually corrected him by gleefully saying that it was "drill, baby, drill." Biden had some sense not to mention the "baby" part, because that chant was completely sexual innuendo, even if conservatives couldn't realize it themselves.

Fourth, on its blog, it mentioned that its not contradictory to be a devotee of Ayn Rand and Jesus. Um...yes it is! Ayn Rand was an atheist intellectual who promoted selfishness and capitalism as the human ideal. Jesus was a Jewish carpenter who promoted selflessness and a form of socialism with his miraculous healings of people with all kinds of afflictions, he saved a woman from being stoned to death, he had many intellectual conversations with women, which was a big taboo in his day. Capitalism is based on the idea that selfish people acting in their own best interest would naturally create products that people would want to buy. Its a materialist philosophy, and Jesus was a spiritualist who taught that how we treat other people is the most important aspect of life. If Jesus was an Ayn Rand capitalist, why did he tell the rich young ruler to "give everything you have to the poor and come follow me"? Or why did he say that it was easier for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle than it was for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven?

Perpetual America bashing? Were the abolitionists America-bashers for wanting to end the practice of slavery in our country? Were the suffragists America-bashers for wanting equal rights for women, particularly the right to vote? Were the Civil Rights leaders America-bashers for pushing for racial equality in our society? What is "America bashing"? Liberals want to see our country be the best place it can be. We are ranked #37 in health care, so the teabaggers who don't want government's hands on their Medicare are the true "America-bashers." The people who supported the invasion of Iraq because Bush told them it was a Christian mission are America-bashers because that costly war helped put our economy in the toilet. The Palin cult members are "America-bashers" because they openly advocate for the assassination of the first black president in history.

Who hates America more? Conservatives do. After all, Reagan sold weapons to Iran in exchange for hostages. Reagan and Bush looked the other way when Saddam gassed his own people in 1988. The CIA helped to fund the likes of Manuel Noriega and Osama Bin Laden when it was most convenient for our country. Get real, "Average American"! Learn the history from multiple sources instead of the steady diet of Rush, Beck and Fox.

The America I dream about is one that is number one in education, health care, standard of living, military, charity, international diplomacy, economics, the arts, invention, discoveries, and happiness. We have a long way to go. With people like "Average American" who is part of the Palinista cult, they don't care about America becoming a great society of tolerance and education. The preference is for idiocy to rule, where we are meant to be subservient to ignorant leaders who are the laughing stock of the entire planet. Intelligence, objectivity, tolerance, and understanding for different ideas are not allowed in "Average American"s America. We would merely be cogs in the wheel of capitalism, forever serving a corporate master as we get fed crumbs for our labours. Religion to "Average American" is an extension of this slavery mindset. Anyone with an expanded view of spirituality that embraces universal ideas is seen as a threat.

I feel sorry for people like "Average American." But, as my former supervisor at my last job in Atlanta often said: "There is no cure for stupid."

My advice to "Average American" would be to volunteer to go to Iraq. If you "love" America so much and support the conservative cause, why follow in the footsteps of cowards (Rush, O'Reilly, Hannity, Cheney, and Rove never served in the military)? It must irk "Average American" that a military veteran can actually be a liberal. Well, guess what? Most of the veterans who are members of Congress are Democrats. It kind of makes you wonder why Republican politicians aren't military veterans. Cowardice runs deep among conservatives, I suppose.

I am flattered that my blog is Google-searchable. Its very interesting to check my statistical counter to see how people have found my blog and where they are viewing it from as well as what they are reading. Recently, I noticed that someone in Wasilla, Alaska had accessed my blog and read my previous post about Palin. Its my sincere hope that it was the Quitter Queen herself. I've heard that she is obsessed with reading what bloggers are saying about her and she loves to fight back. So if the Quitter Queen happens to be reading this (or her devoted minions of mindless zombies), I have just one thing to say to you: "You're a big phony and Trig deserves a better mother than you." Now go back to eating your Crunchwrap Supreme!

Flashback Friday the 13th: Doomsday Scenarios

Today, on this Friday the 13th, a doomsday movie opens in theaters nationwide. I suppose this is better than yet another Jason slasher flick. But, when I saw previews to the film 2012, I was actually bored out of my mind. I guess I'm just not into disaster flicks. I was disappointed with Independence Day in 1996. While I liked Twister, I didn't see Dante's Peak, Volcano, Deep Impact, Armaggedon, or The Day After Tomorrow in theaters. There's something to be said about a society that loves its doom.

I read one early review of 2012, hoping for a hint of what the film might be about...besides the total destruction of planet earth. The movie reviewer basically listed every thing that gets destroyed in the movie. That was it. The entire review. Nothing else that would make me want to see this movie. I'm more interested in the actual Mayan calendar, for the history of it to possibly any match-ups between past events coinciding with certain dates on the Mayan calendar. This does not look like the movie that will do that. All it seems designed to do is wow people with its special effects and plant the seed of paranoia to possibly blossom in three years time.

Haven't we been here before? Oh, right. December 31, 1999. Y2K. The radio played Prince's early 1980s hit "1999", which was about Judgement Day. The Left Behind series were popular among evangelical Christians, who showed that they did read things besides the Bible. Nostradamus' predictions were in vogue, as bookstores featured books of his prophecies in prominent table-top displays. Rightwing radio was warning people to stock up on food supplies, water, and guns. Better yet, run for the hills! Y2K kits were sold in stores. How deeply ingrained was this paranoia? Well, I was at BYU the last semester of 1999 and no less than five guys that I knew got engaged with plans to get married that December. How common is a December wedding? Not very. My guess was that they weren't taking their chances. They wanted to lose their virginity before the end of the world came.

Whenever people talked to me about their Y2K preparations, I just rolled my eyes. I remember hearing people claim that our computer and appliances would go nuts, all because some genius way back when only made enough space in computer programing to count years by the last two digits of the four digit sequence. The theory was that when the numbers rolled from 99 to 00, the computers would freak out because they supposedly thought it would be 1900 instead of 2000. It sounded ridiculous to me. Like the kind of bad sci-fi that L. Ron Hubbard would concoct when he wasn't busy dreaming up evil warlords to create a new religion for saps in Hollywood.

The Clinton Administration deserve some kudos, though, for making sure that nothing disasterous would happen at midnight on January 1, 2000. Had Bush been president, I'm sure he would have done nothing at all, hoping that it would induce mass mayhem by which to declare martial law. After Y2K came and gone, no one talked much about it. I wonder how many people felt silly about their mass panic and costly preparations. It doesn't hurt to be prepared for any kind of disaster, but some of that stuff was really out there in la-la land.

Evangelical Christians, in particular, seem to be too enthralled with end of time scenarios. I've read some essays about Bush's supposed literal belief in end times that he believed that God wanted him to invade Iraq in order to set the clock for the time Jesus would return. Has Jesus returned? People for millennia have been obsessed with Jesus' return. Even my church was founded on the idea that early members would see the return of Christ (thus the "Latter Day" Saints part of the church name for the LDS and RLDS churches).

I am rare in my church in that I don't believe Jesus is coming back. The reason I don't believe in the second coming is because God created our world for us. There was no such thing as a perfect garden paradise where a naked Adam and Eve pranced around, talking to snakes and eating "forbidden" fruit. The world has always been an evolving canvas for billions of years. Evolution is reality to me, not the linear time presented by Christianity. Jesus coming back would violate God's gift of free will to humanity. Besides, since I don't believe humans require a saviour in order to return to our heavenly birthright, there's no point for Jesus to come back to our planet. He was the prophet / preacher of his day. In this day and age, we have the Dalai Lama, Aung San Suu Kyi, Desmond Tutu, and Nelson Mandela to show us the way. Future generations will give rise to other spiritual people to lead humanity in the right course.

My belief that time is cyclical rather than the Christian view of linear time actually makes more sense. According to many evangelical Christians, the world is around 6,000 years old...based on the time line going back to Adam and Eve. 6,000 years!!! So, in this view, God creates the world 6,000 years ago. And at some point, God will "destroy" the world because of the "wickedness" of people who reject evangelical Christian mythology. Somewhere in the meridian of time, God sent a saviour for people to profess their belief in if they don't want to spend the rest of eternity burning in hell. Does this really make sense? Seriously!

How about this idea...time is cyclical. Our world and the other planets are round. They orbit in a circle around the sun. Earth rotates in a 24-hour period. Our year is divided into four seasons, which are repeated every year. Life is the process of living and dying. Birth follows death, as we see when decaying animals fertilize the soil, which causes plants to grow. The circle of life is not just some cute song in a Disney movie. Its the way our world works. Evolution and reincarnation fit into this idea of cyclical time. Living life by the understanding of cycles means you don't have to stress out over things, like doom and gloom of end of the world mythologies.

On a personal level, I've seen cycles in my own life. When I don't learn a lesson for the first time, I'll see it again for the second time, and even a third time. Nothing illustrates this more to me than the fact that this decade began with me falling for an intelligent lady in D.C. and losing her to a European guy. The decade ends the same way, as I watch a lady I'm attracted to and find intelligent planning her move to Europe in a couple weeks to be with a guy she fell in love with right under my nose. What's the lesson, there? I have no clue, yet, but it showed me that things do happen in cycles. I'm sure it will come around again. Things always do. Since I've moved to Portland, I've experience so much bad deja vu about several situations that I've been through before. I believe this is what life is essentially about...learning how to deal with the situations we are given in the most spiritual way possible. Life is not about converting other people to believe that Jesus is a messiah that you need to accept as your saviour if you hope to avoid the firey pit of hell for eternity. Get real, people!

I have a feeling that for the next three years, we are going to be inundated with 2012 doom and gloom, with the intensity picking up the closer we get to that year and month. According to people who study Meso-American history, the Mayan calendar is considered to be the most accurate measure of time ever created by humans (or as some weirdos believe, space aliens gave the Mayans that technology). For whatever reasons we don't know about, the Mayan calendar ends on December 21, 2012. There is nothing else after that. Perhaps people read too much into it. Perhaps the calendar maker was working on the calendar and he was killed, along with his village by hostile enemies, thus was unable to complete the calendar. We'd be panicking over something silly like that.

Some New Agey people view the date as a choice that humunity must make. It brings to mind the title of one of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s book: Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community? Maybe we do have a choice on how we want 2013 and beyond to look. However, if God is giving humanity such a choice, I'm not sure that's an entirely wise decision. There are far too many dark souls who relish destruction and view the apocalypse as a good thing (Sarah Palin is one such individual who believes in endtimes doomsday crap). Most of the teabaggers would love to see the destruction of our world because it would "prove" that their belief in endtimes prophecies from the Book of Revelations to be true to all the skeptics out there. They'd love for us to burn in hell as we realize that we were dead wrong and that they had been right all along. Ha! That's just a reflection of one's ego talking.

If God is reading my blog...please let the decision rest on my shoulders! The post-2012 world I'd like to see is a peaceful one. Where national borders no longer exists, where war is finally viewed as the most ludicrously wasteful means of settling disputes and therefore banned, where people of all religions or none can sit down together and accept one another without a desire to convert the other, where universal health care is seen as the right thing to do, where poverty no longer exists (as well as exorbitant materialism of the super rich).

That's the world I want to live in. Where people know their talents and use them. Where no one stresses out over stupid shit and abuse other people because they don't understand how stress works in their bodies. Where people are cooperative instead of competitive, and quality matters more than quantity. That is the world I choose for post-2012 and I don't see people objecting to living in such a world. If they do (as I assume evangelical Christians would), then they aren't so spiritual-minded as they think they are. If their attachment is to the doom of Revelations, where unbelievers are killed in massive genocide just because one doesn't believe in the saviour theory, then what does that say about them? Nothing good, that's what. I stay far away from people like that, because they have more in common with "the crazies" than they'd care to admit.

A few years ago, I started reading the above book by Daniel Pinchbeck. I had heard him talk on the late-night radio program Coast to Coast AM (the one made famous by Art Bell, who retired and left the show to host George Noory). I was intrigued by what Pinchbeck had to say about 2012, that I decided to buy the paperback book when he came to Powell's City of Books a few years back. Unfortunately, the book is incredibly dense at times and scattershot. Its a mix of autobiography, spirituality, science, travel narrative, history, and even mentions experimentation with drugs (of the wild mushroom kind) and the crop circle phenomenon.

In fact, Pinchbeck is such an odd person that I don't find him all that credible. In the lecture at Powell's, he had said something like how the magical mushrooms are actually outerspace aliens and when you partake of them, you get a hallucinagenic view of the world, of truth, of the meaning of life. Yeah, I'd say that the guy seemed pretty baked. But, I owe a disclosure here...I've always been strongly anti-drug since childhood. I've never even experimented with marijuana. I don't see any good coming out of any drug use, even though people who experienced hallucinegenic drugs might have what they consider a mind-altering experience of consciousness. But, you can achieve the same effect through meditation and regular spiritual practice.

I had a hard time finishing Pinchbeck's book because of the scattershot way he presents his ideas, not all of them related to 2012. Finally, I was determined to finish the book last year that I brought it with me to San Diego when I visited Nathan and his family, because I had a long train ride back to Portland in which to relax and read the book (when the outside scenery did not distract me). The book wasn't what I thought it would be so I wouldn't recommend it for anyone wanting insights into the Mayan calendar. There are plenty of books with 2012 in the title and I've skimmed through several of them but haven't found one worth buying and reading.

What's my prediction for 2012? The day will come and go without any consequence. People will forget about that day and forget how they fell into the mass hysteria of doom and gloom. Life will go on and someone else will discover a new "endtimes date" to raise a panic about. They might want to look at Nostradamus' writings. I believe that his prophetic visions extended into 3000s. That's a thousand more years of human evolution and progress. No reason for humanity to act like suicidal lemmings now because of the 2012 date. Belief in cyclical time will help alleviate the stress and paranoid mass hysteria that the impending apocalypse might cause. In simpler terms: people need to chill out! It's okay to plan your life beyond 2012 because we're going to be here for a long time. In this body or the next one. Got it?