"Sammy's House"

Okay, so I lied. I'm postponing my novel excerpt for a few days (to add when I have more time) so I can review the second novel by Al Gore's second daughter, Kristin GORE-geous. In 2004, she published "Sammy's Hill" and this summer comes the sequel, "Sammy's House".

I posted a review of "Sammy's Hill" on Amazon.com three years ago and when I went to the booksigning at the Margaret ("Gone With the Wind") Mitchell Center in Atlanta to listen to her lecture and have her sign the book, I was surprised that she knew about my Amazon review! Apparently, I was the only guy at the time to have posted a review and her friends let her know about my review, because I defended her novel from the literary critics who used the dismissive and derogatory "chick lit" genre to classify her novel (and possibly marginalize it). As a male who served on Capitol Hill, I found a lot I could relate to in her novel, and it was one of the rare laugh-out-loud funny novels I've ever had the pleasure of reading. I gave it four stars instead of five because of what I thought were a few flaws: the protagonist, Samantha Joyce, was a bit too neurotic and over-analyzed everything; the Charlie character wasn't well developed as he appears at opportune moments throughout the novel; and that it was too short. But that was a good thing, because it left me wanting more! And now, more is here!

Though it is not as funny as the first one, it still packed quite a bit of laugh out loud moments as Samantha Joyce works in the first two years of the new administration. Though Kristin Gore publically denies making any kind of political statement in her novels, it's not hard for a savvy person to pick up on her digs against a Bush-like former president (after serving two disasterous terms as president, he becomes a reality TV star in which he unwittingly is seen as the buffoon) and the character flaws of a Clintonesque President Wye. It's obvious that Vice President Gary is based on her father, with the Second Lady based on her mother. She does a great job "rewriting" the Clinton presidency in this fictional tale of what it's like to work in a beleaguered presidency. Other digs include Senator Bramen, who reminds me of Senator John Kerry, a full of himself politician who can barely contain his animosity for the administration, even though they belong to the same party.

What she continued from the first novel (besides the similarily themed cover art) include the rhyming chapter titles (which I thought was clever the first time and glad to see repeated again), the travails of her Japanese fighting fish (though less focus this time), her roommate, and her romantic ups and downs with Charlie, who is a Washington Post reporter trying to get his first major scoop. Having a romantic storyline between Sammy the White House aide and Charlie the Washington Post reporter did a brilliant job in upping the dramatic tension, as they struggle to find the proper balance between their professional responsibilities and their romantic lives. Added to the mix, is an Ann Coulter-ish gossip reporter with a hatred of the administration; a political blog that seems to post news straight out of the West Wing, prompting suspicions of everyone on who might be the leak; a CNN reporter (think Anderson Cooper) and a ecstasy-addicted actor (I didn't know who she was poking fun of...Matthew McConaughey?) vying for Sammy's attention; a trip to India complete with a spitting camel; and most sweet of all, a White House aide named "Nick." Now, I'm just saying here...I don't know if Kristin knows any Nicks or if she named a character after me (wouldn't that be nice!) in honour of my amazon review, but I like to think that my loyalties to the Gore family would have a spiritual connection. I did introduce myself to her in 2004 as one of her father's interns and I also told her that I didn't know how he got over the loss in 2000, because I still harbored resentment over that electoral theft at that time. But, thanks to "An Inconvenient Truth" and Kristin Gore's novels, I was able to finally let go and accept the reality as it is. Gore may not be president ever, but he was the best Vice President in our nation's history.

The novel is worth reading, but start with the first one if you haven't read that one yet. By the end of "Sammy's House", I was struck by the deeper message of the novel...one that deals with honesty and lies, and how working in Washington can warp you away from your values. When I finished reading, I still wanted more. I would go so far as to say that it's even better than the first one and I hope that she will make it a trilogy. Sammy became less neurotic and much more enjoyable. She is the kind of person I'd love to be friends with and perhaps even date. It'll be interesting to see who'll play Sammy when the film version comes out (in a year or two). I hope it won't be Lindsay Lohan!

Novel Excerpt

Coming soon...I thought it would be cool to devote one day a week in my blog to an excerpt from my novel, Seasons of Silent War, which I'm still trying to find an agent and publisher for. I won't be putting the whole novel up here, but some of the best parts, in chronological order, a sort of chapter by chapter "sneak preview". If you want more, you'll just have to wait until the day when I finally get it published and in bookstores...which I hope will happen before I'm 40.

So...stay tuned. Chapter One is titled "The Realm of Neptune" and will be posted in a day or so.

The poster above represents an old fashioned recruiting poster that always gave me a good kick. In fact, in the novel, I mention that poster which is appropriate, since my novel is about what it means to be a man, especially in dealing with the Navy scandal of the sexual harassment of women and the rampant homophobia. My view is adopted from Martin Luther King Jr's famous quote: "The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands during times of comfort and convenience, but where he stands during times of challenge and controversy." In the view of the Navy, manhood is determined by how many women you sleep with or how many tattoos you have, or how macho you are in making homophobic remarks. It's an outward showing, but in the end, I think there is nothing "manly" about following orders without question, harassing women, or beating up gay people. That's essentially what my novel tries to say, if you get down to the bear essentials.

How Did I Get So "Cynical"?

Fighting the "Bull" of Wall Street

August 2002, New York City

Yesterday evening, I went to a farewell party for my friend and fellow aspiring writer, Sarina, who is going off to Japan in a week with two of her friends for the JET program (for at least a year). I got to see again some of her other friends whom I've met at previous gatherings over the course of the year, as well as meet some new people, including a young lady who majored in political science and worked on Senator Kerry's presidential campaign (for very low wages). She answered a lot of questions I had, so I guess that rules out any kind of low wage campaign jobs I might love to have. But then again, I was never excited enough about Kerry in the first place to believe he'd ever become president. I was a Dean guy, and now an Obama guy.

Anyhow, I was talking with one person (who works as a reporter for a small newspaper in Vancouver WA) about politics. It was just a conversation between two of us, and as I spoke about some of my ideas, I was shocked to noticed that several people surrounded us, just to hear what I had to say about it. I'm always surprised when people stop to listen to what I have to say, because I rarely get that at work. The only time, it seems, when people actually listen to what I have to say is when I talk politics or religion...which are the two topics you aren't supposed to talk about at social gatherings! It's amazing that I have that ability, but then again, judging by the way their mouths dropped, they seemed shocked by my view of politics in this century. What first shocked them was my view that I'm practically guaranteeing that Hillary Clinton WILL BE the Democratic nominee and that even more audacious, that she WILL BE our next president. I'm basing my opinion on quite a few disturbing developments (read the previous post), but essentially, the establishment class sets the political agenda for this country. The vote is most likely a sham. Sometimes, I wonder if the 2006 elections were just a way to throw us off the suspicions that the elections are rigged. Consider how quickly the Republican party told Senator George Allen of Virginia and the Republican Senator in Montana to concede the election when it was too close to call and recounts were needed. It gave the Democrats a majority in the Senate by one. WHY would the Republican party concede so quickly, when they weren't that way in 2000? It seemed like they were following a set script, a sort of "let the Democrats have this one." While I much prefer Senator James Webb in Virginia, it still seemed odd how quickly Senator Allen conceded defeat when he indicated that he didn't want to.

My eager listeners at the party then asked how I got to be so cynical! Cynical! That's a word I use to describe the likes of Cheney, not myself. When I was an intern in D.C., I remember my roommate Matt Baker had considered himself cynical and I told him that he wasn't, that he was wise about people, had a good discernment, but that didn't make him cynical. I told him to use skeptic instead. That's because cynicism is corrosive and closed to any possibility of goodness. It's defeatist. It's what someone like Cheney would want for all of us. So cynical that we won't trust anyone who comes along. No, I'm not cynical, because every election cycle, I fall in love with a candidate (well, not "actual, literal love", but you get the picture). I pick candidates based on their values and how they express it, their biography, their worldview, and how I feel about them personally. A candidate doesn't have to be perfect, because no human is perfect. That's my biggest frustrations with progressive/liberals who are borderline in their support for Kucinich or Nader if the Democrats go with a more established candidate (a lot of the liberals who support Kucinich don't even seem to like Obama much). I guess I'm more mainstream. I vote for the best candidate who has an actual chance to win. And I don't have to agree 100% to support someone, because that's an outrageous expectation. When did we become so narcissistic about voting?

To answer the reporter's question (no, he wasn't on assignment...but if I show up in the papers next week, I won't be amused), I responded that I lost faith in our government the day the Supreme Court stopped the recount in Florida in December 2000. To me, that will always be the day our democracy died. We've been living in under an authoritarian and unconstitutional government ever since. I never considered Bush legitimate as president and never will. The election was stolen and stolen for a reason. Cheney and his neo-conservative cabal knew that time was running out on their nefarious plan to set up military garrisons in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our country couldn't afford to wait another 4-8 years of a Gore presidency, with the rapid increase in China and India's energy needs, so Bush had to be installed as president in 2000 and they knew Jeb Bush could be counted on to do the job (though I bet deep down, if Jeb had known what a disaster his brother would be, he might have not been as helpful in his brother's "victory", so he can one day serve as president instead). Gore's biggest mistake was not focusing on his home state of Tennessee, or even in West Virginia. Had he won either state, he would've become president. But, no...he had to go after the state with more electoral votes (I believe it was 25 for Florida, 11 for Tennessee, and 3 for West Virginia).

I also told my audience of listeners that I believed 9/11 was an inside job and that was really the outrage of them all. No one wanted to go there. One girl said that her father was into conspiracy theories, but even he believes "the official story." When I asked how it was possible that World Trade Center 7 (which was not hit by any plane) was able to collapse on 9/11, they couldn't answer my question. Nor could they answer the question regarding the lack of the airplane wingspan and tail in the Pentagon attack. All we ever saw was a tiny hole in the building, but not a major plane part. How could a building make a plane disappear? And let's not forget that our government never found out who was behind the Anthrax attacks that occurred in October 2001. The trail led to a government facility in Maryland and supposedly went cold. These unanswered questions are allowed to buried, for what reason? But no one seems to want to go there. One girl asked me how I could believe that our government would do such a thing to it's own people. That's the rub, isn't it? We can't believe our government would do such a thing. Yet, there's documented evidence of our government overthrowing democratically elected governments in Iran, Chile, the Philippines, Cuba, and Nicaragua. The Gulf of Tonkin incident was later revealed to be false. So was the sinking of the Maine. And FDR knew that the Japanese were on their way to Pearl Harbour to attack our fleet. If our government can do these to other people and have a record of doing it in the past, why do we continue to believe that our government is made up of good and honorable men? After all, Dick Cheney defended torture as an instrument of government policy by saying that we had to "work the dark side" sometimes, to get what we want.

Then there's also the example of the Germans, who did not believe that their government was exterminating Jewish people in ovens. In fact, American troops had to force German citizens to clean up the concentration camps, removing the bodies and giving them proper burials. How's that for a rude awakening? Since the Nazi regime is considered to be the most evil government in the history of humanity, people often wonder why the German people did nothing. They allowed the horrors to happen. The burning of the Reichstag turned out to be an inside job...yet it was that act of terror that rallied the German people around a man who didn't win the popular vote when he came to power either. Why don't we learn from history? America has produced plenty of psychopaths: Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, the Son of Sam, Jeffrey Dahmer. We also have school shootings, postal workers on rampages, workplace shootings. Why is it so hard to believe that the most powerful government in the world with the most powerful military in the world would not take advantage of the power at their disposal? Especially when our energy needs are depleting the planet and we're forced to compete with China and India, which have 40% of the world's population compared to our 4%? It's time for Americans to realize that we have psychopaths at the helm of our government. It's baffling how people who could have been so wrong in their predictions of Iraq being a cakewalk with chocolate, flowers, and Iraqi oil financing the entire cost of the war and rebuilding, how they could still be running our government instead of locked into padded cells in a psyche ward somewhere, where they belong.

How did I get to be so "cynical"? Nah...how did Americans get to be so naive? Our Founding Fathers set up a system of checks and balances to disperse the power away from a single person. James Madison, if I'm not mistaken, said something like, "if men were angels, we wouldn't need government." But they also knew that government could be corrupt, and many warned that leaders often used war to restrict the freedom of citizens at home and to accumulate more power. They knew from history that democracy is fragile and that power corrupts even the most noble of people. They read about the fall of the Roman Republic. We have the example of the fall of the Weimar Republic in Germany in the 1930s.

I'd love to have a government I could trust again, and one I could support. But the events since December 2000 has turned me against it. They may take my tax money, but they'll never make me fight in their immoral wars. Until the government comes clean about it's history of subverting the peoples of the world through phony conflicts, it does not deserve our support and most especially not our blind obedience. Be wise. That's not cynicism, just good sense. If government officials can't or won't answer questions that make logical sense, why should we continue to buy their bags of bullshit? The events of 9/11 is a prime example. Open your eyes, think logically...the government's story simply does not make sense. World Trade Center 7 is the one they can't explain with logical reasoning...so you know they are lying.

Why a Democrat Will Be Our Next President (And Why We Should Worry)

I watched the CNN/YouTube Debate the other night on YouTube (what a great invention!). I was impressed by the quality of the answers by the candidates, and the questions asked. I laughed at the silly snowman posing a question about the threat of climate change. And I just read an article in which the Republicans are reconsidering participating in the scheduled CNN/YouTube debate next month, proving that they are cowards to not want to face questions by average people. Of course, it could be said that they are worried about a supposed "liberal bias", as Democrats had refused to participate in a Fox News sponsored debate. Since I view the Fox News network as nothing but a Bush-loyal propaganda network, I agree with the Democrats refusal to go on there. They aren't a news channel to take seriously until they get their facts right (and one example of their propaganda agenda is that they had referred to Congressman Mark Foley--you know, the guy who sent sex e-mails to underage male pages--as a Democrat, not his actual Republican Party membership).

Anyhow, in recent articles, I've read that Bush and his propaganda people are already starting to blame Democrats for the war in Iraq, thus why he wants to keep the troops over there until at least Inauguration Day. As Princess Leia would scream out, "it's a trap!" It most certainly is. And it's like he learned from the master, his own father. What did President George Herbert Walker Bush do in the immediate reelection defeat in 1992? He sent American troops to Somalia, leaving the mess to the next president, an untested foreign policy governor of a small, land-locked state. Somalia turned disasterous and who got blamed? That's right...President Clinton, even though it was Bush who got us into the mess in the first place.

That's the thing that scares me most about Iraq. I believe the Republicans are aware enough that they won't win the election in 2008. Their only hope in preventing an all out Democratic dominance for the next 30 years is to allow a Democrat to come in after Bush to clean up his mess, and then come back with a new winning strategy in 2012. They are counting on the well known adage about Americans having a short memory. By 2012, with a President Rodham-Clinton at the helm of an even more inflamed Iraq and raising taxes to pay for the Bush tax cuts, the Republicans are counting on her administration to be unpopular and giving them back control of the White House, possibly to Jeb Bush.

Because of their cynicism and a history of patience to wait out a term or two until they regroup (like during the Carter years to flush out the weak Ford for a stronger Reagan; or during the Clinton years to get Bush junior in government long enough to be presidential), I see them doing the same thing. Democrats have an unfortunate habit of not thinking through the evil motives of the Republican party. There was a cool quote that I read somewhere about how Democrats see politics as a sport in which opposing teams shake hands after the game ends, whereas Republicans see politics as warfare, in which all options are used to annihilate the enemy. How does one compete effectively against that? It's time for Democrats to stop acting weak and playing to the Republican strengths. It's time for Democrats to realize how power-hungry, ruthless, and downright evil the Republican party can be and give them a taste of their own medicine. I mean we're talking about a party in which candidates recently debated the appropriateness of "enhanced interrogation techniques" (an Orwellian euphemism for TORTURE). The moral depravity of the Republican party shows that they cannot be trusted to uphold American values that are embedded in our Constitution. In this century alone, the Republicans have shown their true face: greed, lies, war-mongering, sexual hypocrisy, repressed homosexuality, immorality, obsession with violence, and no compassion for the poor. They don't deserve to remain in political office until they renounce their dark, fascist-leaning impulses.

But that's exactly what we are dealing with. To confront this corrupt administration and party, the Democrats must end the war in Iraq by having the troops withdraw from Iraq BEFORE the January 20, 2009 deadline. This war must be confined to the Bush administration and not be allowed to carry over to the next president, because if it does, the blowhards on the right will start blaming the Democratic president for everything that is going wrong (while at the moment, they are still cheerleading the war, saying that there's all this good going on). The flip flop is something I don't want to see. This is Bush's war of choice, he failed to meet the objectives he set out before the American people (to get rid of the weapons of mass destruction, which did not exist). We must make him own his war. If we succeed in getting the troops home by Inauguration Day, it will be justice served. After all, it was a bit suspicious when the American hostages in Iran were finally released as soon as Reagan was sworn in as president (especially when it turned out later that Reagan had sold weapons to Iran in the mid 1980s). It's payback time. And Bush needs to pay for his war and not be allowed to pass the blame for his incompetent disaster on to another president. Especially since President Hillary Rodham-Clinton will have her hands full trying to turn around the deficits and economy...all while proving that a woman can actually do a better job as president than a man. The Republicans are hoping that they can give her the Iraqi time-bomb and then blame her for everything that has gone wrong. And if that happens, I have a bad feeling that Americans will fall for it. Bush is counting on it, because his whole legacy depends on the outcome of the Iraq war. If he can blame the other party, he will. We must prevent that from happening.

The Rest of the Questions from "One" (the Movie)

Continuing from yesterday's entry where I answer ten of the twenty questions posed by the New Agey film "One"...

11) What happens to you after you die?

As I like to say, death is the ultimate "undiscovered country". Everyone has their theories and people of different religious views love to argue about who goes to heaven and who goes to hell. One of the things that I had a hard time accepting since childhood was the Christian concept that only those who accept Jesus as a personal saviour will be granted admission to heaven. It didn't make logical sense to me, because what happened to everyone who lived BEFORE Jesus lived? What happened to all those who never heard about Jesus? And the biggest question of all, why would God judge a person based on how they view an unproveable claim (that Jesus died for the sins of all humanity).

Since my teenage years, I've been fascinated by Near Death Experiences and tend to believe them. The ones I've read about presented a view of heaven that I agree with. And it's this...after we die, we are there. There is no pearly gate with St. Peter checking for your name in a book. You are there (or not there, depending on your spiritual state). Soon after reuniting with your loved ones, you get a life review of the good, the bad, and the ugly. And based on what you've done, and what your soul contract says (that you agreed to before you're born), you judge yourself based on how well (or not well) you accomplished the goals as set out in your contract. To use Hitler as an example...it is documented that he wanted to be an artist and/or an architect. But, in life, he was rejected by art institutes and destiny led him in another direction. Now, can you imagine the hell you'd experience if you had a life review in which you feel the pain of every person you hurt, and then you see in your soul contract that you were supposed to be an artist, not a dictator. Well, how could you redeem yourself after that? You fell so far from the mark. I can't imagine a worse hell than that.

But death is not something to fear. It will be the greatest adventure of our lives when we make that journey...

12) Describe heaven and how to get there.

I'm one of those who believe that heaven is within. We carry a piece of it now. We also have the ability to unleash hell, but we can bring about heaven. Heaven is not a physical place to get to, it's transdimensional. We can only get there through spirit. And I believe that heaven is a perfect place full of love and light. I believe the buildings and trees and flowers...everything has a sparkle to them, a translucent quality in which you can see all colours reflected at once. It'll be more beautiful than anything we see on earth. I also believe that we get our own homes, if we so desire. I know what I want waiting for me...an over the water bamboo bungalow in a "South Pacific" type lagoon, with dolphins swimming around and a golden retriever to welcome me back. And inside the bungalow will be nothing but all the books I hope to read. That's my vision of heaven.

13) What is the meaning of life?

I believe that despite all our distractions and excuses and diversions, ultimately we only have one commission for our life...to love one another unconditionally. It is perhaps the hardest request God could ever make of us, but I believe that because love is the only thing that exists in the spiritual realm, that God had to create an imperfect earth so we could learn what it was like to live without love, and how hard it really is to love unconditionally. That's what truly separates us from God. I know for me personally, I have a hard time loving the likes of Dick Cheney. But God loves him without condition. And in the spiritual realm, he is our spiritual brother, and in a sense, we have failed to keep him on the spiritual track. But really, that's the only meaning of life that matters in the end. We are free to add other meanings, but love is the ultimate and absolute truth of the universe.

14) Describe God.

I now think of God as the ultimate artist. The world is His canvas, His work of art, His masterpiece. Thus why it's offensive that the people who claim to believe so absolutely in Him seek to speed up the destruction of this planet. It's extremely rude to destroy another person's work of art. But in the end, these people will feel foolish at the way they wasted life by judging people who don't share their warped theology when they realize that God truly loves all people equally...including the outcasts that are condemned by fundamentalist religions.

15) What is the greatest quality humans possess?

Adaptability. Just learning about evolution from the hunter/gatherer days through all the inventions over time to where we are now, it's truly amazing. Those who can't adapt, die out. It shows how endurable we are.

16) What is it that prevents people from living to their full potential?

I'm still trying to figure that one out, because I'm one of those people who is in a job that is far below what I'm capable of. I never wanted to be in this situation and wonder how I'm going to get myself out of it. I want to do more, to work where I'm most passionate (politics and human rights!)...so, I'll let you know when I find that one out. If anyone has the secret, please let me know! And soon!!

17) Non-verbally, by motion or gesture only, act out what you believe to be the current condition of the world.

Well, this will be a stretch, but you'll just have to picture me sitting there crying my eyes out. I think the world is crying out in pain right now. I wish I could present a happier picture, but that's what it feels like. We're a long way off from December 31, 1999, when I felt all around me that people were genuinely excited, optimistic, and full of good will for the turn of the millennium. It was such a good vibe, everywhere I went that day and I didn't hear any pessimists talk about Y2K. It was just an exciting time. How did we ever get away from that?

18) What is your one wish for the world?

That they'll know true peace and reject any political or religious leader who seeks to divide humanity to maintain their grip on power. When the people of the planet reject these corrupt leaders, we will show our true power. We have the backing of the spiritual realm behind us. Let's do it!

19) What is wisdom, and how do we gain it?

Socrates said that "wisdom begins in wonder". I don't know a better explanation than that.

20) Are we all One?

My favourite hymn happens to be called "We Are One in the Spirit" and I just love it everytime it's sung in church or at reunion or on retreats. It sums up everything I believe in a nutshell. Besides the melody and lyrics, I think what also appeals to me about this hymn is that I haven't discovered it in any other church but ours, so it makes it uniquely RLDS (Community of Christ). And I'm glad that we can have exclusive claim on something so good...but it would also be nice to share it with the rest of the world. In fact, I can almost envision the people of the world singing it by candlelight or on a mountaintop like that old Coca-Cola commercial about teaching the world to sing in perfect harmony (and drink Coca-Cola). We are most definitely one. Don't you ever forget it!

Twenty Questions from "One" (the Movie)

Last night, I watched the spiritual film "One", which was a disappointment, mostly because of how it's arranged and that it's a first time film by amateur filmmakers. Which reminds me of another thing that frustrates me about "New Age" people, who rave about any and all films that push the same spiritual message (that we are all one). I didn't like "What the Bleep Do We Know?" either and have my critiques about the film "The Secret" (see an earlier post). Just because they peddle the same spiritual message about the oneness of all doesn't make it a good film. I can find spiritual content in films like "Star Wars", "Contact", "E.T.", and even "Forrest Gump" and prefer it because I'm all about good production values. Don't peddle a shoddy product just because you have a good message.

But, inside the DVD case are the twenty questions the filmmakers asked a group of famous spiritual practitioners (including the "trendy" Deepak Chopra, whom I've never really taken a liking to, and seeing him here only reminds me of what I dislike about him). The filmmakers also ask average people the questions, and they rave about the dredlocked white homeless teen whose answers just blew them away (if he's "spiritually profound" enough to inspire the filmmakers, that's a seriously scary thought because he came across to me as a typical teenager). In fact, what I dislike about the film is that its more like a documentary about making the film. But the questions are interesting and I'd like to offer my answers to their questions.

1) Why is their poverty and suffering in the world?

That's basic "Spirituality 101" question. It shocks me that people are still hung up on that question. My belief is that God created an imperfect world for humans to overcome. It doesn't have to be this way, but sadly, corporate capitalists have managed to con a majority of people into believing that their prosperity reflects their inner quality, and that wealth is a blessing from God that they are more righteous and praying right and all that other crap. It lets people off the hook about actually doing something to eradicate poverty from the planet and makes them feel better about buying the McMansion, the SUV, and the luxury vacations. It does not have to be this way. Bono has the right idea with his campaign to make poverty history.

2) What is the relationship between science and religion?

It doesn't have to be contentious. Science isn't meant to replace religion, but when churches make claims that later turn out to be proven false (i.e. that the earth is the center of the universe), it puts people's faith in jeopardy because they were led to believe the false things. It's remarkable to me how so many Christians reject evolution simply because they've been taught to believe that Adam and Eve are literally true. When I was retaking my Biology course last year, I loved re-reading about evolutionary theory and I have never had a problem with it (thanks to having a scientifically minded father). In fact, as I learned more about evolution, I'm even more in awe of God for creating such a process for our planet. It made me think of God as the Ultimate Artist, with our planet and universe as His canvas. We are like a living work of art, always striving to improve. What's so anti-religious about evolution? The Mormons have it right in their belief about "eternal progression". For who wants to remain the same? Oh, besides the fundamentalists, I mean.

3) Why are so many people depressed?

Are they? My answer is that people are depressed because of a feeling of powerlessness about our world and especially with our nation's economic scheme, which pretends to be Christian but is the furthest thing from it. I believe most of depression is about being off track from where one's spiritual compass indicates they should be. I know for me that I'm not in the job that I went to college for, and if I were to remain in my current job for the rest of my life, I can't imagine a worse hell than that. So, feeling a bit depressed serves as a catalyst to get the heck out of there. It's a reminder that I'm not living the life I was born to live, so I have to search for what I do want. It would be far worse if I remain in my state of frustration, resigned to a mundane and low wage work. There is a current of a spiritual revolution underway and I'm still searching to catch the part of the wave that will take me into my dream life...which is being a part of a movement that actually improves our world. Say no to prozac and ritalin!

4) What are we all afraid of?

I think most people are afraid of being alone and isolated. Again, this is symptomatic of our economic scheme, which peddles selfishness as the highest quality to have, so we can get rich and live the life we wish to live. It promotes the zero sum game...which means we gain at someone else's expense, so people who are part of the rat race think nothing of backstabbing co-workers in their quest for promotions in the ladder towards the coveted CEO, where they can finally cash out. But as Enron teaches us, that's a morally bankrupt pursuit. No wonder why so many people are lonely, despite having all the gadgets to keep in touch with one another. We don't trust others because we see people as obstacles to our piece of the capitalist pie and think nothing of elbowing our way to the biggest cut. Selfishness breeds loneliness; selflessness builds community.

5) When is war justified?

I subscribe to the Just War theory, which states that war is always a last resort when diplomacy fails; that it is a defensive act against an aggressor (and make no mistake, we are the aggressor in the Iraq War); it seeks to minimize the damage to civilians; only military and government officials/structures are targeted; and the war ends immediately when the stated objective is accomplished. Since Bush had said on May 1, 2003 "Mission Accomplished", why are we still there? Besides, his shifting rationales for why we went to war proves that this war is unjust. Any war that begins with a lie is not just and can never be just. And I think it's in America's spiritual contract (dating back to the Declaration of Independence) that we will only win just wars. It has proven true thus far. Iraq, Vietnam, and Korea were unjust wars and have been costly failures. When are we ever gonna learn?

6) How would God want us to respond to aggression and terrorism?

When I was in college, I had hoped to graduate in the Honors program, which included a dissertation that would have to be defended and then the actual paper itself would be bound...but it was a struggle just to get through school, so I wasn't able to do what I wanted to do. I had planned to write my dissertation on how minority groups use violence against countries that operate out of their jurisdiction. For instance, after 9/11, Americans fear of terrorism was a little misplaced...especially when Bush wanted us to believe that terrorists hate our freedoms and that's why they commit acts of terror against us. However, who ever heard of a terrorist attack in Sweden or New Zealand? Those citizens aren't any less free than we are. In fact, their quality of life is a lot better than ours...yet terrorists aren't attacking those governments. Why not? Because those governments don't have military operations all over the world. My dissertation would have focused on examples like the French in regards to Algeria, Great Britain and the IRA, and the U.S. and Vietnam.

But that's a round about way of not actually answering the question...so let me just say that God would want us to find creative and nonviolent ways of solving those issues. When 9/11 happened, I saw it as "Columbine times a thousand", which is another way of saying that terrorism is a larger scale of what happens in school shootings. Its a result of an unequal and oppressive status quo, a lack of compassion, and a lashing out. It's a cry for help. If our country did a Marshall Plan and a Peace Corps type of work in the Middle East, we would have solved the terrorist problem. No one grows up in this world wanting to be a suicide bomber. Only a person in complete desperation would do such a thing, in order to cause the hurt in others so people can understand and share in the hurt. That's why it's a cry for help. When we ignore their hurt, we are actually inviting their pain to come into our lives when we don't have a say in it. So, it's better to be preventive than reactive. Unfortunately, our society is entirely too reactive while ignoring the preventive measures that would be less costly and less painful than dealing with the aftermath.

7) How does one obtain true peace?

By meditation or prayer. The calmness within really does wonders for the outside environment, even if it's chaotic. Without having peace within, we can't really have peace in our world. Once one achieves peace within, he or she can bring that calm serenity out into the world. And people do pick up on other people's states of being. In my last job, I knew one new guy was bad news from the start. He was a drama magnet and always had his chaotic family life intrude upon him at work. I was consistently shocked how a day wouldn't go by without some family drama causing problems at work. It was so radically different from my own life, which is pretty calm and tranquil. It tells me that some people are addicted to the drama, but it doesn't have to be that way. So, I don't believe that guy is alone in his chaotic life. If he can't have peace at home, how could he bring peace at work, or into the larger world? He was a very difficult person to work with because of that.

8) What does it mean to live in the present moment?

This is one I have trouble with, because I'm all over the map. I can simulataneously reminisce about a past experience, focus on a future goal, and go about my daily work by being in the present...but that's probably why I have a hard time hearing that soft inner voice that guides me towards my path. At times when I'm truly in the present moment, I do get guidance on how to act, what to say to someone, or what choice I should make. I wish it happens more often, so that's something I should work on...but I do agree that we should strive to focus only on the present moment. It's very disciplined, but rewarding...because that's where true insights come from.

9) What is our greatest distraction?

I would say without a doubt money. The pursuit of it, the accumulation of it, the materialism it brings about, the arguments about it...all of it is a major distraction from what's truly important in life. And because we're caught up in the money game, we're afraid of loss, thus why we truly can't change our government because no one wants to rise up and storm the White House gates to forceably remove those people from power. A people's coup couldn't happen in the U.S. the way it did in Eastern Europe in 1989, yet that event shows how powerful people could be if they rise up together to remove the abusers from power. We're so afraid of losing our jobs, of not being able to pay our mortgage or bills, to make a ripple. And our government is counting on that fact to keep us docile and compliant.

10) Is current religion serving its purpose?

It depends on the religion. For my church, I would say yes, though it could do more. Other religions serve the capitalist state and keeps its followers in line, which is far from what Jesus wanted for us. So, it's hard to say. Some religions are greater than others. But all of them do serve a purpose in the follower's life. While I might not be LDS or Scientologist or Jehovah's Witness or fundamentalist, I recognize that those religions have value in the members who belong to those faith groups. It's not for any of us to say what religion is right for another person. We have to trust that people are where they need to be, and if they are not, they generally do seek changes in their lives.


And with that, I'll continue questions #11 through 20 in tomorrow's entry.

If I Could Talk With George...

...Here's what I would say:

Listen, George...um, you don't mind if I call you George, do you? Because if I call you "Dubya", I might have a slip of the tongue and it'd come out "Dumbya", and I don't want to disrespect you. And honestly, I don't respect you enough to call you "Mr. President", because let's face it...you aren't my president. Not only did I not vote for you, but I don't believe you authentically won either the 2000 or the 2004 election. Of course, I can't prove that you committed fraud, but let's just say that there is a record kept in heaven of what is the truth behind every event that occurs on our planet. Now, you say that you're a believer in all that, so aren't you just a tad bit worried that you are running up a karmic debt faster than the actual national debt you've racked up?

So, as long as we're being honest here, I just want to say a few things.

First, I'm sorry that you had an emotionally cold mother and detached father who seemed more interested in his international political career than being there for you when your sister died and when you wanted to play catch with your old man. I truly understand your plight, so I have with me a gift for you: the DVD of "Field of Dreams." Now, it might be a little too "metaphysical" for you, but I think even you might tear up at the ending when Kevin Costner asks a younger version of his father if he wanted to play a game of catch. No guy can keep his eyes dry after that line! Besides, it looks like you need a good cry. No one's gonna think you're weak if you just let it out. Well, except for Ann Coulter, but come on...she's really a transgendered man who was formerly a Nazi SS agent.

Second, I heard you loud and clear when you said in 1999 that you never wanted to be president, that it was never your dream in life. Man, was that a truthful statement or what? I mean your whole administration shows just how much you did not want to be president. You really managed to make a complete disaster of your office and our country and world, all because you were given a job that you didn't want. And in the 2004 debates, you kept repeating how much "hard work" it was to be president. It was like you were begging the Americans to vote for the other guy...but they didn't (or, at least, the computer voting machines didn't). So, you're stuck, digging an even deeper hole than where we were in 2004. I feel your pain.

Third, I know that you were wired for the debates and receiving answers from someone (was it Dick Cheney, the same man whose lap you sat on when facing the super scary 9/11 Commission? Or was it Karl Rove, who secretly nurses a crush on you. Oh come on, you've got to have noticed by now, the way he whispers in your ear all the time). You didn't care enough about the issues to do your homework. You had to have assistance to help you debate a mealy mouthed liberal flip flopper like John Kerry. You weren't confident enough in your own abilities to think quickly and speak extemporaneously on random questions. I understand that. It's all "hard work" you didn't bargain for when your peeps stole the 2000 election.

Fourth point is actually a question. In an Iowa debate in 1999, you had said that Jesus was your favourite political philosopher because he had "changed your heart". What I'm curious to know is: (1) What specifically made Jesus "political"?; (2) What specifically made Jesus a "philosopher"?; and (3) What evidence can you show to prove that Jesus did indeed "change your heart"? The reason I ask is because in an interview with Tucker Carlson, he had asked you about your thoughts on Karla Faye Tucker, the woman you had executed despite Christian leaders asking for a stay of execution. You remember your response? You spoke in a scaredy little voice, mocking her plea: "Please, don't kill me!" Based on that display, how is it that Jesus changed your heart? I understand that you were an alcoholic business failure up until your 40th birthday when your wife gave the ultimatum that it was either the booze or her...but given all that we've seen with your lies, love of war and demonizing people who disagree with you, I fail to see any evidence of Christ in your life. In fact, if it were illegal to be a Christian, there would not be enough evidence to convict you as being guilty of Christianity. Here's what I think the real reason for your answer to that question. You couldn't say that your true favourite political philosopher was either Machiavelli or Leo Strauss, so you went with the one designed to win over the evangelical vote because they are so hungry to hear a politician speak about Jesus that they will swallow every shallow platitude without a deeper analysis of how your life reflects that belief. In other words, you lied about even that to score political points and it worked, even though it is a lie you will one day answer to Jesus someday (and hopefully Karla Faye Tucker will be standing right next to him when you meet your maker and His only begotten son).

And the fifth and final point I wanted to say to you is that I know about your smirk and that eyebrow twitch. It's your body's betrayal of your lying mouth. You make it so easy to know when you're telling a lie, because I just have to watch your face betray your mouth. Every time you smirk, it means you're saying a huge whopper that you can't believe people are swallowing. You think you're able to con the masses, but your face betrays you. That smirk is a dead giveaway. And your eyebrow twitch is designed to make what you are saying more believable, but it's also a dead giveaway. It's hard for you to emote sincerely because you don't believe what you're saying. Your fraudulent, immature mind betrays your true intentions. True, you have die hard true believers who no doubt would go Monica Lewinsky on you if you asked them to (I'll even name a few: Condoleeza Rice, Karen Hughes, Harriet Miers, and Rush Limbaugh), but I think most people have caught on to you. That's why you consistently poll below the 30% approval mark.

You say you don't care about how people perceive you because when the historians have their say, we'll all be dead. That statement also betrays you. A sincere Christian would never say such a thing. That's because authentic spiritual people know how history will be written. Martin Luther King, Jr. said that the long arm of the universe bends towards justice. He knew that he wouldn't live to see the day when our society would be racially integrated, but he knew that it would happen some day. He also knew that people who make a lonely and controversial stand for righteousness will one day be glorified as visionary. You think that will be the case with you, but nothing you've done in life has been righteous. You avoided Vietnam, even though you supported the war (Clinton was against the war and avoided it; Gore was against the war yet went to it; but you supported a war you didn't want to fight), then you ditched the National Guard when they wanted a flight physical (because you had "coke" in your system). You bankrupted three companies but came out with millions. You fought dirty against your opponents Ann Richards, John McCain, Al Gore, and John Kerry. You ignored terrorist warnings and allowed 9/11 to happen so you could get your war in Iraq. You lied about your reasons for going to war. You horribly bungled it. You ignored warnings about the levys in New Orleans and then waited 5 days to respond, after seeing a specially made DVD (instead of watching on Fox as it was happening). I mean, you really managed to make a huge mess of things and you think history is going to vindicate you in the end?

Let me put it to you mano a mano...the best thing you can do, George, short of hara kiri, is to resign, apologize to the nation (a blubbering farewell address to the nation might score a few political points), and disappear into obscurity. A few photos of you in the fetal position sucking on your thumb at the feet of Laura might help a nation and world forgive you and feel sorry for you. After all, you never wanted to be president. That evil man Dick Cheney made you do it. It's all his fault! All you ever wanted to do was play baseball with your dad and be able to run to your mommy when you got a boo-boo. I get that. The world gets that. All we're waiting for is a confession and resignation. Then you can be that person you were meant to be.

Happy Pioneer Day!

Today in Utah, they celebrate Pioneer Day, which is about as big, if not a bigger holiday than Independence Day, complete with fireworks to celebrate the day the LDS Pioneers arrived in Salt Lake valley and Brigham Young announced that "this is the right place!" As my friend Matt Baker says, ever since then the Mormons have mistaken that for a political statement and have voted Republican. Either that or they are confused by their hymn "Choose the Right" (which we don't have in our church, so it's probably my favourite Mormon hymn).

I don't really celebrate Pioneer Day (because that's not my heritage), but now that I live in Oregon, I am fascinated by those pioneers who moved from the known and developed world and ventured across this continent of ours, facing the wrath of native populations, disease, homesickness, and other struggles to develop civilization that we take for granted. Where would we be without these pioneers leading the way? In a modern day sense, I am a lot like them in that I have moved back and forth across this continent of ours, though it's expensive and a pain in the ass with all the stuff I have. I still have most of my things in Atlanta to move across the country, but with gas prices being as high as they are, I can't really afford to do it this year as I had hoped.

But, today, in honour of the all the pioneers, from the Mormons to those who continued on to Oregon and California territories, I thank them for their adventurous spirit and hard work taming the wilderness, which we benefit from today. It's also with a bit of remorse for the native populations who lived in these areas and have a rightful claim on the land. Sometimes, even I get frustrated with our obsession with property ownership and using houses as a money making scheme, which drives up costs out of reach for people like me to afford my own home. But, this is beautiful country, so it's hard to say that progress is wrong. Evolution is all about adapting or dying out...and unfortunately, rigid tribal systems the world over have a hard time "competing" against our rapid progress-oriented world. We are simply here now, hopefully not to make a mess of things for future generations to enjoy...so they can go on celebrating Pioneer Day.

Meeting Indigos and Learning to Fire the Grid

Yesterday, I decided to attend a meeting of fellow "Indigos" after wavering back and forth about whether or not I really wanted to attend. I'm glad I decided to attend, because I was able to receive a message I was meant to receive.

First of all, for those who don't know about Indigos, it is a New Agey name for the current generation of children who are supposed to change our world by turning it on it's head through their less than patience manner and refusal to obey the established order. This generation is supposedly psychic and spiritually advanced, and we'd do well to heed them. Indigos supposedly started out as a trickle...with a small minority in the Baby Boomer generation and a little bit more in Generation X, and still a bit more in Generation Y. But after that, it's supposedly 70% of the young generation now populating our schools. The group that teachers and society wants to lazily diagnose as being ADD and thus put on ritalin rather than dealt with directly.

I'm slightly skeptical on the whole Indigo thing. I find it hard to believe that 70% or more of the younger generation supposedly have high psychic ability, or that having psychic ability makes one an Indigo. I don't really have psychic ability, but I've always had a problem with authority, whether religious, military, or governmental. I trust myself to govern more fairly than those in authority positions. I'm impatient with the relative slowness of change in the spiritual sense of the word, frustrated by people's willingness to be unthinking sheep in following the herd instead of thinking boldly about why such beliefs deserve our unquestioned obedience. From descriptions I've read about Indigos, I found myself feeling very much like one. But I'm not psychic.

While this group was interesting, and I might add that I was most likely the youngest one there, out of ten or so people, it also reminded me about the frustrations I have about the whole "New Age movement." People are almost too accepting of any idea that others propose or claim in a way that seems very dangerously naive. For instance, one guy kept saying that the biggest problem where religion went wrong was naming whatever they feared as "evil." When he said that there was no evil, others around me nodded their heads as though this was a truism. I couldn't believe it. Of course there is evil. Hitler was evil. Torture and killing is evil. To deny that evil exists is dangerous and inaccurate. What they mean to say is that when fighting or standing up to evil, one must be careful not to return evil with evil (as Bush has done in his war against "the evildoers"), because we'll lose our souls in the process. But, this is the problem I see with liberal minded people and why we keep losing against conservatives in religion and politics. We allow evil to happen because we don't believe it exists (why else could Bush not be impeached for his war crimes while Clinton was impeached for his sexual immorality?).

One thing I did learn in this meeting was that July 17th was a day that psychics and light-workers devoted the same hour of that day to "Fire the Grid." What that means is that our planet's energy system is being sucked into very negative spaces (not "evil", mind you!) and people on this planet needed to take advantage of the universal energy field on that significant date to capture and rechannel it by focusing on positive affirmations in an attempt to "re-boot" planet Earth's energy so it can move in the right direction (which I'm hoping means the impeachment and removal from office of the Bush regime). It sounds like a whole bunch of mumble jumble, but we'll see. I'm open minded to consider the possibilities that this group might be good for me as I seek to make corrective changes in my own life, to go in the direction I'm meant to go in (working as a low wage slave for an unappreciative organization with spiritually immoral ethical practices is simply not what this Indigo boy was born to accomplish in this lifetime!). We'll see what happens in the coming month.

One thing that does alarm me is that others in the group share my sense of foreboding about the months of August and September being months that are prime targets for a terrorist attack that would dwarf 9/11 in a last ditch effort for Bush/Cheney to regain the support of blindly loyal Americans who are starting to awaken from their slumber over the fiasco in Iraq. If they want to retain power and possibly extend their reign of terror beyond January 20, 2009, a well timed and targeted terrorist attack just might be the ticket to get Americans to rally around their faltering administration for one more war...this time against Iran. That's my big worry anyhow. And it doesn't help when Michael Chertoff of the Homeland Security Department is claiming that his bowels are telling him such an attack is imminent and Bush and Rice are telling the media and Congress to wait until September before passing judgment on the effectiveness of the surge. As they say in the "Star Wars" films..."I have a bad feeling about this." We've seen time and again how this administration knows marketing techniques, using the month of September for a media blitzkrieg to unleash the new b.s. product they are selling. Whatever happens in the next couple months, I hope and pray that Americans won't be conned into complacency and obedience again. We must remain awake and prepare to face the home grown evil that cares not one whit about human life.

Farewell to Tammy Faye (Bakker) Messner

Tammy Faye Bakker...I mean, Messner, has left our realm for the uncertain one that awaits her on Friday. Though she was known and mocked for her heavy makeup, false eyelashes, and Betty Boopish voice/personality, she is a true American Icon (for better or for worse). Americans, it's been observed, love a good comeback story, and none are as fascinating as the rise and fall and rise again of Tammy Faye.

I never heard about her until the scandal in 1987 with the PTL ministry she ran with her then-husband Jimmy which featured a Christian-themed amusement park along the lines of Disney World, complete with condo timeshares that turned out to be a money making fraud. While suckering evangelicals into sending money for their ministry, the Bakkers were living it up Hollywood style in a huge mansion, and most shocking of all...an AIR CONDITIONED DOG HOUSE!!! I remember that outrage the most, because my mother pointed out to me that some people in Thailand are of the view that pets in an American household live better than they do. That's a pretty sad and disturbing view on so many levels.

Anyhow, at a time when I was struggling with the hypocritical Christian youth ministers I dealt with as a teenager, I was pleased to see Christian hypocrites fall from the disgrace of their own greed and the fraud they committed against their own sincere followers who probably donated way more money than they could afford, for some hope that it would come back to them fourfold (as many charlatans promise those who donate money to them). Prosperity theology is very damaging and deceptive, yet so many people fall for it, based on their own greed and lust for wealth. All they end up doing is help these phony Christian leaders live a lavish lifestyle. I've felt for a long time that Jesus obligates us to help those less fortunate than ourselves, not those who are more fortunate! But like a lot of things in our society, charlatans can find a way to work their pyramid schemes into any facet of society. Suckers are there to be fleeced.

I remember in 1989 when Tammy Faye Bakker sang on the courthouse steps after her husband was convicted and given a 45 year prison sentence (considered severe by many people, but not enough for my tastes, though I've changed my view over time to agree that it was severe). She sang horribly off key, "On Christ the solid rock I stand..." (or whatever that hymn is called). She kind of ruined it for me. Now, whenever I hear that song (which isn't often, thank God), I can't help but think of Tammy singing it on the courthouse steps, in full makeup and eyelash glory like a bad Betty Boop impersonation. Nightmares! Oh, it still gives me nightmares.

But an amazing thing happened to her in the years since. A redemption story, like we love in our great nation. She seemed to be less judgmental, more accepting of others who are outcasts, even embracing the community of people who were most likely to be in her camp to begin with (key word being CAMP). That's right. I'm talking about her status as a gay icon...following in the footsteps of Cher, Bette Midler, and Barbra Streisand. They seem to love campy schtick. Must be the makeup and personality. I don't really get camp, unless it involves tents and mosquitos, but if she could be embraced by that community, then perhaps she's not in the same vein as the Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells of the world.

I've seen her in interviews and can't help but think that she's not a monster or a charlatan. She grew and changed. Tragedy humbled her. Money might have corrupted her in the 1980s, but in the aftermath, she became about as likeable as Dolly Parton (who I think is very likeable). So, of course, I hope she is in the loving embrace of God and Jesus in heaven (where Falwell is hopefully not...at least not until his hypocrisy and judgmentalism are burned away in the other place). The verdict is still out on her former husband Jimmy, but I think she represents what's possible in American society. The ability to change and become better, with the forgiveness and support of the American people. Her son carries on her legacy by his ministry to the outcasts in Atlanta (I wanted to attend his church while I lived there, but never got around to it...probably because I was "scared" of the punk types who attend his services).

So, farewell Tammy Faye. You added a bit of needed colour to the American evanglical landscape. Though Jan Crouch strives to carry on in your likeness (what with the big hair, heavy makeup, false eyelashes, and big boobs), you were a true American icon with the classic redemption story. I hope you rest in peace with the good Lord above.

Namaste

Another Republican Hypocrite Exposed!

Last week, Senator Vitter, a Republican in the Religious Right mode of moralizing family values as a voting issue, was exposed as having been on the D.C. Madam's call list. He admitted in a press conference that he did seek out the services of a call girl to engage in...well, let's just say that it wasn't Tiddly-winks they were playing. With his wife at his side, he made his confession. The news reported that during the 1998 debate on impeachment over Clinton's sexual affair with an intern, Vitter's wife was asked if she would forgive her husband (like Hillary had done) if he did such a thing. Her response was alarming. She had said that she would be more like Lorena Bobbitt and hinted that she would chop his most precious body part off. Yikes! And yet, Vitter still engaged in adultery...even paying for the transgression! All while professing family values and voting to impeach Clinton for lying about his sexual affair. Um...of course Clinton lied about his affair. When has an adulterer ever not lied about it at first? And the lie is somewhat understandable, even if it is still wrong. Yet, a lie to save face and protect loved ones is different than a lie to con Americans into supporting a devastating war, is it not? Why do conservatives get hung up on lies about sex, but not lies about war and violence? It goes to the very heart of the divide between liberals and conservatives. Conservatives are quesy about sexuality and love instead of guns and violence. They have it backwards.

But, its all a ruse. Republicans are every bit as sexual as Democrats, perhaps even moreso. They can't help being hypocrites though, for as long as they tie themselves to the claim of being pro-family values, they can't be honest with themselves if they find themselves in bed with a high priced call girl...or as in the case with that one Republican, Jack Ryan, who was running for the Illinois senate seat in 2004, who forced his actress wife Jeri Ryan (who played Seven of Nine on one of the "Star Trek" shows) to indulge his sex club fantasies in Paris. They still claim to higher morality, despite hypocrisy after hypocrisy exposed. The most notable chain of sexual hypocrisy occured in 1998 when House Speaker Newt Gingrich vowed to make that year's mid-term election a referendum on Clinton's adultery. After the election when he resigned, he was exposed to have engaged in adultery with his secretary. Congressman Bob Livingstone was next, and was set to become the next Speaker until the news revealed his having had an adulterous affair. Congressman Dennis Hastert was the next Republican to be revealed as an adulterer but became the Speaker until his party finally got swept from power last year due in part to the sexual hypocrises of televangelists and the Republican Party overlooking a Republican Congressman's sexually explicit emails to underage male pages.

I mean, how many scandals does it take to convince Americans that Republicans have no right to claim sexual morality. To do so is hypocrisy. And its a fraud. Why does it happen so often? I think I have an understanding why. When I was in the Navy, a Chief Petty Officer and a Naval Lieutenant both said to me that I had no right to serve in the military because "liberals don't follow the rules." A year and a half after both men said that to me, they both went to Captain's Mast for breaking Navy rules against fraternization and sexual harassment (with women of different ranks than them). When I heard the news, I couldn't help but feel vindicated. And when I got my honorable discharge and good conduct medal in 1996, I can honestly say that I did follow the rules. What's so hard about following the rules? It wasn't the rules I objected to...but the attitude. Had a superior ordered me to torture someone or kill another person, I'm sure that I'd have difficulty obeying, but it fascinates me that it is conservatives who have a hard time following the rules they set up, especially on sexuality issues. Thus, every time one of them is exposed, I don't feel bad for them or their families. They deserve what they get. I think exposure is justified, because Jesus had done so himself. When the men accused the woman of adultery and were about to stone her to death, Jesus stood up for her and asked them what right they have to judge. He knew that they were just as guilty as she was, yet they wanted to make her pay while they put on a pious act like they were free of guilt. That's the greater sin.

It reminds me of one of my friends. When we first met, we had discussed many number of issues. I learned just how conservative he was. On one issue we had discussed, he believed that a man and woman cohabitating outside of marriage was not only wrong, but a sin. I didn't believe it was. I saw it as a personal choice issue. I've had friends who've done that and I never passed judgment on their decision to do so. That was their business, not mine. Yet, when my friend found the love of his life, he moved in with her after a month or two of dating. They co-habitated for six months before marriage. Whenever I brought this up with his previous view, instead of saying that he changed his mind, he got mad. He told me later that he still believes co-habitation is a sin and if someday his children do that, he would tell them that it was a sin. I was shocked. Why is it not okay for anyone else to co-habitate, but for yourself, you can do it? He didn't like my questioning on that and accused me of holding him to a higher standard than I held other people. I told him that I hold everyone to the standard they claim to hold, but even then, no standard is held to the highest level that I hold myself. I hate hypocrisy more than anything else, so I'm not going to tell people how to live their lives, especially if I'm doing whatever it is I'm condemning. So, yes, if a friend tells me he believes something is a sin and I see him doing just that, I'll call him up on it. I wouldn't be a good friend if I let him slide on the values he claims to hold. He might not like it, but someone has to keep friends honest. If he hadn't made such moral pronouncements, it wouldn't even be an issue.

Thus why I hate the moralizing and hypocritical Republican party. The more Republican politicians that get exposed for their lies and sexual immorality, the better. It's time for Americans to wake up and realize that politicians have no right to legislate morality, and also to know that often the people who speak most about morality have the most to hide. Psychologists call it overcompensating, others call it hypocrisy. And lest we forget, Jesus seemed to hate hypocrisy more than any other transgression. It's not difficult to understand why. Hypocrites want to hold other people to a higher standard than they hold themselves, which is wrong. We should always hold ourselves to a higher standard than we hold other people. And most important of all, we shouldn't crucify people for the sins we are guilty of, because someday, it will come back like a boomerang. No one likes hypocrites. What a shame the Republican party is full of them. I anxiously await whatever fruits Larry Flynt's crusade to expose more of them bears. May such exposure lead to a complete electoral wipeout of the most sanctimonious and pseudo-religious political party that ever slithered on the American scene. I'd love to be able to say, good riddance Repugs. Back to the cess pool where you belong, to feed on pond scum. America can do without your phony religious values postering.

Chicago's Cloud Gate

That's my reflection...but somehow, the photo lab flipped the negatives when saving it to the disk.

The cosmic egg



Chicago's Cloud Gate

Earth Gets Its Own "Council of Elders"

I read on www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/07/18/2612/ about a group being formed made up of some of the most innovative and popular leaders around the world, to be called "Elders" as they seek to inspire and solve some of the most difficult issues facing our planet today.

Here's a partial list: Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, Kofi Annan, Mary Robinson (former president of Ireland), Jimmy Carter, Muhammad Yunnus (known as "the Banker to the Poor" for his founding of the Grameen Bank), and Aung San Suu Kyi (currently under house arrest in Burma/Myanmar)...to name but a few. I don't have the whole list, but I think the Dalai Lama, Al Gore, Mikhail Gorbachev and Vaclav Havel should also be included in this impressive group.

When I read the article, I had a feeling that there is a spiritual force at work in our world. We can't see it, but we can feel that something is brewing in the undercurrents. There is a force at play in our world as we seem to come to a head over a multitude of issues facing the very real challenge of sustaining life on our planet. It could very well be a planetary emergency, an S.O.S. distress call from the spiritual realm to our material realm.

In my diverse readings on near death experiences, psychic's descriptions of heaven, and spiritual texts of various religious paths, one idea that has captured me the most is the idea of a "Council of Elders" that exists in the heavenly realm. This "council" is made up of the most spiritually advanced/evolved souls in the universe. And it is this council that we supposedly face when we get our post-life review and again when we make "the contract" to future plans in the next lifetime on earth. These beings help us see more clearly what we need to work on as we continue to strive towards spiritual perfection. It's an idea that has captured my imagination, and I've even seen glimpses of the concept in films like "The Matrix Reloaded" (in Zion, you'll see a table with 12 people facing the group of humans as they discuss their plans, concerns and ideas regarding the war against the machines).

The earth does indeed need a group of elder statesmen of various nations to work together to show the inhabitants of this planet that we must work together to solve the problems of poverty, disease, nationalism, war, greed, and environmental sustainability. Future unborn souls are counting on us to give them a world worth growing up in. One of the most brilliant things God has done for us, is to give us inspiring leaders to call us to our better selves. Unfortunately, too many are deceived by nationalistic pride and arrogance, religious bigotry, and other issues that divide us from one another. As Jesus warned, we can see the false prophets by the fruits of their actions. The world is simply too small to continue in the petty regional and factional conflicts. It is my deepest hope that the earth's Council of Elders will be effective in inspiring people around the world to ignore the voices of the right, which always seeks to keep people divided and fighting each other, and reach out to others even if they are different from us. I am one who wants this planet to be around for another billion years, able to sustain human life (without starting over again at the very beginning).

What's even most interesting is that this group of elders was announced on Nelson Mandela's 89th birthday yesterday. Happy Birthday, Nelson! Viva, Mandela, Viva!

Ten Questions for the Dalai Lama

On Monday night, I needed a spiritual uplift, so I decided to go see the film "10 Questions for the Dalai Lama" at the Cinema 21 in NW Portland. This follows my trend of seeing more and more documentaries in theaters. I thought of waiting until this is on DVD (or maybe it is already?), but I really needed a spiritual uplift this week and I consider the Dalai Lama to be the premier prophet of God in our lifetime. I'm still baffled how my fundamentalist Christian co-worker back in 2001 could ever use the word "evil" and "Satanic" to describe the Dalai Lama. My heart just lifts when I hear him speak and laugh. He, like Mother Teresa, Pope John Paul II, Nelson Mandela, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Aung San Suu Kyii, and even Lady Diana Spencer (better known as the Princess of Wales), always lifted me up in inspirational ways. That's something that neither Pat Robertson nor Jerry Falwell had the ability to do (then again, those two are capitalists pretending to be religious).

The Dalai Lama has such a cool laugh. As I watched him speak, often with a mischievious sense of humour, I couldn't help but think of who he reminded me of: YODA from the "Star Wars" universe! Perhaps that's where George Lucas got his inspiration (and not from an LDS prophet--Benson?--as was widely rumoured at BYU).

The documentary itself was very interesting. I'm glad that it gave a brief history lesson on the whole "Lama system" of Tibet. I haven't seen the film "Kundun" in several years, so I forget the details. But it was interesting that as a young man, the Dalai Lama was almost tricked by Chairman Mao into making agreements when the Communists overtook Tibet and claimed it as part of their country. At first, he thought the Chinese would help modernize Tibet and allow their culture to remain and flourish. But when Mao had told him that religion was bad and to be outlawed, the Dalai Lama, in his wisdom saw just who he was dealing with and began his crusade around the world to gain support for his mountainous country. Unfortunately, the world allowed China to do what it wills, and thus the atrocities in now turning Tibet into a sort of touristy gimmick, much like the state of Florida. But as I watched, I couldn't help but think of how our country had acted similiar to the Chinese communists. We annihilated a spiritual people who lived on this land for centuries before the Europeans arrived. We annexed Hawai'i at point of the gun. How are we any different?

But through the difficulties, I'm amazed how happy and funny the Dalai Lama is. That he has retained his impish sense of humour is fantastic. He's one person I'd love to meet. And I missed my chance when he was in Washington, D.C. in the summer of 2000. One guy from my church who graciously allowed me to stay in his house after I had to move out of the BYU-leased apartments and another church member's place. I should've went with him to the mall to see the Dalai Lama, but I thought it would be crowded and I wouldn't see anything. Turns out, the guy ended up shaking the Dalai Lama's hand and he bragged endlessly about it, probably to make me feel bad about not going. Well, it worked. I missed out my chance. But, I always enjoy hearing about other people's experience being in the Dalai Lama's presence and the testimony about his awareness, as though he could sense where to turn his attention to individuals in the crowd who most need the spiritual touch. That is the mark of a true spiritual leader. And when he speaks of the Chinese, it's never out of anger or spite. He realizes what a huge spiritual deficit they are suffering, the godless communists. They might've turned Tibet into a sleazy version of Las Vegas, but they'll never rob him of his soul or connection to the divine source.

In the documentary, I forget what all the ten questions are, but they were interesting. The most fascinating observation was the documentarian's first question...in which he said that he saw even among the poorest in India, a kind of happiness that he rarely saw in western societies among the rich. He had asked the Dalai Lama about that and the answer was profound but one I've felt is true for a long time (and the reason why we were destined to lose in Iraq). When you have a lot of possessions, you fear it's loss, and once you experience the loss, you feel sorrow and anger. But if you have nothing to lose, then you have everything to gain. Something like that. It's an idea that's in the Book of Mormon...why waging war with poor people is not only immoral, but foolish. A person with a lot to lose fighting against a person with nothing to lose...who wins? The answer is obvious, yet we in the industrialized west keep falling for it. When are we gonna change?

I left the theater feeling spiritually uplifted. I'm glad I went. To this day, I'll never understand how fundamentalist Christians (who follow Dobson, Falwell, Robertson, et al) can consider the Dalai Lama evil. If he is evil, then they don't know what evil is...and that is the true terror. People who cannot recognize evil are capable of committing some of the worst atrocities. No wonder why our country has been sliding faster and faster down the slippery slope of tyranny and oppression. We need more Dalai Lamas in our world to counterbalance the negative forces of those capitalist preachers pretending to be best buddies to Jesus. Our capitalist class has more in common with the communist leaders of China than they are willing to admit. Both groups see the destruction of authentic spiritual culture as the price of materialistic progress. And we're all poorer for it.

Namaste.

An Interesting Dream

A few nights ago, I had an interesting dream that I actually thought was real and when I woke up and realized it was only a dream, I was disappointed because it was so cool.

I was walking with my dad in some city that looked like a movie set. Somehow, we came across George Herbert Walker Bush. I kept feeling a need to talk to him, but I had to work up my courage, especially with my father there with me. My dad isn't outspoken and would shy away from any confrontation, but I can't resist a good unleashing of my mind on people who need awareness. So, I approached the honorable George Herbert Walker Bush, and somehow, the secret service agents didn't try to take me away. I started nice enough, with pleasantries. I actually liked him as president and thought he was better than Reagan. Then, I start ripping on his son and questioning his parenting abilities by giving the world such a dysfunctional person to lead our nation out of spite for his defeat in 1992. He was shocked, but even in his shocked state of my verbal lashing out at him, he still wanted to give me a gift. I can't remember what the gift was, but it was a small token of a presidential souvenir. I remember being touched by his gift and felt guilty about criticizing his son so harshly.

That was the dream. If I ever met the elder Bush, I don't think I'd lash out at him for his son, for I'm sure that when he thinks deeply about what his son has done in the world, he is very pained by his son's disasterous presidency. The elder Bush is no dummy. And he knows the truth about his son that he's tried to cover up all W's life...what with the cocaine conviction, the DUIs, the AWOL, the alcoholism, the sadism, the lack of curiosity, the short attention span, the loneliness. A parent can see that some children are beyond saving. I'm certain the elder Bush is fully aware of his son's major dysfunctions. I'm sure he commiserates with Jeb, whom everyone saw as the rightful heir to the Bush Dynasty. The pain must be very deep...especially when the elder Bush meets with his Saudi oil buddies in the Royal family and they share with him the view of Arabs in the Middle East on how much they hate his son. How does that feel to have your good, rich Arab friends hate your namesake and first born?

But, don't fret too much, George. At least your son will boost your administration in the history books. Your son has redeemed your decision in 1991 not to continue on to Baghdad. Future historians will use your famous quote in the book "A World Transformed" that was published in 1998 in which you had foreseen that invading Iraq would have been a huge disaster. If only your son had listened to you. Perhaps you weren't a great parent, but you were by far a better president than your son. But, I think you should go ahead and apologize to the entire world for dropping baby George on his head, and explain that's why he is the way he is. And please...don't put Jeb on the V.P. slot for Mitt Romney's campaign. I can live with a President Romney, but not if I fear that he'll be conveniently assassinated so your other son can sneak into the presidency the back way. Your brand is broken. Too bad Barbara didn't get an abortion way back when. We wouldn't be in this mess now if she had.

What Happened?!?

What can I say about John McCain, who I selected for my "Nonconformist of the Year" in 2000 for his straight talk express, the most exciting campaign that year, and a person who had a reputation for brutal honesty, a refreshing breath of fresh air in an era of political sound bites and canned speeches that are about as exciting as the Bush twins on a sober day. Sometimes I wonder how our country would be had he been the Republican nominee for president instead of the Bush fiasco. Probably a whole lot better.

When I was a Gore intern, I had an interesting encounter with him. One young lady who worked in the office had told me to come over to her desk and tell her if the Vice President's Ceremonial Office in the U.S. Capitol was in use. When I walked over, I found myself face to face with the famous Senator. I immediately smiled and perhaps even laughed, causing him to smile. I was speechless. I didn't expect to find him in our office. After he left, the staff members asked me what that was all about. They even questioned my loyalty to Gore. After all, McCain had promised voters that he would "beat Al Gore like a drum" in the fall. I couldn't really explain it. Though Gore was my primary loyalty (more than Clinton, of course), I admired John McCain. Plus, we have the Navy bond. He was cool. Not afraid of his past (like Bush is). He owns up to his flaws. His reputation for honesty had made him unpopular in the Senate among his fellow Senators. Yet, out of all the politicians on the Hill, I had learned that he had the highest staff loyalty of any Senator. So, despite his reputation for a temper, he retained staff members for years. What was it about him? Honestly, had the 2000 election been between Gore vs. McCain, I would have been happy with either outcome, though there were some things I had a problem with (McCain was the only candidate who threatened "rogue state rollback", which turns out to have been co-opted by the Bush regime after promising a more humble foreign policy than Clinton).

So what the hell happened?!? He drank the Kool-Aid. He sold his soul to Karl Rove and Dick Cheney. After the lies they spread about him having an illegitimate daughter with a black prostitute (they adopted a Bangladeshi orphan whom they had brought over for a cleft lip operation) and allegations of mental instability, affairs, and tempers. If someone is going to try to destroy you with lies (that would be Karl Rove's doing), why on earth would you join sides with them? That's the worst kind of sell out in the world. And look at all the good it has done him. His campaign is hemorrhaging staff members faster than passengers on the Titanic. His fundraising through the Internet in 2000 set the model for future campaigns by Howard Dean and now Barack Obama. Now, he's struggling to keep up with the likes of Giuliani and Romney. He should be the front runner, but he's even losing ground to a man who had earlier endorsed him (Senator Fred Thompson, who's still debating about whether to jump into the ring). Then there's the age issue. He'd be the oldest president elected if some "miracle" occurred. But it ain't gonna happen. His time is past. He has lost his vision. He's running towards failed Bush policies when Republicans who care about their future careers are tripping over themselves to get as far away from Bush as they can. That's not a good way to be remembered by history. Selling your soul for a chance to win the Republican primary through the evangelical vote (especially after insulting their leaders in 2000) was a bad idea. He's no longer the "straight talker" but a craven politician who will do anything to win, even sell his soul to the person who cut him at the knees in 2000.

It's tragic to see such a great man follow down the foolish path of disasterous policies in the hopes that he'll be named the rightful successor. But maybe we are seeing his true face after all these years of pretending to be a maverick, bluntly honest politician who shoots straight and not beholden to various interest groups. So, McCain...give it up. Your faltering campaign is what you get for betraying your "principles". And tragically, you let someone like GWB screw you over twice. That makes you unfit to lead our nation out of disasterous policies.

Choices...

Last year, I had planned to move to San Francisco to begin my new life in search of a dream job (dealing with politics, human rights, or writing). I was all excited about it. But then the doubts crept in, with everyone telling me how expensive it is and what if I didn't find a job and my money ran out? So, runner-up Portland became more and more realistic. But my biggest fear with Portland was the lack of meaningful work that paid well. Funny how worse case scenarios come true. I made the "safe choice" and now, I can honestly say that I regret it. I'm in a job that pays a lot less than the one I left in Atlanta, and doing much more work. That's not progress to me. That was a huge step backwards, to where I was in 2001, when I was in another shit job that paid lousy wages. How did I get here? This August marks the 10th anniversary when I listened to the prayer response I believe God gave me to attend college at BYU. Even that decision seems to be a bad one, in retrospect. Because this whole decade since that fateful decision, I've been in low wage jobs and struggling to stay afloat. Honestly, if it weren't for credit cards, I wouldn't have made it. But payback, as they say, is a bitch! With interest.

So, I'm full of regret these days. Regrets about taking on such huge student loan debt to attend college away from Georgia (but I will always remain grateful for the friends I've made on the Washington Seminar program), regrets about majoring in International Politics expecting to work in a Gore Administration when I graduated (had I known the 2000 election would end up the way it did, I would have pursued a film degree and moved to L.A. after college), and now regret for moving to Portland and accepting the first job offer I got, even though the pay was a lot lower than I wanted.

I don't know what I'm going to do if I don't turn my life around soon. In my many prayers to God, I remind Him that I've been patient for far too long. And what do I have to show for it? Debt, a job I despise, wages that are not acceptable (it would be acceptable if the wealthy class didn't drive up the cost of living on everything else), and a novel awaiting a willing agent to take the risk. I've wanted to be a writer since I was 11 years old. I toiled on that novel for 4 years, listening to the promptings of the spirit to get it finished. So now what? I've suffered for too long. Now's the time that I should be reaping the rewards of my hard work and patience.

So this is my ultimatum to the universe...August better be the month when things come together...otherwise, I will seek private contractor work in Iraq or Afghanistan. If low wages in shitty jobs are the only thing I have to look forward to, then, honestly, I'd rather go to Iraq. At least it would be exciting (what every guy needs in mid-life!). All I ask God and the universe for is a meaningful job, working in my passion (politics, writing, human rights issues). How hard can it be to manifest? If I have to move to San Francisco to find what I'm looking for, I'm ready. I really did wish I took the chance on San Francisco a year ago. I might've had more success than I've found in Portland. I love Portland, but have yet to snag an interview on the many jobs I've applied to. I just don't understand the block. I keep thinking that having BYU and the Boy Scouts on my resume has blacklisted me from good jobs available in this progressive city. It's a shame that people are going to judge based on that, since I'm not even a Mormon nor an Eagle Scout. I'm just a liberal down on his luck since Bush stole the election, and my dream job since 1992.

So, God, how about it? How hard is it to manifest the job I was born to work? I'm not greedy. All I want is a job that pays my age in salary...so that would be $35,000. Considering how many millionaires and billionaires there are, and with so many homes and condos in Portland going for more than $300,000...there are good paying jobs to be had out here. My patience is running out. I expect results by August.

Bastille My Beating Heart

In honour of the French Revolution, which is celebrated dans le monde francophonie today, I'd like to call on Americans to support the principles of both the American and French Revolutions, in which the people rose up against the corrupt power that ignored the wishes of the people. While our Independence Day holiday is celebrated in anniversary of the passing of the Declaration of Independence, a written letter of grievances against King George III of England, the French national holiday (Bastille Day) is celebrated in memory of the day the Bastille Prison was stormed by the people, which ultimately lead to the beheading of King Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette (who never said the famous words attributed to her: "let them eat cake!"). While it seems odd to Americans, perhaps, that the French would make a holiday around the storming of a prison, I'm in awe of that. To me, it represents a more activist form of revolution. The people rose up and tore down what was seen as an unjust place that held unjustly imprisoned people. When are Americans going to rise up against our tyrannical government? When are we going to storm Guantanamo Bay and demand its closure and rightful return to the people of Cuba? When are we going to impeach Cheney, vote guilty, remove him from office, have him face an International War Crimes Tribunal, found guilty, then execute him for treason against the U.S. Constitution? I want to see more French Revolutionary spirit in our society. While I'm against the death penalty in most cases, I do believe it is the only just punishment for people who are in positions of power and abuse that power to the point where lives are lost or ruined. By abusing the power entrusted by the people, these abusers should pay the ultimate cost of that betrayal. In this instance, the death penalty would operate as a true deterrent against others who aspire to corrupt leadership (the death penalty is not an effective deterrent against people who murder in the heat of passion, unfortunately). And yes, such an execution should be shown on TV and the Internet the world over. It would show the people of the world that justice exists in America, because people are having serious doubts about that.

Along with my inflamed passions against the government, I'm just giddy with the news that Cindy Sheehan (the woman who was my selection for Nonconformist of the Year 2005 for standing up to Bush outside his ranch in Crawford, Texas that fateful August two years ago) is now threatening Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that if she does not begin formal impeachment hearings against Bush and Cheney, Sheehan will run against her as an independent in the most liberal voting district in the country. If Pelosi isn't running scared, she should be. The reason is because there are a lot of conservatives, who might not like Sheehan, yet the prospect of the House Speaker losing her position after merely two years might be enough to entice them to support Sheehan (who, if she wins, would most likely not be given any leadership positions in the next Congress). That would be a stunning defeat, and well deserved. I like Pelosi, but I'm baffled why she put impeachment off the table. There's no real logical explanation for it. As one editorial stated, impeaching the president and vice president would be a huge boon to her and the Democrats. She would become the first female president if those two are removed from office. And that's why I think she ruled it out (Because Hillary has pressured her into a deal). Hillary wants to be the first female president in history and nothing and no one will stop her ambitions. Okay, so if that's the case, then just go after Cheney. Bush without Cheney would be a far more acceptable (and impotent) president in his remaining time in office. I can live with that scenario.

The other news of the week was the government releasing a report that al Qaeda has regained its strength from before 9/11 levels and are planning a major attack on America soon. When I heard this news, I felt a renewed chill of the burning of the Reichstag. Considering how much Bushco. benefitted from 9/11, I'm worried that another terrorist attack will be the end of our republic (google "NSPD 51" and see what comes up...it's Bush's plan to become dictator in the aftermath of a high casualty disaster). But we've been given scare warnings so many times since 9/11, I think it has lost its effective "distraction tactic" to the point where Bush has no choice but to allow such an attack to occur so that Americans can once again rally around his faltering administration. Besides, he wants to wage war in Iran and probably stay in office past January 2009. With reports that Cheney had built a secret bunker somewhere, it makes me wonder what these nefarious individuals are plotting. All I can say is, if a terrorist attack does occur in America this year, one that dwarfs 9/11, I hope that Americans will hold the administration responsible for failing to protect America (even if these two are the culprits or co-conspirators in the attacks), and forcing the removal of Bush and Cheney from the White House (at gunpoint, if need be). These scoundrels must be removed from office by any means necessary. I hate to go Malcolm X on you, but I'm fed up. And the spirit of the French Revolution lives on. Long live liberty, fraternity, and equality! Vive la revolution!

Happy Friday the 13th!

In honour of Friday the 13th, who'sthe bigger sociopath? Jason Voorhees of the infamously bad slasher flicks or Dick Cheney? I vote on Cheney...the only time he'll ever get my vote for anything. He is responsible for the deaths of more people than perhaps Saddam himself. Cheney is nothing but pure concentrated evil who will find himself burning in hell someday unless he finds God, repents, and make amends. But I doubt that'll happen because his allegiance is to Lord Satan, after having signed a contract with the ruler of the underworld.

I mean, look at his face right there. That snarl, those teeth. I've never seen a picture in which the hatred within shows itself on the face. It reminds me of the film "Devil's Advocate", in which Charlize Theron's character went crazy because she saw glimpses of the true soul of the people who worked with her husband. She saw the snarling demon within. I didn't like that film because it truly did scare me, as I believe there are people among us who have no light of Christ (or Buddha) burning within. No where is it more obvious than the person of Dick Cheney. He didn't used to look this way. In the early 1990s, he was okay. Something happened between 1993 and 1998, and it is during that period which I suspect that he sold his soul to Satan for power, wealth, and whatever else. When the day comes when the news reports on his demise, I hate to say it, but his death will be worthy of celebration because it is time for this conscience-less, evil, cynical, immoral, heartless, and dangerous man to go. I like to believe in redemption, but I also know that there are some souls who are so far gone, they are beyond redemption. Their darkness has totally consumed all that is good, until nothing but an empty shell remains. That is the essence of a "sociopath", or more accurately, "psychopath." We need to protect ourselves from these people.

It's All About Soul

"It's all about soul and a deeper emotion" -- Billy Joel

On Tuesday, I bought Taylor Hicks' book and have read it (an easy read). I know the "snobs" among you have a certain disdain for Taylor Hicks, but I don't understand why. He represents everything music should be about, but our corporate music industry had rejected him year after year, as they sought out talentless hacks who are more image over talent. Taylor Hicks is a refreshing "new" artist who performs with a love of musical tradition from the depth of his soul. If it takes a reality show like "American Idol" to circumvent the corporate suits in bringing to American awareness soulful singers like Taylor Hicks, then that's all the more reason why that show is a great boon to music.

So, it is with great excitement that I read his book. The truth is, I have been mulling over my "situation" lately. On June 30th, I was halfway through my 35th year of existence. And as I thought about my low wage job (and dealing with abusive customers at times), I realized just how far off the mark I am from what I had envisioned for myself years ago of where I would be at age 35. I'm running out of options. When I apply for job after job and get no response, along with receiving rejection letter after rejection letter on my novel, I'm just at whit's end on what to do with my life. I honestly cannot deal with my low wage, under appreciated, overworked job anymore. In August, I'll have been there a year, and that's one anniversary I'm hoping that I won't be around to observe. I'm hoping that I will have a new, better paying and satisfying job by then. Once that's accomplished, I can refocus all my energies once again in finding an agent for my novel and live the life I was meant to live: as a novelist.

In the midst of my frustrations over my job situation comes this book. I knew a little bit about Taylor Hicks story...that of a person who dropped out of college to pursue his love of singing, and how on the verge of his 30th year (his make or break time) and a little hurricane known as Katrina, he went to the American Idol audition in Las Vegas and finally got the big break he had been working towards for about a decade. His story is inspirational, especially for a guy like me (also prematurely gray). I've toiled in low wage jobs for 10 years now, waiting for my big break, facing the imagineless corporate publishing world (which historically has a pattern of rejecting innovative novels in favour of clones of best sellers, which were best sellers because they were different from other books before them). I keep praying to God about my break. Why should I have to suffer in low wage jobs for this long? I'm not a materialist like so many I see in my daily existence. It's relatively inexpensive to be me (though I'd like to pay off my college loan debts sooner rather than later). I just want a career that I love doing every day (such as writing and editing), am paid well enough to travel and begin to think about finding a wife to support, and one that helps me accomplish my big dreams in life.

So, I'm grateful to Taylor Hicks for writing this book, though I'm sure he's going to get a lot of critics asking why his life merits a book. Essentially, the message of his book is that if you have an inexplicable passion for something, you should never give up on trying to achieve it, because you never know when you might catch your lucky break. And the thing that most struck me about his book is what he writes about blues musician Keb' Mo', who was a big influence, even going so far as calling Taylor up and giving him advice when he was down (Taylor had met Keb' Mo' before "American Idol" fame). Ever since I first heard the funkiest blues song played at Washington, D.C.'s Union Station on January 22, 2000, I've become a huge Keb' Mo' fan. I have all his cds and saw him in concert once. On each cd is at least one song that hits me deep at the soul level, with lyrics that spoke to what I was feeling at the time. My favourite songs include "A Better Man", "The Action", and "Come on Back." Whenever I see that he has released a new cd, I can't wait to listen to it because I'm always struck by at least one song with lyrics that uncannily speak to what I'm feeling at that time. How he does it is a mystery. So, I'm thrilled that Taylor Hicks is also affected by Keb' Mo's music. It shows me just how small our world is, how connected we are...and though I continue to look for a better job, the burden is much lighter, the depression over my current status less severe. Thank you, Taylor!

Why I'm Glad the Iraq War is a Failure

If my friends who have served honorably in Iraq (and the one who's over there now on a Navy ship) can forgive me of my view, I want to say that the fault is not theirs. They were just doing their jobs, and while in theory, bringing democracy to the Iraqi people who have suffered for too long under brutal dictatorships is a good thing, my criticism is aimed at the civilian leadership and mostly centered on the most ignorant and incompetent person ever to assume the presidency (and I assure you, "assume" is the correct word for two reasons: 1 -- I don't believe he was truly elected in either 2000 or 2004; 2 -- assume makes an ass of u and me).

I was against the Iraq War from the start. That shouldn't be surprising, as I was against even the war in Afghanistan (mostly for historical reasons, as Alexander the Great, the British, and the Russians have all invaded that part of the world and ultimately lost, so I didn't see that we'd be any more successful, considering how patient the Afghans are and impatient we are...after all, the Russians were there for ten years before they gave up), and even against Clinton's war in Kosovo. I see war as a last resort, but Bush believes in war as a first resort. I knew in 1999 that if he became president, that we'd definitely go into Iraq to finish his father's legacy. In fact, that's how I view his entire motives for being president. He had started running for president in 1999 by claiming that he never wanted to be president, ever. What does that tell us? More people should have listened to him. Why give the presidency to a person who says that he didn't want the job? Gore wanted that job and prepared all his life for it. McCain wanted that job too. Either candidate would have been a far more capable and excellent president than the disaster we have going on right now.

But, the reason why I'm "glad" that the Iraq War is a failure is because of our future. In the 1980s, I was seriously worried that a draft might occur to fight Reagan's guerrilla war in Central America. I'd even wager that had we won in Vietnam, we most likely would have sent troops to Nicaragua in the 1980s. After all, the communists were on our back porch, whereas in Vietnam, they weren't seriously a threat. The only reason why we got involved in the first place was the unfair charge that Republicans leveled at every Democratic candidate for President after Truman that they were "soft" on communism. Because of the quagmire in Vietnam, it probably kept us out of another war until the Gulf War came along. The lightning "success" in which American troops were able to evict Iraq from Kuwait and scenes of the surrendering Iraqi troops was a big boost to American confidence as well as our national ego. Even President George Herbert Walker Bush himself said, "We kicked the Vietnam syndrome once and for all!"

Isn't irony delicious? He might have "cured" us of our "malaise", but his son has managed to return America to a sense of defeat, and what will hopefully be a more humble foreign policy and the use of diplomacy first before militarist options. That's not to say that we're cured of war. I believe our country is the biggest war monger on the planet. We have to be from a purely capitalistic point of view. I hate to say it, but Vladimir Lenin is absolutely correct when he claimed that war is inevitable under capitalism. A brief look at all the major conflicts our country has engaged in since our founding, and you'll see a lot of capitalist motives behind it. Hawaii is just one example. We annexed the kingdom of Hawaii by putting a gun to Queen Liliuokalani's head and let American companies set up huge corporate farms. Where would we be without Dole's plantation?

I knew the Iraq War would be a fool's adventure. For one reason, I believe that impure motives lead to questionable results. This is not only a spiritual law for the individual, but applies equally for nations as well. Being dishonest in one's motives is also a guarantor that the end result will only end up in disaster. Everything about the Iraq War was a fraud from the beginning...from citing a forged document written by a grad student that was the laughing stock of Europe (I hope Condi Rice is remembered in history for her "let them eat yellowcake!" scare tactic of smoking guns and mushroom clouds), to the timing of the war vote before a mid-term election to scare Democrats into voting for the war resolution or face defeat, (which some did vote for and ended up being defeated anyway), to the promises of chocolate, flowers, and cakewalks, to the tax cuts and zero % APR to buy a new SUV (remember all those ads promising zero % APR?), to the "Mission Accomplished" banner, and the purple fingers of Iraqi voters. All of it is one big fraud. Everyone with an IQ of room temperature knows the war is really about oil and our energy needs. The only people in denial about it are the ones who believe that God appointed Bush to be president (and it is a violation of the Ten Commandments to make a false idol of Cheney and Rove, the true masterminds behind making Bush president).

Only a disasterous defeat in Iraq can prevent our country from engaging in another war any time soon. It also breaks the bubble of Bush's arrogance. You can see more lines on his face and in so many pictures, he looks desperately unhappy these days. Even Republicans are bailing on him in greater and greater numbers. The sooner the country wakes up to the reality what a disaster this president has been, the better. When the dust of history is settled, I'm certain that Bush will be at the very bottom of the list of presidents. Iraq is his only legacy. While he claims not to mind that at all, he is the worst kind of gambler imagineable. One reading of the Declaration of Independence is enough to know the folly of engaging in foreign wars. Justice is not on our side because we are an invading army. Uninvited by the Iraqi people. And any study of history shows that the home people have the advantage in a war. Just like sports, but even more accurate. That's because people in Iraq have a stake in the outcome. Their lives are disrupted. Family and friends are being killed all around them. Homes and livelihoods destroyed. They have a stake to see the invaders leave in defeat. The invading army has no stake in the country (well, except for the oil). They are foreigners in enemy territory...far from loved ones and their own lives. They are just there until it's time to rotate home, while politicians squabble over legacy, appropriations, and patriotism.

So, no offense to the troops who are just doing their jobs. Iraq wasn't theirs to win. It was all a political game waged by corrupt and incompetent politicians for their egos and greed. The troops are just pawns in an international game of chess. Sometimes losing is the only way to regain humility and grace. Winning tends to make arrogant people even bigger assholes. For the sake of our country's salvation, I prefer to see us return to humility and compassion. That's why I'm glad we lost this one. May our failures keep us out of another war for at least twenty years.

The Pope Reasserts the Old "One True Church" Lie

Is it just me, or does Pope Benedict XVI look like Emperor Palpatine from the "Star Wars" empire? One thing's for sure...he's no Pope John Paul II...who I hope will be remembered as the best pope in history (that is, until the Catholics select a Brazilian or African pope who is into restorative justice and liberation theology).

Here's a favourite joke about the Catholic Church that a member of the Community of Christ once told me:

One day, a bishop urgently went to see the Pope, saying, "I have some good news and some bad news, your eminence."

"Tell me the good news that has gotten you all excited."

"Jesus is on the phone, saying that he has returned to establish his kingdom on earth."

"So what's the bad news then?" the Pope asked.

"He's calling from Salt Lake City."

Badabing!

Okay...that was mildly funny. Right? No? Okay, okay...Maybe I should've put in "Independence", but most people wouldn't get that. Besides, that's how an RLDS member told me the joke, which makes it even more funny (because RLDS members don't believe Jesus would return to rule from either Vatican City or Salt Lake City). But, that's another story.

What got me all flustered was an article I read online about Pope Benedict XVI reasserting to the world that the Catholic Church is "the ONE TRUE Church" because it is the only organization that has direct lineage to Jesus' apostles. All other "churches", this pope claims, cannot even consider themselves "churches", but rather "communities" (hey...maybe my church is starting a trend by renaming ourselves "Community of Christ" rather than "Church of Christ"--which was already taken...but "community" has a nice meaning to it).

When I was at BYU, I've had discussions with Mormons aplenty about the whole "authority" and succession issues. In the Latter Day Saints movement, the standard storyline goes that young Joseph Smith, Jr. had prayed to God about which church to join when he was a lad of 14. In a grove of trees, he saw God and Jesus as bright spiritual beings, who told him not to join any church because they were all wrong. That is to say, none of them have the authority of God to be "the official organization" in Jesus' most holy name. So, once Joseph Smith translated ancient plates and organized the church on April 6, 1830, God's official church was once again reestablished on earth. Many in both the LDS and RLDS Churches believe the corruption occurred early on in history, around the time of Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nicea. I agree with that view.

The interesting thing is that after Joseph Smith's assassination in 1844, there was a succession crisis in which the largest body of followers went with Apostle Brigham Young, and left behind the mess of tragedy and corruption at Nauvoo. Smaller groups followed various other leaders. But my church (the RLDS one) went with the view that Joseph Smith, Jr. had claimed that his son, Joseph Smith III would be his successor. The problem was, Joseph III was too young to assume leadership of the church. But once he accepted the calling in 1860, our church followed the family lineage for the president and prophet of our church, until 1996, when the torch was passed to a non-descendant of Joseph Smith. I was one who always liked the lineage aspect, but I can understand the criticism that Mormons have our church being a "cult devoted to the Joseph Smith family" (though it isn't close to true).

Anyhow, what does this have to do with Catholicism and its claim of being the "one true church" on earth? Well...I personally believe that God isn't so much about direct lineage as He is about spiritual lineage. In my view, the spiritual leader meant to lead us in each era could be from a different religious tradition than the one before. I don't believe we are ever without authentic spiritual leaders/prophets to guide us to our higher selves. For instance, I believe Mohandas Gandhi was one of God's prophets on earth. He was a Hindu in India. I also believe that Martin Luther King, Jr. was a prophet of God. He was a Southern Baptist in the American South. Now, I believe God's most holy prophet is the Dalai Lama, a Tibetan Buddhist. I'd go so far as to say that even Pope John Paul II was a prophet of God. But that doesn't automatically make the Catholic Church "God's organization on earth."

The Catholic Church has a spotty history of power-hungry popes who cozied up to Kings and Dictators alike. If the Catholic Church ever had "spiritual authority", it certainly lost it when it persecuted Galileo for his correct belief that the earth revolved around the sun. It took the Catholic Church 400 years to admit that it was wrong on that issue. But, I believe the corruption goes back even further, to Emperor Constantine, when he married Christianity to power; a merger of the cross and the sword. Turning pagan holidays into Christian ones set into motion the strange phenomenon of our celebrating Christ's birth in most likely the wrong month. Let's not forget, also, that the Catholic Church gave us the torture of the Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades (of which, one could almost argue we are still fighting today, according to Bush), and even complicity with the Nazi regime in the holocaust of Jews during the 1930s and 1940s. And the latest pope was chosen over capable Brazilian and African bishops, a man who was a member of the Hitler youth. If that's not enough outrage for you, what about all those cover ups of clergy members molesting so many children or the rampant homosexuality in the priesthood ranks? The Catholic Church is in serious denial as it tries to hold fast to antiquated dogma, turning a blind eye to serious scandals. Nope, that's not the mark of an organization that would be "God's one and true". Truth should be valued at all costs, even if it contradicts the established mythologies of the church organization.

One of the things I love about "The Da Vinci Code" and "Angels and Demons" is that those novels turn Catholicism on its head. We get to engage in speculation that perhaps we've been conned all these years by religious dogma that the truth had long been forgotten. All I know is, with a long history of torture, unjust wars, corrupt popes, empire ambitions, genocides of native populations the world over, turning a blind eye towards the mass murder of Jewish people, molestation of children, and other inexcusable crimes...the Catholic Church has a lot of gall to assume that it still represents the true and only enduring lineage from Jesus' time. Take it from a guy who is a member of a church that had it's own fascination with lineage and legitimacy, it's not the direct lineage that gives you spiritual authority. It's adherence to the principles that Jesus taught and preached. And that authority can come from any religious faith tradition, even non-Christian ones.

The Battle Against the Irrational

I read two interesting articles on the role of Christianity in the political life of the United States. Please read them for yourself:

www.truthout.org/docs_2006/070507F.shtml

www.truthout.org/docs_2006/070807F.shtml

The most disturbing one is about the Christian "millennialists" or "dispensationalists", who believe that armageddon is upon us and all it takes is a politician (such as "born again" Bush) willing to bring it on by waging war in the Middle East. These are the people who tend to vote Republican, debunk climate change (even though you can read the environmental catastrophes in the Book of Revelations as being a warning against global warming), and believe that when armageddon comes, they will be safely "raptured" while the non-believers or the false believers will be "left behind" to duke it out in the final war of humankind that will usher in the Thousand Years of Peace by a triumphant return of Jesus, defeating the agents of Satan. Whew, got all that?

Since childhood, I've had struggled with the idea of rapture, armageddon, and the sheer ecstasy in which "good" Christians spoke of seeing nonbelievers annihilated in this final battle. In fact, there's even a violent video game from the people who gave us the best selling and poorly written "Left Behind" novel series. The point of the game is to kill all the non-believers in the name of Jesus. And in the final book of the "Left Behind" series, "Glorious Appearing", the Jesus who appears is a genocidal maniac, responsible for the deaths of billions of people. Now, correct me if I'm wrong...but if this is the Christ image we're meant to "worship" and "obey", then what makes him any different from Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, and every other homicidal, power-hungry dictator? It was disturbing to me whenever I heard fundamentalist Christians speak with an excited enthusiasm for this future scenario. So many, in fact, had hoped that it would've started on January 1, 2000.

What's so Christian about wishing the death of millions of people who don't share your theological beliefs? Is that truly what Jesus advocated when he was alive? What Bible are they reading? I surely haven't read that one. Unless it's from "The Satanic Bible". Then I can understand where their hatred comes from. And that's not Christian.

When I shared a cubicle with a fundamentalist Christian woman, I got to learn how her little brain worked and it was a scary insight into these people. On Biblical prophecy, she explained to me that there are many prophecies out there, but only the ones in the Bible are true because they have a way of "coming true." The mark of a true prophet is that his or her predictions come true. But that could also be a self-manifesting prophecy. For example, I could predict that I'll get fat and have diabetes, and because I believe that will happen, I subconsciously act to bring that about by overdosing on sugar and not exercising. Does that make me a prophet or a fool?

A decade ago, I read "The Celestine Prophecy" and it's sequels "The Tenth Insight" and "The Secret of Shambhala". The idea of rapture that it presents is more in line with my thinking. And the whole point of armageddon prophecy was not as a prediction that it WILL happen, but a WARNING of where humanity is heading if we continue to pollute and abuse the environment, wage war, pursue greed and materialism. It doesn't have to be the end result of human history. In fact, it would represent a colossal failure if it comes true. And as for the rapture bit, according to "The Celestine Prophecy", only when people become so spiritually advanced will such an ability occur to "translate" our bodies from physical matter into light particles. When I was at BYU, several professors had said that no human could stand to be in the presence of God because our bodies would explode from the intensity of His love for us. In August 2001, I had the most intense spiritual experience of my life and I often felt like my body would explode from the intensity of it. It was a spiritual high that lasted for about a month...and I attained it without drugs or sexual activity. Had it been any more intense, I'm sure I'd needed to be "translated" or else die from the spiritual love that I felt.

In an earlier post, I had written about my long-running war with fundamentalist Christianity, and I have no problems fighting against them to my dying day. Their views of our world and the future are so incompatable with my own that I believe we have to choose sides and fight them from wrecking our environment, from killing so many people, and from their self-destructive wish to usher in some mythological armageddon battle between the forces of good and evil. What really puts me at odds with them is that I believe God created an imperfect world to be our school. How can one learn love in the absence of hate? How can one have free will to make choices on any number of things, if we live in a perfect world? The world is what it is for a purpose. We are spiritually obligated to preserve and protect the planet from those who wish to destroy it. God gave us all of eternity to work out our soul's development. It's just completely baffling to me that these people who believe the world is only 5,000 years old seek to bring about its destruction. There's something psychopathic and selfish about wanting to destroy the planet God gave us. And besides, I have a selfish motive to see it exist for future generations. I so much want to have another lifetime on this planet, next time as an Australian. Anyone who seeks to destroy the earth for future inhabitants is worth fighting against.

So, please join the battle. Preserve and protect our planet from the dark forces that seek its demise. We must trust that God has established a perfect system for our spiritual evolution, even if we get frustrated by all the pain and despair we see. Besides, it's kind of rude to destroy something that another had created. How is that honouring God? How can one claim to worship God and yet seek to destroy His creation? The lack of common sense among fundamentalist Christians is alarming. Irrational people can believe whatever they want...so long as they stay out of our political sphere. Leave governance to those who love our planet and seek to improve it. God called us to be good stewards and entrusted this planet to us. What does it say about us to God if we so desire the worst case scenario to come true? God gave us a choice between chaos or community, so why on earth would any rationally minded human being choose death and destruction when we could have peace and love for our fellow humans, regardless of religious belief?

Dick Cheney (Before He Dicks You)

In light of the recent commuting of Scooter Libby's prison sentence (c'mon...if Martha Stewart and Paris Hilton can serve time behind bars, Libby can handle "Club Fed"...where white corporate executive felons go without worry about being gang raped), I think Americans should realize by now how endlessly corrupt this administration is. It should be read that the biggest reason Libby's punishment was commuted was not for "justice" but because he knows too much and serving time in prison (as posh as it is for white executives) would only tempt Libby to talk in exchange for a shortened sentence. Bush did an end run around justice to save his administration, and people should not fall for it.

Please send a letter to your representative in Congress to let them know that the Vice President must be impeached and removed from office IMMEDIATELY! He has abused power continuously and there is no reason why he should continue in office. After he's impeached and removed from office, he should face a War Crimes Tribunal, where he will most likely be found guilty and face an execution squad.

While I believe Bush deserves impeachment too, I think he should be allowed to remain in office and then after he leaves, face a War Crimes Tribunal as well. I do not want to see an interim president of any party. Let the 44th presidential administration be elected by the people. Throw out the electoral college. And vote Democratic because the media and opposition party holds Democrats to a higher standard than they do Republicans. No Democratic president would be allowed to be so corrupt (if you think otherwise, why did a Ken Starr investigation of $40 million turn up nothing impeachable than a lie under oath about a sexual indiscretion), incompetent (Somalia turned sour on Clinton and he got blamed for it, even though it was Bush who got us in there in the first place), and secretive (Ken Starr released Clinton's video deposition a mere month after he conducted it; Bush/Cheney's "testimony" to the 9/11 Commission was allowed to be done without administering an oath on the Bible or any recording whatsoever of what was asked and said). How's history going to look at the two administrations, and why Clinton's administration merited such a costly and lengthy investigation that turned up little more than an indiscreet adulterous affair, while the following administration had so many conflicts of interest, graft, corruption, and incompetence, yet no investigation?

Send a message to the Demcratic Congress to impeach Cheney. It won't be full justice for the past 6 years, but its a start. Hopefully God will take care of the rest. Cheney's days are numbered. The sooner we get rid of them, the better off we'll be.

Happy 07/07/07!

One of the things I love about living in the new century are the dozen years in which the numbers of the month, day, and year all align in threes. Last year, it was the mark of the beast. This year, it's divine with an unprecendented concert all taking place today on seven continents to raise awareness for climate change and the need to act. This is all Gore's doing and wow, is there anything he can't do these days? His active public role of the last couple years has helped to heal the bitter wounds of the stolen election of 2000.

I hope you have a blessed day today, focus on spiritual thoughts, and most important of all, stay cool!

Bush's Historical Legacy

There has been reports recently that Bush is now looking through the history books to find the "presidential model" on which his legacy will replicate, never mind that his administration is the worst aberration in history. It is so radically rightwing that it has brought our nation as close as it has ever been to fascism (which originally meant the merging of corporations with government, which is to say a government for, by, and of the corporation). Bush has gone so far right he makes Nixon look downright liberal. Even Reagan never dared to go to that extreme (as bad as he was anyway) and Bush's own father had a term for the neo-conservatives who have reigned supreme on his son's administration: "the crazies in the basement." That's not a compliment by any means.

It's about this point in a president's administration that he starts looking at his legacy. With Clinton, what offended me the most was his comment that he had wished 9/11 had happened on his watch, because he claims to have prepared all his life to lead the nation in a moment of tragedy. However, Clinton should be grateful such a devastating event never occurred on his watch. In fact, it is well documented that terrorists had planned to blast in the new millennium with targeted terrorist attacks in Seattle, LAX, and Washington, D.C. That the year 2000 was rather anti-climatic (what, with the whole Y2K scare that had people thinking armaggedon was upon us. Had Bush been president during that time, I have no doubt it would've been a chaotic disaster, just as they like it), seems to be forgotten. Unfortunately, a large part of Clinton's legacy will be his lack of self control over his appetites (fast food and faster women). He knew that Nazi-wannabe Ken Starr had a $40 million investigation into every nook and cranny of his and Hillary's life (which might have turned out a blessing, as Hillary has an excellent chance of becoming our next president because there are no more skeletons hiding in her closet. If there are, it would've long been exposed by now as desperate as the right wing was to bring down her husband's administration). Clinton realizes that great presidents (according to historians) are the ones who presided over hard times (war and the Great Depression). There are other ways of being great. Kennedy's administration will long be remembered in history not so much for what he did, as for the inspiration, magic, and mythology that has grown since his untimely assassination. The thousand days of Camelot is how Kennedy will be remembered.

So, what about Bush? He, like so many Republicans, want to be the second coming of Harry S Truman...never mind that Republicans hated Truman and accused him of "losing China" (as though a president could prevent something like that!). What does Bush see in Truman? Believe me, it's pure ego on his part, because Bush is no Harry S Truman! For one thing, Truman had a sign on his desk that said "The Buck Stops Here!" Ever since Bush became president, he has passed the buck on everything, from 9/11, to the Katrina mess, to the failure in Iraq. It's no surprise, really. Because Bush's parents never held Bush responsible for anything (they got him out of Vietnam, out of a drug conviction on cocaine, out of the National Guard, out of bankruptcy when his two companies went bust, get the drift?), Bush has grown up an immature man, expecting others to take the fall for his mistakes or all out criminality (Scooter Libby being a prime example). When does the buck ever stop in Bush's administration? No one has assumed responsibility for the abuses at Abu Ghraib, except for a few uneducated National guard members who were convenient scapegoats when Bush's policies were exposed around the world.

Truman also made sure that no companies profited from the rebuilding of Europe after WWII. Truman didn't believe that it was moral for a company to financially benefit from the destruction of war, otherwise it would set a dangerous precedent. Not so with Halliburton, Kellogg Brown and Root, and Blackwater. Those three companies got no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq and have been fleecing the American taxpayer ever since. Even military members complain that private contractors for those corporations make tons more money for doing the same jobs that they are doing. Surprise! And it's baffling how a "conflict of interest" charge was often raised against Clinton, but no one pays any attention to the obvious conflict of interest in having a Vice President who was a former CEO of Halliburton and still has stock options, and the no-bid contract that automatically went to Halliburton. That such a corporation was allowed to profit on a war of choice started by a former CEO should be enough to convict the corrupt and dickless Cheney on treason alone. But I'll settle for a fatal mistake in his upcoming operation. The sooner he faces God's judgement, the better.

But I digress. The biggest reason Bush thinks he'll be the next Truman is because Truman had low popularity during most of his term in office, even leaving office with high negatives. Yet the tide of history changed, as historians looked at what Truman had accomplished and the bravery it took to implement them, most notably the Marshall Plan that rebuilt Europe; using the atomic bomb to force Japan to surrender, sparing a prolonged Pacific conflict after Germany surrendered; integrating the Armed Forces; and firing General MacArthur when he wanted to go to war against China (had the neoconservatives been as prevalent and influential then, they most likely would've gotten their war and we might not be here today). It took someone like Truman to have the courage to stand up for what's right. Bush has no moral courage. He caves to the wishes of the extremist right. In his 2000 campaign, he accused the Clinton Administration of arrogance and promised to have a more humble administration, yet instead of showing graciousness in losing the popular vote, he ran to the far right and turned everyone who didn't vote for him as an enemy. Now, with no allies but the far right fundamentalist Christians and corporate capitalists, he thinks that history will redeem him. This after firing everyone whose prediction for the impending Iraqi disaster has proven right. This after promoting the most incompetent people in his administration. This after nominating his personal lawyer Harriet Miers to be a Supreme Court justice. This after pardoning a convicted liar because he (and his wife and children) have "suffered enough" (bullshit! Send Scooter's wife and kids to Iraq to see what suffering really means!).

There is absolutely nothing that will redeem Bush in history. Iraq is the albatross around his neck, a millstone that will sink him to the very bottom, where the puss affects the mucus to crud up the pondscum. That's where Bush will be. The trash heap of history. The very bottom of the list of 42 presidents (for some reason, Grover Cleveland is counted twice because of his two nonconsecutive terms in office). The WORST PRESIDENT EVER. Somewhere from the depths of hell, Nixon is thanking his good fortune to no longer be at the bottom. The irony is thick and would be funny if it weren't so tragic: a history major at Yale who avoided fighting in Vietnam failed to learn from history and put his country into an unwinnable war of his own making and his arrogant blindness causes him to think he's another Truman when in reality he's worse than Nixon and Johnson.

What's even more outrageous about Bush's beliefs is that he doesn't seem to care how history will remember him because he says that he'll long be dead when historians make their judgments. Hasn't he heard of God's judgment? There is a day of reckoning coming. No one can escape karmic law. When the soul that is currently smothered by the ego-drenched body that is Bush realizes all the spiritual laws he has violated during his tenure as president, he will most likely wish he was never born. Nothing can be more painful than facing the results of one's actions in the presence of God. All those lives destroyed because of his arrogant and greedy presidency will make whatever treasures he snatched on earth seem like worthless baubles when the true price of his sins are revealed.

So Bush...dream on, dude...but you'll never be a Truman. History won't vindicate you because you ignored the most important lessons of history in pursuit of your reckless foreign policies. It is a spiritual truth that no army of empire can ever subject a people forever. People rise up and resist. People would rather be unjustly ruled by one of their own than by a foreign occupier. And you proved to us all that you didn't believe Americans would support your war of choice when you had to puff up the threat, scaring Americans, and then on top of that, offering another tax bribe to get Americans shopping their fears away. Never in the entire history of humanity has there ever been a war and a tax cut. It just proves that you never trusted the American people to support you and now, after all your promises of the cakewalk and chocolates and flowers that this war would beget, now the American people are ignoring your disaster of a presidency.

If you won't be impeached, I hope your days in office are short. And if you manage to walk out of the White House a free man on January 20, 2009, I hope your retirement is very short. I just don't see you ever admitting a mistake because your ego is so overpowering. You can blame your over-accomplished father and your mean mother, but in the end, you have to look yourself in the mirror every day...somehow knowing in the back of your mind that God's judgment awaits you and it'll be a day you won't want to face because you can't take your protective ego to heaven with you. Your conscience will convict you before historians write the final book on your administration. Feast on that, Shrubya!

Independence Day in France

Ten years ago, I spent the best Independence Day of my life in Paris, France. In fact, I had so much fun, I forgot that it was Independence Day until a French person reminded me of it. What was I doing? I was staying with a French family I had known since 1992 when I started writing to a French girl. Christelle had invited me along to her friend's house. What started as an evening among friends (it was three French guys, Christelle, and myself) and me, the American interloper, ended up to be one of the great experiences of my life. I was shy at first, not sure what they thought of this American guy Christelle brought along. We played a round of an interesting game on a pool table (but wasn't pool), ate raclette (cheese that is melted and poured on vegetables like potatoes and tomatoes), watched "Batman Forever" (en francais, bien sur!), and then played Risk (my favourite game as a teenager). The cards were in French, of course, so they asked me if I could read and understand French, even if I rarely spoke it, much to their consternation.

We had so much fun that we didn't realize that the sun had long since set and was now rising. We had stayed up all night, and that was something I rarely did (it was a regular habit once I started college, however). What I most loved about the experience is that I was the sole American and whatever questions and curiosities they had about America or Americans, I was the "official spokesperson" for America. I know my conservative friends (and enemies) hate that fact, because they don't trust what I have to say about our country...but as I've told people before when I was in the Navy, the best American a foreigner could meet would be a guy like me rather than some ig'nant country boy with a cowboy hat, belt buckle the size of Texas, and an "America is #1" attitude. That type of American (and believe me, there are a number of sailors and Marines who pour into foreign ports everyday with their cliched American country boy outfits) would give foreigners a bad view of Americans. At least when they meet me, they are impressed that an American knows a little about their country and politics to hold his own in a conversation. And the reason why I love to be the sole American ambassador to foreigners, and especially the French, is because I get to disarm them in whatever pre-conceived stereotype they have about Americans. Its a mutually beneficial exchange.

I can't believe a decade has gone by since I was last in Europe and my beloved France. I want so much to tour Europe during the Bush years to hear what they think of our country now and the administration. When I traveled Europe ten years ago, Clinton was popular and well liked. America was admired. It's almost unbelieveable how one president could screw it up so badly, to turn allies into enemies. All that French-hating on the right during the lead up to the Iraq War revealed our ugliest side. After all, the French helped our nation become independent of Great Britain over 200 years ago, yet American conservatives want the French to remain forever indebted because we had liberated them from the Nazis in WWII. What kind of friend is that? No true friend will ever remind another that he owes the person something for a kind act of the past. Yet we do it all the time. Why?

So, this Independence Day, I couldn't help but wish that I was in France to celebrate the holiday. Somehow, being an ocean away from all the nationalistic, jingoistic, patriotism is tolerable when I'm discussing with French people what America means and how I see our country. There's a scene in the film "Jefferson in Paris" where the Marquis de Lafayette and other French aristocrats question Jefferson about slavery. To me, that's the kind of dialogue I relish and why I love the French so much. They keep us honest and that's why so many right-winger Americans hate it. The French won't kiss our collective asses like the Brits or the Israelis and we hate them for it.

Long live the French! Only nine days until they party with their own national holiday, Bastille Day. Bon fetes to all!

A New Declaration

Every year on Independence Day, I re-read our sacred founding document, the Declaration of Independence and always get something new out of it. What really captures me is how relevant the words still are today, how much our president George resembles King George III. And our George is the THIRD president who had the name George. The coincidences are uncanny, for George often acts like a petulant boy king, spoiled, and making infantile statements like, "I'm the decider. I decide what's best." So, for my blog this year, I'd like to re-write part of the Declaration for today's America. The words in bold will indicate a change from the original document, so it should be an interesting exercise...

When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all humans are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. -- That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among people, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. -- Such has been the patient sufferance of thse colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present President of the United States is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these States. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his party to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has subverted Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihiliation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice by refusing to assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has deceived the legislature to send abroad the U.S. military in pre-emptive wars of aggression to maximize profits for friends in corporations at home.

He has affected to render the military independent of and superior to the civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed private contractors among us:

For protecting them by a mock trial from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states:

For signing free trade deals with all parts of the world for the purpose of cheap labor costs to maximize corporate profits:

For running huge deficits without our consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of trial by jury:

For transporting us beyond seas to be tried for pretended offenses:

For abolishing the free system of American laws in neighbouring countries, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these colonies:

For taking away our Constitution, abolishing our most valuable laws and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments:

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever:

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, left a city to environmental catastrophic neglect, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and breathren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our borders, the merciless Islamic terrorists whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions.

In every state of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the rule of a free people.

Nor have we been wanting in attentions to our British breathren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnamity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends.

We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in general congress, assembled, appealing to the supreme judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these United States are, and of right, ought to be free and independent of a tyrannical government, that all political connection between them and the state of our government, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, that they are absolved from all allegiances to the American government, and that all political connection between them and the government, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace contract alliances, establish commerce, and do all other acts and things which independent states may right do. -- And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.

Nicholas Carroll of Portland, Oregon

Pledge of Allegiance

"I don't pledge allegiance

to the flag of the United States of America

and to the corporations for which it stands,

one nation, divided by God,

divisive,

with liberty and justice for the wealthy few."

Blasphemy? Nah! It's what America has become. Why pledge allegiance to it? My allegiance is to a principle...a principle spelled out in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, not a piece of colored cloth that is made in China these days. I hate to be cynical, but our government no longer deserves our loyalty, obedience, blood, or even taxes.

In the spirit of Independence Day, this week, I'll post on various topics of our political system in the current era of cynicism and corruption. Today's post is on the pledge of allegiance itself.

In my senior year of high school, due to an awakening I experienced as a result of having an inspiring teacher I idolized and world events proving to me that people can make a difference (the wonderful school year that was 1989-1990), I felt brave enough to question a ritual that schools forced upon us. The ritual? The Pledge of Allegiance. For years, I had noticed that most people were like robots during this part of the school day. They stood up, held a limp hand against their hearts and mumbled the words to the pledge of allegiance with all the enthusiasm of a person on prozac. It became obvious to me how meaningless the ritual had become. I had long questioned such practice, at least since elementary school when I imagined Soviet children pledging allegiance to the Soviet flag and how Americans would view them as brainwashed. Or how German children pledged allegiance to Hitler in the 1930s, or Cuban children pledged allegiance to Castro. Why does it seem ridiculous when other people do it, but not when we do?

Because my favourite teacher in my senior year was an atheist who didn't participate in the pledge, he was "coincidentally" scheduled a planning period during the hour when the pledge was recited. His beef with the pledge was the "under God" part, but if they removed that phrase from the pledge, he would say it. His stance gave me the confidence I needed to refuse to stand for the pledge during class, even though classmates would heckle me about it. But, no teacher ever made me stand and recite it and I'm glad. Here's why...

I don't pledge allegiance to a material object. I only pledge my allegiance to God and my own conscience. I cannot even pledge allegiance to friends, as one of them had wanted me to do a few years back. People change. I change. I don't know where I'll be five years from now. I've seen friendships die out. I generally make friends for life and have only rejected two people's interest in maintaining a friendship with me (both of those people were blindly loyal Bush supporters, but that was only the final straw in a long list of grievances that doomed the potential for friendship). However, I don't believe it is honest or wise to pledge allegiance to anything that lacks permanence. Only God and one's conscience are eternal. Flags, Constitutions, governments, countries, churches, and even friendships are not permanent. Things can change. People change. And yes, our country has changed. I would never pledge allegiance now to such a vile government that completely disregards the mass of people in our world.

When I see the American flag wave, I can't help but think of how obscene it has become. The American flag, once considered a beautiful sight against a blue sky, now brings to mind torture, war, greed, corruption, disregard for human lives, corporate profits, low wages, debt, cynical politicians, jingoistic xenophobia. Why would I pledge allegiance to such a thing? So I don't. When my country can live true to its founding ideals, then maybe it can restore some pride. But that doesn't mean I'll ever pledge allegiance to the flag. I want to see that ritual end. I wouldn't allow my children to participate in such nationalistic blasphemy (against God).

And while we're at it, I support a move to change the national anthem from the war glorifying "Star Spangled Banner" to "America the Beautiful", which is the best song tribute to what makes our nation great. Given the choice between a flag that's made in China or the landscapes God blessed our country with, I'll choose land every time. Wouldn't you?

Rhymes With Spinach

Yesterday evening, I went to a rally for Congressman Dennis Kucinich at a local school (that was built back in 1916). It had a larger turnout than I expected. I'm not good at estimating crowd numbers, but perhaps upwards of 500, maybe? I didn't go because I support the guy, because I don't...even though a lot of what he says, I agree with. I'll go see any Democratic candidate who comes to Portland, and even a few of the Republican candidates, just to hear what they have to say.

My main gripe with Kucinich stems from the only "encounter" I had with him, when I was a Gore intern and he was on the phone and I didn't recognize his name as being one of the 435 members of Congress (I only knew the names of the major players). He chewed me out in the worst way possible. When I later learned that he was the one who had been proposing the establishment of a Department of Peace (an idea I was open to at the time), I was shocked. How could a man who was so angry because an unpaid intern didn't recognize his name be the right person to promote a government agency devoted to peace advocacy? Something was amiss. He made an enemy of me from that moment. I know that I should be gracious and chalk it up as perhaps his having a bad day and I was a convenient scapegoat. Yes, I could do that...but I'm also not a carpet to piss on. I hate hypocrisy more than anything and if some politician is going to promote a cabinet level department devoted to peace issues, he better be peaceful in his dealings with other people. After his speech, I wished that I had the courage to go up and ask him the question I was interested in hearing him respond to: "Seven years ago, when I was an intern for Vice President Gore, you had yelled at me on the phone because I didn't know who you were. Why should I vote for you, especially when you talk about peace more than any other candidate, but in my one dealing with you, you had failed to live up to what you advocate?" I'd love to see him try to answer that one.

A lot of liberal "purists" support him, as they did in 2004 when I supported Howard Dean. I don't understand what they see in him. I honestly see a phony who knows the only niche he can occupy in a crowded field of candidates. To me, Kucinich comes across as someone who was a nerd in high school and now finds himself basking in the glory of adulation by leftist liberals, hippies, Naderites, and the assorted apolitical types who think that supporting a more polished candidate like Howard Dean or Barack Obama is somehow "selling out." Kucinich loves to make himself look like the hero, but it's all ego. And I sensed that in his speech last night. First of all, he came out to the podium with a statuesque redheaded beauty (she towers over him, even when he stood on a platform) and then proceeded to kiss her not just once, but twice. Show off! Every nerd's wet dream, right? I kept wondering what she saw in the guy. If she thinks she's gonna be the next First Lady, she is delusional. Though if by some strange occurence, that does occur, I think she'd give Jacqueline Kennedy a run for her money in being the most beautiful First Lady we've ever had. But, there's a snowball's chance in hell that'll happen. I wouldn't be surprised if she dumped him after the election to become Mitt Romney's second wife.

Anyhow, the speech was interesting. The usual litany of liberal talking points, which prompted a lady behind me to yell out "yes!" so many times I thought she was having an orgasm. And the hippie next to her annoyed me by offering a running commentary on how Kucinich was doing. When Kucinich pointed out the American flag and talked about "The Star Spangled Banner", the hippie said, "oh, he's going nationalist on us." Many times, Kucinich was interrupted by applause, which drowned out some of what he was saying. I was kind of frustrated with it, as I prefer to hear what he says and keep the applause to a minimum. During the Q&A segment, a couple guys mentioned 9/11 being an inside job and asked him what he would do about it to bring such info into mainstream respectability (instead of it being automatically dismissed as a "conspiracy theory"). Kucinich said that members of Congress were investigating the shorting of United Airlines and American Airlines stock in the days leading up to 9/11. Hopefully that will lead somewhere. The sooner we expose Cheney and his evil cabal of neo-conservative Nazi wannabes, the better. Kucinich was also the one who introduced House Resolution 333, which is to bring about impeachment proceedings against Dick Cheney. Hopefully that will go somewhere (though with Cheney set to get a new pacemaker installed in his heartless chamber this month, I'm hoping the doctor will do the world a favor and make a fatal mistake. I know its bad to wish that thing on someone, but when one has caused so much death and misery already, who's lock on power is never ending, anything that quickens his demise would be a good thing for the inhabitants of the globe).

One of the things Kucinich stressed was the media's obsession with poll numbers. While I agree that poll numbers are unfairly used to guage a politician's popularity with voters, I also think he'll have a hard time breaking out of single digits. He just doesn't look presidential to me. I kept picturing a Napoleon when he talked. All I saw was ego, saying stuff the liberal audience wanted to hear a politician say. Some of his ideas are unrealistic. I've thought about the Department of Peace over the years and came to the conclusion that the last thing this government needs is another bureaucracy. I wasn't happy with the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security. I really don't trust this government to do peace right. Peace is up to the churches, up to the citizens, and nongovernmental agencies to lobby the government on. The Department of Defense should be renamed to the Department of Offense, but in no way should we trust this government to handle peace properly. It would be too contradictory and too prone to propaganda of an Orwellian scope. In fact, in the novel 1984, the Ministry of Love was where torture was committed, and the Ministry of Truth was full of lies. As we've seen in the Bush Administration, they took pages out of that novel and created their own twists on language. Peace is a word that should not be abused. Our government isn't noble enough to even utter a word like peace. At least not since we've been the biggest warmongers on the planet since the fall of the Third Reich in 1945. Until our government turns our weapons into ploughshares, they have no right to co-opt and corrupt the word peace.

It was a good gathering. As I sat in that rousing audience, I felt a little of what the American colonists must've felt when forces were stirring among the people that a complete break with the corrupt King George was coming soon. Like those Americans of two centuries ago, we are also feeling the stirrings of a complete break from our corrupt boy king wannabe, George W. I'm ready to join in that spiritual revolution. Are you?

Oh...I'm still backing Barack Obama for 2008. Kucinich may have some interesting ideas, but he'll always be an ego-maniacal Napoleonesque nerd who got angry seven years ago because an unpaid White House intern didn't know him from Adam. He can stay in the House where he belongs. I expect more out of a president and Obama is the man with the winning message (though I support him, I'm 100% certain the Democrats are going to nominate Hillary Rodham Clinton to face the weakened and demoralized Republican party candidate).

YAPS Having a Blast at Mount Saint Helens

From left: Me, Sean, Tom, Erik, Jamie, and Rachel

Last weekend, the Young Adults of Portland/Seattle (a Community of Christ group) met for a weekend retreat at Kathy Hergert's house in Ethel, Washington. We went out to Mount Saint Helens on 23rd June to take in the beauty and majesty of what a powerful volcano can do. We also had a great spiritual experience with campfire, hymns, games, communion, and a round of asking thought-provoking questions for discussion. It was hard to leave our "Zionic experience" for another week's work in the "real world." But, each time we gather together, it is a special bond and makes life a little bit more endurable. Only three more months until I can make the next event up in Samish Island. I can't wait!