SANSEGO

Best of 2011

2012-01-27T21:18:00.000-08:00

The annual "Best of the Year" list was delayed due to movies that I wanted to see before I made my selections known. A few years ago, I had named Up in the Air as the best film of the year, and then I saw Avatar, which blew me away, so I had to change my list. In 2011, I kept hearing that The Lady (about Burmese Dissident Aung San Suu Kyi) was going to be released, but I saw no evidence of that and once the Oscar nominations were revealed this past Tuesday, the film (if it was released for Oscar consideration) did not garner a single nomination. Perhaps Luc Besson is waiting for 2012? The film is supposed to be released in February (in time for the Portland International Film Festival!). Michelle Yeoh is likely to be my "Best Actress" choice for her portrayal of Aung San Suu Kyi. Since that film will be released in 2012 instead of 2011, I could go ahead and make my selections for 2011 known, once I saw The Iron Lady and A Dangerous Method. So, without further delay, here are my choices for Best of 2011 in the world of entertainment and pop culture:

Best Catchphrase

No statement was as hilarious to me as "Honey badger don't care. Honey badger don't give a shit. He takes what he wants." It was uttered in the Internet sensation of 2011 where a guy named Randall gave his hilariously witty commentary about the daily routines of the world's most tenacious animal, the honey badger. If you ask me, though, the Honey badger sounds kind of Republican.

Best Book

Micro - Michael Crichton (with Richard Preston)

No other book was as highly anticipated this year as the final novel by Michael Crichton, who was working on it when he died in 2008. The novel is so smooth and classically Crichton, that it was difficult for a Crichton fan as myself to know what Crichton actually wrote and what the hired writer, Richard Preston, wrote. Also, this novel has me looking at nature in an entirely new light. Micro is a gripping read, with the kind of gross-out imagery that will likely make me not want to see the inevitable movie when it comes out.

Best Television Show

The Republican Debates

I didn't watch a lot of TV in 2011. Just TV shows that are on DVD (Big Love season 4, Mad Men season 4, Entourage, and Eureka). However, what did capture my interest were the Republican debates. There seemed to be a debate each week, with each debate adding hilarious, "what the fuck?" moments. No other television programming captured my interest or made me laugh as much as these Republican debates. It is fun to watch this hateful political party self-destruct, after bringing so much destruction to America, the world, and people's lives. Hopefully, when Americans head to their polling places this November, they won't forget any of the wackiness of these debates. Based on what was said, not a single one of these candidates are "presidential material." Not a single one of them. This is one television show that I can't wait to see get the ax (hopefully after Florida's primary on Tuesday, last night's debate was the last one).

Best Song:

"Hidden Away Down" by Johnny Clegg

This song is from Johnny Clegg's 2010 release, Human. This song, more than any other in 2011 really held my interest because of the awesome melody and lyrics. Also, I had seen Johnny Clegg in concert in April and he gave a great explanation for this song, which was inspired by the life of Senator Ted Kennedy. The song is about the human tendency to push one's dark side way down and denying it, until it inconveniently emerges to wreak havoc on the person when they least expect it. I consider it to be among Johnny Clegg's best songs. I don't keep a weekly singles chart like I used to (from 1985 through 1995), but if I did, this song would have been #1 on my singles chart for about 12 weeks, which is a rare occurrence. I love it that much.

Best Concert:

Johnny Clegg Human Tour
Aladdin Theater, Portland OR

Best Album / Best Album Cover

Love to Beg by Dana Fuchs

I had the opportunity to hear this album because of my job. Since sometime in the early part of last decade, I stopped keeping track of music like I used to. I actually liked music less and less the further away from the 1990s that we got. Something about music in the past decade is not as good as what I grew up with in the 1980s and 1990s. Since I started working for a music company, I have not listened to a radio station in over a year. When I did listen to a radio station, I was frustrated by the small playlist, where you'd hear the same songs every single day, often in the same order. There is so much great music out there, but how do you discover them if radio stations don't play them? This is where working for a music company comes into play. Since I started working where I work, I've been exposed to a lot of great blues artists. I still don't care for jazz very much, but blues are pretty good, especially this one by Dana Fuchs. She was also the featured entertainer at last year's label conference, with a great concert promoting this album. She has a lot of soul and is often compared to Janis Joplin. My favourite single on this album is "Summersong." It was a great anthem for summer. I'm surprised that this album did not find greater commercial success in the U.S. Dana Fuchs has a higher profile than most blues artists. She played Sadie in the Beatles-tribute film Across the Universe.

Best Actress in a Supporting Role

Shailene Woodley - The Descendants

Last year, I had a free movie pass to see The Descendants, which I would not have seen otherwise. It didn't sound all that great, and it wasn't. Though George Clooney is likely to win the Best Actor Oscar for his role in this film, for me the stand out performance was Shailene Woodley, who played the oldest daughter and helps guide her clueless father towards the truth and to redemption. She's quite mature for her age, and also, quite attractive (jail bait!). But her emotional performance is amazing. She is an actress to watch. I mean, we're talking Natalie Portman territory!

Best Actor in a Supporting Role

Anthony Mackie - The Adjustment Bureau

Mackie was the soul of this film about a mysterious bureau that keeps intervening in the lifepath of a certain, ambitious New York politician. While other members of the bureau just want obedience without question, Mackie's character breaks a few rules to help out his assigned human. He plays it with such cool and with heart, that you can't help but be in awe of him, especially when the film's resolution happens. I served with a guy in the Navy like Mackie. Definitely someone you want on your side. He also played in The Hurt Locker and I hope this is an indication of a promising future for this actor.

Best Actress

Meryl Streep - The Iron Lady

In my list of Best Actress performances (since the early 1980s), this is Meryl Streep's first win (she was named Best Actress of the 2000s, though). She came really close in 2006 with her role as Miranda Priestly in The Devil Wears Prada, but with this iconic role as Britain's first female Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, the only one who could've denied her this honour was Michelle Yeoh as Aung San Suu Kyi (but she's in the running for this slot in 2012). Meryl Streep is definitely the most versatile actress of the Baby Boomer generation (she's the same age as my father). I wasn't a fan of hers until The Devil Wears Prada. Since then, I've come to appreciate her choices and the roles she plays, including the Diane Sawyer-type journalist in Robert Redford's Lions Before Lambs. In The Iron Lady, Streep humanizes the iconic, and conservative Thatcher, who often faced protests and even IRA bombs that tried to assassinate her. She's also up for yet another Oscar (she's the most nominated actress in history. I have a feeling, though, that she's going to lose again this year, this time to Viola Davis who will likely become only the second African American to win Best Actress).

Best Actor

Michael Fassbender - A Dangerous Method

Who is Michael Fassbender? He has come out of nowhere to have an extraordinary year with a critically acclaimed and daring role as a sex addict in Shame and a role as the famous psychotherapist Carl Jung in A Dangerous Method. He's made quite a few films, none of which I've seen, yet he does such a phenomenal job as Carl Jung that I'm taking notice. The scenes with Viggo Mortensen as Sigmund Freud are simply electric and it is extraordinary to watch him as he struggles between his professionalism and his suppressed attraction to a troubled patient, as well as arguing with Freud about why the field of psychiatry / psychology should consider metaphysical ideas. The movie shows the differences between the two men and the woman who comes between them. I hope that Fassbender will be able to catapult himself into more meaningful roles in the future. 2011 was his breakthrough year, and it is always a joy to discover a new actor or actress when a role or a few roles at the same time brings them to greater public awareness.

Best Director

Woody Allen - Midnight In Paris

I've never been a fan of Woody Allen. The few movies I've seen by him were either disappointing or merely okay, but I have to admit that I have not seen many of his films (for example, I have still not seen his best known one, Annie Hall). I have thought of having my own Woody Allen Film Festival and watching them all, but I haven't had a lot of time in the past several months and when I see a movie, his are generally not on my list of really wanting to see. What was different about Midnight In Paris, though, is that he just had to make a movie set in Paris, that was a love letter to the most beautiful city in the world. Then, he had to feature the Lost Generation, which is another interest of mine. All of this made the film an absolute must see for me last summer. It became one of his biggest hits (supposedly his highest grossing film, as well). Great news of all, he's not in this film at all, as Owen Wilson did a fantastic job as fill-in on the neurotic Allen. What truly impressed me about this film, though, is that Woody Allen managed to create a perfect film with a timely message. In fact, you could almost argue that it is less about the Lost Generation in Paris and more about the Tea Party movement in the United States. For those who did not "get" the movie, the take-home message is that the past was never as great as we think it was. Nostalgia is a tricky mental construct. All we have is now and we should enjoy it because someday in the distance future, someone will think that this age or time period was better. After I saw this film, I understood (finally) what makes Woody Allen a great director.

Best Motion Picture

The Adjustment Bureau

2011 goes down as one of the best years in movies that I can ever recall (1989 still remains as the best year in movies during my lifetime). There were so many good releases last year, which was the opposite of 2010. On my blog's left side, you can see the list of my fave films in 2011. No one beats The Adjustment Bureau, though. This film completely wow'd me beyond belief and made me look at my own life in a different way. This was actually the best film I had seen since Forrest Gump in 1994. I've written a review of it last year, so I won't go on too much about this film. Ironically, this movie led me to the Movies and Meaning group that I am a part of (along with the Thursday evening courses offered by the Eastminister Presbyterian Church). When I saw this movie in the theaters last March, I wanted to go somewhere and just think about it, especially in the context of my own life. I also wished that there was a discussion group to see the film with so that we could discuss the ideas in this film. That's when I went online in search of such a group and found it in Meet-Up and signed up. It has been a dream! Now, to find a Lady Love who is similar to Emily Blunt (she's quickly becoming one of my favourite actresses, ever since The Devil Wears Prada). I hope 2012 will have plenty of great films as well. There are at least three that I'm looking forward to: The Lady, On The Road, and another one about young Jack Kerouac (before he became famous). Oh, and hopefully this is the year that Spielberg's Abraham Lincoln film will be released. I've waited for that movie for several years now.

Best Music Video:

"Alane" by Wes

Granted, this song was released in Europe in 1996. However, I did not hear it until 2011 and it became an instant hit to my listening ears. I absolutely love it and when I looked for a music video on YouTube, I was stunned that Wes, the lead singer, looks like my "spirit guide" Shimba (whom I met in a hypnotherapy session in 2003). I think it was his cheerful countenance and his dreadlocks and his African dashiki. The song is irresistible and so is the video (I love the way those ladies dance! And the one with her hair done up like Princess Leia certainly has some mesmerizing moves). Enjoy!

Happy Australia Day, Mates!

2012-01-26T22:22:00.000-08:00

Today on Facebook, I had posted several video clips from a few Australian bands in honour of Australia Day (commemorating the day in 1788 when the first English explorer sailed into what is now known as Sydney Harbour). These include the best rock anthem tribute to the world's largest island: "Great Southern Land" by Icehouse, a video by Aboriginal band Yothu Yindi, and several by Midnight Oil. I went so far as to call Midnight Oil "Australia's greatest band."

A former co-worker (from That Place That Shall Not Be Named) refuted that by pronouncing AC/DC as Australia's greatest band by sheer fact of the number of albums sold and critical acclaim. He ranks INXS at a distant second place. As we debated it, he even had the nerve to put Men At Work ahead of Midnight Oil, simply because Men At Work had a few hit songs in the U.S. and he had never heard of any Midnight Oil songs. The discussion was enlightening, which revealed this guy's judging qualities to be based on numbers and popularity, rather than quality of the music and message of the music.

He didn't like my diss of AC/DC. Well, the point I tried to make is that if you listen to Midnight Oil's music, you learn a lot about Australia and some of the issues that people of that country are facing. Midnight Oil is unmistakably Australian. The reason why I love them so much is that they have managed to create many songs with meaningful and memorable lyrics with a catchy melody. They found international success in 1988 with their Diesel and Dust album, which featured two songs about land rights, which is a controversial issue in Australia (acknowledging that white Australians are encroaching on sacred Aboriginal lands). Those songs are "Beds Are Burning" and "The Dead Heart", of course.

If you listen to AC/DC or INXS, they could be from anywhere. There's nothing uniquely Australian about them. They are international bands, much like U2. AC/DC is merely a hard rock band that's from Australia. When I first heard about AC/DC in the early 80s, I actually thought they were an American band! The first Australian band that captured my attention was Men At Work, with their huge hit, "Down Under." And yes, I did like Men At Work as a kid. They were the second band I was crazy about (Blondie was the first, in 1979). But when I heard the two Midnight Oil songs in 1988, and then bought their Blue Sky Mining CD in 1990 (still the best environmental-themed album of all time), I was hooked. They ranked up there with Johnny Clegg and Savuka in terms of making music meaningful, by matching lyrics of profound depth and issue-raising awareness to irresistible melodies. If they haven't found greater success in America, it has more to do with American shallowness than anything else. Its just amazing to me that people are willing to argue sales and radio airplay and popularity among listeners as qualifications for "great art." If that were the case, Britney Spears would be considered "great", which she is most certainly not.

My love for Midnight Oil skyrocketed with their 1993 release of Earth and Sun and Moon, which is their most spiritual album and was such a huge hit for me that it spent over a year at #1 on my album chart that I kept from 1985 to 1995. The album still ranks at #2 on my Favourite Albums of All Time list. Its an amazing and profound album. There's no comparison, at all. Men At Work, Icehouse, Crowded House, and yes, even AC/DC simply do not come anywhere near the level of artistry and depth as Midnight Oil. Unfortunately, my interest in them started waning with their Breathe album from 1996, which was their "grunge" album and with Redneck Wonderland a few years later. Capricornica was their final album, which I never bought. They returned to their harder rock sound of the late 70s and early 80s and away from the pop sensibilities of the late 80s and early 90s. I was able to see their concert in 2001, which was awesome, and then the band broke up in 2002. I wish they'd get back together to see if they can create another album like Earth and Sun and Moon.

One more thing that I wanted to say about Midnight Oil being the best band from Australia: when I was in Prague in 1993, I stayed at a youth hostel and met an Australian guy who was traveling Europe for a year. When he found out that I was an American, he started ripping on America...mostly for our military involvement in the world and for our narrow-mindedness and disinterest in other countries. When I mentioned that one of my favourite bands was Australian, he wanted to know which one. When I said, "Midnight Oil", his attitude changed. He said that he thought I was going to say INXS and I laughed. He was stunned that an American had not only heard of Midnight Oil, but liked them more than any other Australian band. And if one likes Midnight Oil, its safe to assume that they are probably a politically aware person and not the stereotype of a typical ignorant American who is clueless about the world outside of our borders. This Aussie became cool with me and we had a friendlier conversation once I passed his "cool test."

If Bryan (the guy who argued with me about Australia's "greatest band") had traveled Europe, I wouldn't be surprised if he ticked off foreigners with his lack of cultural knowledge. My first impression of him was that he's a typical redneck / good ole boy, although he has surprised me over the years in that he considers himself a Democrat. Its interesting to note that he was hired in the position that I had applied for in 2007 that some had hinted that I might get if I put in my application. He lost his job a year before me and he's still unemployed more than two years later! It only took me 75 days to find a job. If I'm not mistaken, he served in the Army and when I had a debate on Facebook about Congressman Anthony Weiner's sexting scandal, I found it ironic that Weiner was being defended by a few females on my FB friends list while Bryan and I (two former military guys) believed that Weiner needed to resign from office.

The strange debates that I seem to inspire in people! Regardless of one's musical preference, when I think about Australia, Midnight Oil always comes to mind because a lot of what I've learned about that country I still long to visit comes from the songs and videos of Midnight Oil. Compared to the Oils, "Down Under" is merely a silly song. Have a happy Australia Day!

The Honey Badger Don't Care!

2012-01-25T03:40:00.000-08:00

Sometime in 2011, the guy who owns the townhouse that I rent a room in showed me a video clip on YouTube that I might not have discovered on my own. I laughed my ass off listening to the narration by some guy most people would identify as stereotypically gay. His way of expressing himself is hilarious, to the point where you don't know if its what he says that is as funny as the way he says it. If you've never seen the video clip, I have attached a video link at the end of this post for your convenience.

On Tuesday, the narrator of this famous Internet sensation came to Powell's City of Books, which means he actually has a book out (geez, everyone is getting a book published while my novel is still failing to find an interested agent). This was one of those events that I had to attend, just to see if this guy is for real. His name is Randall. This event was one of the larger ones I've attended (not surprised, actually). Its interesting to see who turns out for the various lectures. In this one, I noticed a larger percentage of teenage or twentysomething girls. That doesn't really surprise me, either, because Randall's manner of speaking is exactly how teenage girls talk. I guess that's part of the humour, its a man who speaks like a teenage girl.

This being Portland, a grown man showed up in a honey badger costume. No, it was not former Congressman David Wu! I had no idea that there are even honey badger costumes to be had. The rest of the crowd was the usual "Portland hipster" crowd. I had no idea what Randall looked like. When he came to the podium, he wore sunglasses, the only lecturer / author I've seen to do so. To me, this told me that Randall is a character and the sunglasses (inside a building) is his way of maintaining his real identity (keeping it from the public). He gave a Powerpoint presentation, featuring photos of animals that are in his book (not just the honey badger). He was hilarious in his presentation, as well. Every few screen images were a photo he claimed to be "embarrassed" by (part of his schtick, I think). These included a group of shirtless firemen, Erik Estrada, an old looking librarian-type lady, a chef with a large hat, and the final photo in his presentation was of a shirtless President Obama running in the ocean surf on his Hawaiian vacation (that the whole world has seen).

For the Q & A section of the lecture, Randall did something that no other lecturer had done in all the ones I've attended for the past 5 years. He said that he would answer any questions we might have, but the condition was that he would ask the person a question of his own. I thought that was an awesome idea.

What I learned in this segment is that he loves animals and nature, though he's afraid of it and hates the brutality of animals eating other animals. His father was a film photographer for Mutual of Omaha, so he had been narrating these video shots for his family and friends amusement since childhood. Which means he's probably in my age group. Mutual of Omaha wildlife series is something I remember watching when I was really young. Most of the crowd at the lecture seem like they never heard of that show before.

Randall did get a little political, saying that he doesn't think the animals will be safe after November. He recommended forming a honey badger party to run in the general election. However, the way he describes the honey badger, I think there already is a candidate who resembles this fearless creature. That honey badger is Newt Gingrich. He just doesn't give a shit.

The guy in the honey badger costume asked Randall a question, which I don't remember what it was, but Randall's question to him was "Why do you run backwards? I can never figure that out." One question he asked the person who asked him questions was: "What celebrity would you want to be stuck in an elevator with?" The guy responded with, "Not Kim Kardashian!" which drew a lot of laughs. Its weird that this woman's name comes up a lot. I have no idea who she is or why she's famous. I know her name but I don't know what she looks like. If I had been asked that question, I would've said "Natalie Portman", though my real answer would have been Audrey Tautou. But if I was aiming for funny, I would've said, "Sarah Palin."

He said that his motive for doing the book and a few phone apps, and supposedly even a limited edition stuffed talking honey badger toy, was so he can devote as much money to saving the animals. No one asked if he was a vegetarian, which would've been my question, if I dared to ask. All in all, it was an entertaining evening. He is definitely witty in person and talks as he does in the video, although there were times when he spoke with sincere seriousness, which leads me to believe that this "Randall" narrator is an act and not how he really is to family and friends. He did say that he was a theater major. So, I guess this was his creation. It is cool that he found fame through YouTube. If I'm not mistaken, he had only uploaded his video narration of the honey badger a year ago and it now has more than 35 million views. He has other videos, but I don't find them nearly as funny as the one that started them all.

I managed to find a photo of him in a Google search. He looks like he's trying to be a 70s porn star with the hairstyle and the mutton chops and 'stache. Notice the sunglasses. He really doesn't want anyone to see his unobstructed face. Its a way of maintaining his privacy, I suppose. It'll be interesting to see if he will be able to stretch out his Andy Warhol-mandated 15 minutes of fame. For every Randall, though, I'm sure there are thousands who are posting things on YouTube in the hopes that their time in the public spotlight will come soon.

Defeating the Troll

2012-01-24T01:34:00.000-08:00

The past couple of weeks, there was a war of words on a Facebook page for members of the Community of Christ. A disgruntled "Restorationist" woman reemerged on the site after a two month absence and immediately got to work stirring the pot with accusations against anyone who dared to disagree with her views. In one thread, a young lady posted some of her conservative views regarding abortion, homosexuality, and religion. The more liberal members of the board engaged in a discussion with this young lady. There was no name calling or personal attacks. But our troll, Cyndi, kept posting comments that people were "attacking" this young lady and she even warned the lady to be prepared for personal attacks. Attacks that never came.

The dialogue went on like that, back and forth, for many rounds. It was interesting to read and while I did not agree with the young lady's views, I did understand why she believed what she believed. Our troll took it upon herself to get offended on the young lady's behalf. As I've said in a previous post from this month, Cyndi has a persecution complex and perhaps even paranoia. She sees any disagreement with her opinions as a personal attack on her. She claims victimhood all the time. She's always a victim of everyone, who are just mean towards her. She also likes to claim innocence. In addition to all that, she actually does attack people and has claimed that a few of us "hate God" or are "angry with God" and are either "deceived by Satan" or "in cahoots with Satan." She has made these claims not only on the Community of Christ discussion board, but also a Restorationist site, which I am not a member of.

This past weekend, I was so fed up with her that I decided to copy her words from the Restorationist site and pasted them on the Community of Christ page. Not just hers, but a few people who made disparaging remarks about individuals on the discussion board. I was one of four people she and others have targeted for abuse. In fact, she seems to view me as one of the "ring leaders" on the church board. Ha! I laugh at her presumption. Me, a leader?

I was a little leary about posting their words on the discussion page (or "wall" in Facebook parlance), because some might say that it wasn't "Christian." But I used a favourite Sinead O'Connor song ("Emperor's New Clothes") as my guide. Particularly the line: "Through their own words, they will be exposed." And it didn't take long for me to see that my decision worked. The moderator of the Restorationist board posted later that she would crack down on any negative comments about people on the church board. She wrote that some of their words were being re-posted on the church site "as an example about how mean and nasty we are." So, she laid down the law. I was thrilled. My plan worked. Hypocrites do not like being exposed. They think they can type out words on the Internet and not be faced with them? I'm all for ownership of words.

Cyndi's battles didn't end there, though. In another discussion, he hated that her brother was more well received than she has been, because he's an atheist and she's not. It apparently bothered her so much that she did something that I consider to be the dirtiest, most disgusting thing someone can do to another person (friend or family member). In order to discredit her brother in an intense discussion thread, she revealed dirty family secrets from their past. I was so appalled by what she wrote that I responded with a scathing rebuke, calling her despicable. Of course, I got criticized by her defenders. They called me "judgmental" and did the usual quotes ("Judge not, lest ye be judged") that conservatives like to cite, even though Cyndi has done a lot of judging in the two weeks she's been on there. But, the dirty, low road trashing of her brother on a public discussion board pretty much killed her credibility. In fact, one lady who once defended her against some of my comments about her, turned against her and sided with me. Cyndi made a lot of enemies.

She enlisted her 19 year old son to defend her on the board, and he started going after me. She said of him, "he has more wisdom and maturity than all the rest of you combined!" Yeah, whatever. I seriously doubt that. She also claimed that he was more moral than anyone else on the site, so I suggested: join a fraternity or the military and we'll see how long you maintain your morals without mommy around. That didn't go over well with either of them.

All through these various debates, the more reasonable members of the board kept saying, "Don't feed the trolls!" I understand that view. Its based on the idea that Cyndi was seeking attention by getting people into debates with her. However, I disagreed. I believe in engagement. I actually enjoyed calling her out on her bullshit. I can play hardball. I was willing to push back as far as I could go. She was playing with fire with me. She had no clue who she was dealing with (I'm the guy people underestimate and for those who thought they could pick a fight with me, they ended up losing because I'm not someone to mess with. I don't just fight back. I make it a point that the person who picks a fight with me will end up regretting it). Of course, some people who don't have the stomach for conflict commented about how its all around nasty and how bad that looks for the page. Some even posted that they were leaving the site because of the nastiness.

I'm not sure what happened, but Cyndi and her son were deleted from the membership of that board. Someone told me that they had sent threatening emails to a couple people (I did not get such an email). It should have been obvious to anyone who the problem folks were. One Restorationist did post a critique of me for not acting very Christ-like. He complimented me on my intelligence but said that my posts, even if right, only alienated people. I didn't find that to be the case, though. A few people sent me private emails complimenting me for being so bold to speak out against Cyndi and her son. I realize that some people don't want to come out looking like the bad guy by telling Cyndi what she's doing. I don't mind looking like the asshole, because I don't care if people like me or not. I know that the people who like me, like me for my honesty and passion and sense of fairness / justice. People who don't like me tend to be ideologues.

One day after being evicted from the site, a new person by the name of "Reu Smith" joined and started posting. It didn't take long for people to figure out that Reu was Cyndi. The ruse was lame. Reu claimed to be a Baptist in Tennessee who recently discovered the Book of Mormon and was interested in the church, so she came on to the page when a co-worker told her that "you can find everything on Facebook!" Her profile revealed no friends and only minimal information. What made me suspicious, though, was that Reu had posted comments stating that she was shocked by the nastiness of people towards Cyndi and her son, who did not provoke such a response. A few people told her to keep reading the posts. She also attacked Cyndi's brother for being an atheist and wondered why an atheist would be on a church site.

I read enough of Reu Smith's posts to decide posting: "Clark Kent is Superman!" I even found it amusing that the Restorationist site had recently posted that several people were plotting to infiltrate their page to cause trouble. No one did such a thing, but a member of their page did that on ours. When I got more provocative and called Reu out on her lies and deception, even mentioning how hilarious I found that the other site did not even have a clue that Reu was Cyndi, that's when things really came to a head. Reu was evicted from the church site and a day later, was deleted from the Restorationist site after someone questioned her identity (thanks to my posts).

This was not the outcome that Cyndi probably foresaw for herself when she started stirring the pot a few weeks ago with accusations against others. She might have gotten her kicks to cause trouble, or else she grossly underestimated how she would be received. The end result of her games is that she was evicted from the church site, she lost her brother (who not only de-friended her, but blocked her), and on the Restorationist site, the moderator is deadly serious about deleting not just negative comments, but also any member who violated her stricter rules. Cyndi loved trashing church members on that site, but now she'll have to be civil or else get kicked off that site. I can't imagine that she'll "behave for long." She has serious psychological problems.

By Sunday, all was peaceful back on the church board. Amazing how things turned out. As I told a few people, I'm not one who can just "ignore the troll." Their nastiness doesn't bother me the way it does other people. I realize that a lot of people have different sensibilities and don't want the negative comments in their view. For me, I've been able to spar with different people over all kinds of ideas. I like the battles and the fireworks. I know how to win the battle against bullies of all kinds. In my experience, bullies pick on weaker people because they believe they can get away with it. And they count on the fact that most people will just stand by in silence, watching it happen. Bullies don't respect weakness. Thus, the advice of "don't feed the trolls" does not really put an end to their abuse. It only encourages them to get more outrageous until we respond.

I prefer engagement. I love putting a mirror to their face and showing them some of their own treatment of others. Whatever it takes to force an awareness. In my experience, only standing up to bullies works. Not just standing up to them, but also telling them what you really think of them is a powerful rebuke to a bully. So, if you don't have the stomach for confrontation, give me a call. I will stand up to bullies and tell them exactly what I think of them. As Tom Petty sang in one of his best songs: "I won't back down." I'm tenacious that way. I do not like bullies and I do not like that most people seem to think that the best way of dealing with them is to ignore them. They don't understand the psychology of the bully. Bullies respect strength and hate weakness. If you stand up to a bully, they probably won't admit it to anyone, but they respect anyone who dares to stand up to them without flinching.

As for Cyndi, I don't hate her or anything. I feel sorry that she has to stir the pot in order to feel important. She really should consider getting professional help. I admit that a part of me is amused that she went through the trouble to create a fake Facebook account just to get back into our board to continue her lies and deception. She just doesn't know how to quit. With her banned from the church board, the rest of us can post in peace, without fear of being accused of attacking someone. We can actually have meaningful discussions with one another. Its a shame that Cyndi will never know what its like to have a meaningful disagreement. She is a woman in complete subversion to her ego. That is a tragedy.

The Irony of Newt Versus Mitt

2012-01-22T12:07:00.000-08:00

Republican primary voters in South Carolina have upturned the punditry by giving the amoral adulterer and sanctimonious hypocrite a primary win over the monogamous Mormon. As political analysts have said over and over, for the past 30 years, the winner of the Republican primary in South Carolina has gone on to get the Republican nomination. I have a feeling that it won't happen this time, though. Newt has more baggage than a luggage carousel at a busy airport terminal. But a win is a win and what this tells us is that South Carolina evangelicals do not like the Mormon church. This is obviously religious bigotry at its worst (when evangelical Christians would rather vote for a lying, hypocritical, adulterer who joined the Catholic Church when he married a third time than a monogamous family man who shares their same conservative values).

I actually laughed at the results of this primary because it is proof that karma is a real principle. One of the aspects of karma that I read about is that you eventually become the thing that you hate. In the case of the Republican Party, they made "family values" a campaign issue in 1992 when Governor Bill Clinton became the nominee, because he had a infidelity problems. It was such a shallow premise, though, because President G.H.W. Bush never spoke about "family values" prior to 1992. He didn't want to talk about the economy because the country was in a recession at the time, but they thought character was a winning issue. Clinton did have character, though. When the going got tough and the slings and arrows started aiming his way, he never quit and he never backed down. He was tenacious and though adultery was a problem, Clinton also never made himself out to be "holier-than-thou" or the bastion of morality. He simply focused on the issues that mattered ("It's the economy, stupid!"). Republicans continued the "family values" issue in 1994 mid-terms, 1996, 1998 mid-terms, and the 2000 elections.

How did the karma boomerang come back to the Republicans? Well, Newt Gingrich is that immoral candidate with no family values that "values voters" claimed not to want in a president. But in 2012, these voters will have to choose between a man who makes Clinton look like a Boy Scout and a flip-flopping, wealthy elite politician from Massachusetts whom no one seems to like. Doesn't that sound familiar? In 2004, the Republicans painted John Kerry as a "flip flopper". He was also wealthy / elite, and Republicans even made snarky comments in 2004 that he "looks French." Romney actually served a Mormon mission in France (when guys his age were fighting in Vietnam, a war that he supported but couldn't bother to participate in). It is amazing that in 2012, twenty years after the rise of Bill Clinton, the Republican Party is going to throw out family values and consistency as virtues to promote. In 2012, Gingrich is the Republican version of Clinton and Romney is their version of Kerry. Karma is a bitch.

Of course I laughed at the South Carolina primary results. The Democrats have become the Republicans and the Republicans have become the Democrats. For my entire life, the Republican Party claimed to be the party of foreign policy. They are the ones that will keep the country safe. You can bank on it. Since 1992, they claimed to be the party of "family values." Now, we have a president with incredible family values and a successful foreign policy we haven't seen since George Herbert Walker Bush was president. And Obama has a Nobel Peace Prize to boot, which no sitting U.S. president has won since Theodore Roosevelt over a century ago.

So Republicans, I hope you love your choices. Remember: stop hating because you will become what you hate. Now you have to choose between the Newt and the Mitt. Maybe in 2016, you won't be so ideologically rigid and actually choose a moderate (hint, hint: Scott Brown!). But, you have to get through 2012 first.

Psychological Intrigue

2012-01-21T22:33:00.000-08:00

Earlier today, I finally made it to see A Dangerous Method, about Carl Jung and the patient he treats through an innovative new process known as "the talking cure", that was created by famous psychiatrist Sigmund Freud. As a huge fan of biopics and with a growing interest in psychology, this film was absolutely must-see for me. The reviews I had read played up the "love triangle" aspect, but after the film concluded, I can gladly say that it was not. Though I learned a lot more about Carl Jung than I currently know about him, I did not realize that he was unfaithful to his wife (or had an "open marriage").

The film opens with Sabina Spielrein (played by Keira Knightley) screaming in a carriage as she is taken to the institute where Carl Jung (played by Michael Fassbender) works to be put under his care. She's deeply troubled and when he suggests that she start talking while he sits behind her to listen, she can barely get words out (I actually hated these scenes because the way Knightley speaks--with the bottom part of her mouth extended out like a fish--is not particularly enjoyable to watch. She's a beautiful lady, but her facial expression are truly ugly to watch). She's traumatized by events in her past and acts with wild abandon (including swimming around a muddy pond in her white dress).

Early on, Jung remarks to his wife about the amazing timing between two events and then says, "I don't believe in coincidence." Jung, of course, is known for coining the expression "synchronicity" (as well as "archetypes" and the personality traits of introversion and extroversion). He decides to pay a visit to Sigmund Freud's place in Vienna. Viggo Mortensen plays Freud. He does such a great job, that I really did forget that it was Viggo as he disappeared into the role. Freud is a supporting character in this film, but in every scene, there's a cigar in his mouth (Freud is known for saying: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar"). Their first meeting sparks a conversation that lasts 13 hours. Its like a meeting of two souls who finally got to meet on the earthly plane and played catch-up without realizing that time flew by during their conversation.

Their friendship begins and they write letters to one another, and meet occasionally. Freud sees Jung as his protege and the one who will carry on his work in making psychoanalysis / psychiatry a respected science. In one of the most electrifying scenes I've ever seen, Freud and Jung argue about their different approaches to the field. Freud wants to follow strict protocol in order to be considered legitimate among the academic elite of that era. Jung is interested in metaphysical aspects and wants the freedom to explore subjects that Jung believes will bring ill repute to their profession. When a loud crack is heard, Freud is dismissive of it while Jung claims that it coincided with a feeling he had in his gut and he swore it would happen again.

Freud sends a former protege to be under Jung's care, but this turns out to be disastrous. Jung ends up disagreeing with the troubled psychologist, who has a tendency to sleep with his patients, which Jung finds unprofessional. Yet, that patient's advice ends up influencing Jung to have a physical relationship with his former patient Spielrein. When word gets around that Jung has a mistress, even Freud was able to hear those rumours and asks his protege about it. Jung denies the rumours and tells Spielrein that they can't carry on any more. Of course, she can't handle the rejection so she demands that Jung ask his mentor to take her on as a patient. Freud refuses to intervene in a personality clash until Jung is forced to admit his deception regarding his relationship. It was difficult to see that Freud was the more professional one, while the psychiatrist I prefer comes off as reckless.

Jung and Freud travel to America together, but all we get to see is the ship (and the Statue of Liberty). During the voyage, the two men talk about dreams, though Jung is stunned that Freud won't reveal his dreams for Jung to analyze. The two men eventually have a break and their friendship (mentorship / protege relationship) ends after a decade. I was stunned that it lasted only a decade, for I thought it was a lifetime. I knew about the differences that caused the break, though. I agree with Jung's analysis. In the film, Jung complains that Freud is too obsessed with the idea that all problems can be boiled down to sex. He doesn't believe anything is as simple as that.

This movie is a fascinating look at the friendship between two famous men in the early part of last century. Michael Fassbender is phenomenal in his role as Carl Jung. I'd give him the Best Actor Oscar for his performance. I also had no idea that Jung was such a snazzy dresser. His suits looked sharp (I want to dress like him!). Viggo Mortensen also did a great job as Freud. Any scene with the two of them were just electric. I loved hearing them talk back and forth about various ideas in the realm of psychology. This film made me think that maybe I picked the wrong major in college. But, I actually only became interested in psychology AFTER my college experience.

In period films, its always interesting to me that the women always seem to have elaborate and memorable hats. Perhaps the costume designers think that this is "Oscar bait." I certainly hope that the Oscars will give this movie major nominations (Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actor, Best Adapted Screenplay), but I'm not sure if it made any critics' best of 2011 lists. It was shut out of the Golden Globes, which is considered the bellwether for Oscar. Regardless of what the Academy decides, this is a great film worth seeing, just to get an idea of what a friendship and conversations were like between two famous men of the early 20th Century. In one telling scene, Freud advises Spielrein not to fall in love with Jung, because they are both Jews and Jung is an Aryan. Freud seemed to have a keen understanding of where anti-semitism was heading in that century. But he had no idea that more people would be influenced by Jung's ideas than his. I don't think that's a coincidence.

A Foreboding Sense of Doom

2012-01-20T23:55:00.000-08:00

On Friday evening, I went to Powell's City of Books again to attend my FOURTH lecture / booksigning of the year. I know, I know...excessive, right? Well, Powell's City of Books usually schedules one event per night every month, so there's a huge potential that they will get an author of interest to me. This time, it was Thomas Frank, who I saw at Powell's the last time he was here, promoting his last book, The Wrecking Crew. I first heard about him when his book, What's the Matter With Kansas?, was released several years ago. It was his attempt to answer the question that has baffled liberal political thinkers for the past couple of decades: why do Americans vote against their own economic self-interest? Its a phenomenon unique to America. People voting in favour of what the wealthy class want because of the belief that one day, they will be rich too (through the miracle of a winning lottery ticket) and they'll want to benefit from the low taxes on the rich. Now, Frank is back with Pity The Billionaire, which could be considered a sequel of sorts to that previous book.

But first, I wanted to point out that the universe is definitely playing with me. When I went to the Amy Chua booksigning, I was on the Portland Streetcar when a cute Bohemian Bicyclist lady got on board. I liked her look and style and hoped that our paths would cross again. I wanted to talk with her then, but the Streetcar was too crowded and I don't like private conversations in small, public spaces. So, I simply made a request to the universe that our paths would cross again soon. Having lived in Portland for five years now, I know that request is not too difficult to accomplish. Well, after work today, I disembarked the bus at the 82nd Street MAX station. On the platform was...you guessed it! The Bohemian Bicyclist lady!! Wow. I was stunned. Ten days later, the universe honoured my request. But the platform was crowded, so I didn't say anything. When the MAX arrived, I boarded it and saw her making her way into the train. The door started closing, so I held out my hand to prevent the doors from crushing the rear wheel of her bicycle tire.

She struggled to hang the bicycle vertically on the hook, so I volunteered to help her. In my mind, I kept thinking how brilliant it was for the universe to set things up so that I could play "the hero" for this lady who captivated my interest. She said that she wasn't strong enough to lift the bicycle up to the hook and thanked me for doing that for her. I heard a faint trace of an accent. I told her that she was brave to ride her bicycle in such rainy weather. When she said something and I was about to ask where she was from, she walked to the far side of the MAX train to look at the route map.

When she returned, she sat in a seat . The distance was too far to engage in a conversation. I felt a lost opportunity. Then she started talking with some guy in a wheelchair who sat in the space next to her. I'm not sure if this means anything, but I was a little miffed that she had walked off when I said to her, "I like your accent. Where--" She probably did not hear me, but it felt kind of rude. I saved her bicycle tire from being crushed by the MAX door (twice!) and I help hang her bicycle on the hook, and I can't even manage to engage her in a longer conversation? I know two people who met their spouses on MAX and I want a story like that! So, universe, I'm asking you. Please have our paths cross again and let her remember me. I would like a longer conversation. She's adorable. Lean, short, a uniquely Bohemian manner of dress, short dark hair (like a flapper), and an accent (I kept thinking in my mind that she's Portuguese or something, but I have no real idea). She is what I'm looking for in a Lady Love. So, universe...please make it happen!

Now, about that lecture. As is usually the case, anytime there is a political lecture, the space fills up quickly to standing room only after all the seats are taken. I wish our church could inspire this many people in attendance! Thomas Frank spoke about the latest agenda of the Republican Party and their billionaire backers. He said what I believe from all the stuff I've read. The goal of the Republican Party is the complete destruction of the New Deal. They want to turn back the clock to the Herbert Hoover era. You can see it in each Republican president. They manage to undo some things (financial regulations, union busting, budget cuts, etc.), and each president pushes a little bit further towards the right. In Bush's second term, he had wanted to privatize social security but was not able to do so, probably because he squandered his "capital" on the Iraq war and then after Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans, his presidency was effectively over. His popularity never reached the 50% mark again. When the economy crashed in 2008, people were relieved that social security was still safe and not moved into privatized accounts, otherwise there would've been a lot of hurting seniors. But, Americans also have a short term memory, as witnessed in 2010 when voters returned to power a mere two years after a stunning defeat the political party that had brought so much ruin to our country.

Why are Americans so much like Charlie Brown and the Republican Party is Lucy holding the football? The Republicans have proved time and again that they cannot be trusted with power. They are grossly incompetent when it comes to government (not that they are all that great at business. Look at Enron for a case example). As Frank said, the current crop of Republican candidates for president is amazing in terms of ideology. Our country will not survive another Republican presidency because they intend to privatize social security and medicare (remember Congressman Paul Ryan's voucher plan?).

Frank had things to say about Democrats, as well. He explained how Washington works because that is where he lives and he talks with major Democratic Party personalities all the time. His frustration is that Democrats never argue in favour of government, but they need to because the other party is trash talking government, which means the message that voters pick up is that government is bad. People did not think so in the FDR through LBJ years. It was the Vietnam War and Watergate that broke Americans trust in government. We've been cynical ever since. But maybe not cynical enough. Seriously...why would anyone vote for a person who says that they hate government? Would a corporation hire a person who said that they hate business? It doesn't make sense. Government is only as good as the people who serve in it, and obviously Republicans love government if they are willing to spend millions of dollars for an office that pays between $100,000 and $400,000 a year.

According to Frank, the Democrats base things on the "experts." When they debate, when they make a case for an idea, they always quote "the experts." Who are "the experts"? Frank said that Washington, D.C. has the largest concentration of people with PhDs. With all the colleges, think tanks, military bases, media stations, and government agencies, there are plenty of experts to choose from. But this creates a bubble in which "thinking outside of the box" does not exist. As we've seen with the way the Iraq War was sold, "the experts" were wrong. They all supported the war and the execution of it. Experts being wrong is like a meteorologist on the local news. You don't have to worry about losing your job for being wrong most of the time.

Frank said that the reason why Democrats refer to the experts' opinions and are all about "consensus building" and bipartisanship is because they don't want to be frozen out of the lucrative employment opportunities after they retire or lose an election. Frank said something completely stunning. He said that a Democrat will maintain the experts' opinion or strategy, even if it means losing an election because they are seen as out of touch. They won't fight for the common person and vote on what's best for the country as a whole. They want the exclusive and high paying jobs, too. While the corporate monies that are buying members of Congress wholesale prefer Republicans in office, they know that they have Democrats where they want them. Frank even said that the Republicans who aren't off the deep end (the non-ideological ones who actually value logical thinking and facts) admit that Obama is essentially an effective Republican president.

Another thing Frank mentioned is that one of the things Republicans like to say is that "real conservativism hasn't been tried." He said that the only reason why Bush is ignored in the GOP is because he was unpopular. Had he left office popular, they would be touting his presidency the way they still do with Reagan. Well, at least we can give them some points for honesty. Its refreshing that they aren't trying to spin history regarding Bush, but I imagine at some point in the future, the propaganda machine will kick up to rehabilitate Bush as a successful presidency. They are counting on the American habit of forgetting the past.

During the Q & A session, someone in the front row asked Frank this question: "Why did no Democrat primary challenge Obama?" Frank said that he did not know the answer to that question and asked the audience if anyone knew. No one offered an explanation. I was stunned. Really?!? No one knows why Obama did not get a primary challenge? If my voice could carry in a large room, I would've answered the question, but I kept quiet. I'm amazed that no one knows why Obama did not get a primary challenge. It is so obvious! Really.

Here's why Obama did not get a primary challenger. No Democrat wants to be the one that made our first African American president a one term president. During the Clinton years, I learned one of Clinton's worries was that a Democrat would challenge him in the primary. This is considered a curse. If a president is challenged for his party's nomination, then his presidency is doomed, even if the challenger doesn't win a single primary. Pat Buchanan challenged Bush in 1992. Ted Kennedy challenged Carter in 1980. Ronald Reagan challenged Ford in 1976. Eugene McCarthy challenged LBJ in 1968. Its a curse. Any Democrat who did that to President Obama would face the wrath of African Americans all over the country, 90% of whom voted for Obama in 2008. This is the most loyal and one of the largest voting blocks within the Democratic Party. Why do that to our historical president? Despite disappointment about the centrist nature of his presidency (and capitulation to Republican demands), his victory in 2008 is still worth remembering. There was so much happiness and hope, and we were a witness to history. Obama has been far better than Bush, and if someone like Bush could win a second term, then of course Obama deserves a second term. If Obama was a white man, he likely would have faced a Democratic challenger. If Hillary was president, she would not have faced a primary challenger, because her presidency would've been seen as historical as well, and no Democrat would want to raise the ire of female voters. It would be the kiss of death for their political career.

Frank's lecture was interesting, but far from optimistic. It appears that he believes America is heading in an unstoppable direction. We only have one way to go: down. The viciousness of the current crop of Republicans for president, the amnesia-quality of American voters, and historical trends all seem to be pointing in the same direction. America is on the path of self-destruction. I left the lecture feeling icky. It makes me want to meet a foreign woman so I can marry her and move to her country. I wish I could be optimistic about our future, but when Americans keep thinking that Republicans can be trusted, like Lucy with the football, then I don't have any hope for our country. After what the Republicans did in the Bush years, this political party should be completely shut out of government for the next generation. They are and deserve to be the permanent minority party. I swear, if America returns Republicans to the White House this fall, I'm done with this country. I just don't have a heart big or strong enough to watch as my fellow citizens, in a masochistic display of ignorance, vote for a party that keeps wrecking our economy and laughing all the way to the bank. You won't find me pitying any billionaire. They can all go straight to hell for what they are doing to our country.

A Spiritual Response to the Tiger Mother

2012-01-19T02:26:00.000-08:00

Last night, I finished reading Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, which I started reading on Sunday. It was a quick read and interesting. Definitely "book club worthy" for those who are in book clubs looking for the next book to read (I'm sure the discussions about it will be interesting). I don't belong to a book club mostly because I don't trust other people's choices for books and I like reading what I like reading. When I decide on which books to read at any given time, I usually go by intuitive guidance. I have a huge backlog on the books I want to read (some have been sitting on my bookcases for YEARS).

Last week, I had attended Amy Chua's lecture and booksigning at Powell's City of Books in Portland. She made her case about why she's not as bad as the media made her out to be. After the lecture, I read my blog post about her last year when she was in the eye of the storm. Interesting, I thought, especially once I've read her book. My initial impression has been confirmed. Basically, the biggest problem with Amy Chua is that she exhibits all of the stereotypes of "Ivy League Elitist." In fact, in her book, she mentioned something that I had never heard before but it kind of makes sense. She said that she is a Chinese American who is married to a white Jewish man, which she claimed sounds "exotic" but was actually the majority in certain circles. Well, gee, what circle could that be? Maury Povich is married to Connie Chung. Les Moonves is married to Julie Chen (host of CBS' Big Brother reality show). Former Senator Phil Gramm is married to a lady of Asian heritage (Wendy Lee Gramm). Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky is married (!) to the Secretary of Labor in the Baby Bush Administration (Elaine Chao). Though Gramm and McConnell aren't Jewish, they did marry Asian.

Another thing that irked me about Amy Chua's parenting style is that she wanted her daughters to play either the piano or the violin. Not the drums, because it supposedly leads to drugs and sex. But let's get real. The piano and violin are considered the instruments of the upper class. How many concertos, cantatas, recitals, and such are written for the piano and violin? In some telling episodes from the book, Amy made her daughters practice their chosen instruments for four to six hours each day. Even when the family went on European vacations, she would find music stores or hotel bars that allowed her to rent for a few hours so her daughters could practice every single day, sometimes early in the morning before they went out sightseeing AND upon returning to the hotel for the evening. When her eldest daughter won an opportunity to perform at Carnegie Hall, she invited everyone she knew to attend, and then felt disappointed that her daughter had to perform in a lesser hall and not the main one. She pushed her second daughter into applying for the Juilliard and bragged about it to others. When her daughter did not get accepted, she felt humiliated, while her daughter had to face questions of people if she ever heard back from the famous music / performing arts school.

If this was not crazy behaviour enough, how about this episode from her book? She had secured a meeting with a well known violin instructor, who lived on the other side of New York from them (they lived in Connecticut). She had borrowed five violins from a store to see which one to buy for her daughter, and took all five violins with them to meet with the instructor. Not only that, she also told her daughter's violin tutor to come along, offering to pay by the hour as well as the gasoline for the tutor (who had to drive her own car) for the three days. Her husband balked at such an expense, saying that it would mean cancelling their summer vacation.

Not only was the obsession over playing instruments, but also grades. When her daughter did not do well in math, she would drill her daughter in timed tests for hours on end until her daughter would be fast enough to be #1 in class. She expected her daughters to be ranked #1 in all subjects (except gym and drama). Only straight A's were acceptable. An A- doesn't count. She ended the idea of sleepovers when her older daughter came home from one unhappy because of the way the other girls acted (talking bad about a girl when she wasn't in the room, discussions about sex, gossiping about people, etc.).

Amy has her reasons to be strict on her daughters. In her belief system, she wants to drill discipline into her daughters so that they will be well-functioning adults. She writes much about Chinese parenting versus Western parenting, even though she had written a disclaimer in the beginning about stereotypes, acknowledging that there are many different parenting styles among "Western parents." Ultimately, though, her younger daughter Lulu rebels and the fights culminate in a public showdown at a restaurant in Moscow's Red Square when Lulu screams at her mother that she hates her, hates the violin, and hates that she was born into that family. The other diners were uncomfortable witnesses to the public breakdown of an American family. Amy wrote that she bolted out of the restaurant in tears, only to return later, having calmed down and willing to let her daughter give up the violin.

Amy admitted in her book that her husband and even her Chinese immigrant parents (who were just as strict on her as she was on her daughters) told her that she was being too restrictive on her daughters. Her mother told her that there was something wrong with Lulu's eyes. Its amazing that you can see in another person's eyes when they are not fully present. A change in demeanor. Lulu decided to play tennis and wanted her mother to stay out of it after catching her mother trying to find the right coaches for her.

As I read the book, one thing was clear throughout. Though Amy did not admit it within her pages, its quite obvious to any reader. Amy is a status seeker. She's the epitome of an "elitist." Though that word gets tossed around a bit, what it signifies is that special privileged class of people who go to the Ivy League schools and get the choice first jobs with big salaries, which allows them to afford homes in pricey Connecticut or apartments in Manhattan, to pay for tutors and private schools, to have enough free time to drive her daughters to recitals and rehearsals and tutors, and to travel the capital cities of Europe for vacations. Not that there is anything particularly wrong with this, but her story reads like a cliche about fitting in with high society through doing all the things that impresses the right people. In the end, what did it accomplish but make her daughter resentful?

She did not mention anything about her spiritual beliefs. Yes, she did mention joining her husband's Jewish faith and having a bat mitzvah for each daughter, but I got the sense that they are more secular Jews than anything else. The true religion was status. It was important for Amy to fit in among the elite. This soulless pursuit obviously led to a breakdown in Russia, when she realized she was in danger of losing her daughter for good. I've read that the suicide rate among teens in Japan and Korea are pretty high. The emphasis on grades and being #1 are creating monsters. Only one person can be #1, so the highly competitive view of life is just ridiculous. Not everything in life is meant to be a competition. What's more important is being authentic and doing things because you feel a passion for it. The worst thing is to pursue things that will increase your stature in the eyes of the elite you're trying to impress. You might fit in for awhile, but those people are not really your friends. Will they be there when you are struggling or facing some adversity?

Amy Chua seems to believe that through her sheer willpower, she can force her children into certain identities. She does not seem to believe that her daughters have souls of their own, with interests that they brought with them from the spiritual realm that might have nothing to do with her at all. For example, Lulu is passionate about tennis. At first, Amy did not want her daughters to pursue sports, but it wasn't surprising that she allowed Lulu to trade in a violin for a tennis racket. Tennis is the sport of the elite class. The wealthy academia literati that Amy is hoping to impress will be more interested in her tennis-playing daughter than they would be if she took up basketball. In her book, Amy did mention that she was glad that her daughter chose tennis instead of bowling. In her mind, bowling would be undignified. Its the "sport" of middle America: those people with overhanging stomachs and ugly clothing probably bought at K-Mart.

What would be my advice for the Tiger Mother? Get some spiritual depth! Get to know who your daughters are at their soul level of being. What did their souls come to earth for? What do they hope to accomplish? Stop perpetuating the stereotype of Asians being classical music and math / science nerds who get straight A's all the time and fight for first place in the class rankings. There is more to life than that. Yes, its important to have discipline and structure and goals in life. But sometimes, you can go a little too far for that and your soul ends up suffering.

Wine To Water

2012-01-18T00:24:00.000-08:00

On Tuesday evening, I went to Powell's City of Books again to attend the lecture given by Doc Hendley, who was a bartender in North Carolina when he decided to get involved in the water crisis in the developing world and ended up starting his own Non-Profit Organization. I love stories like this. Or course I had to attend!

When he approached the podium and began speaking, there was no question that he's a Southerner. He had an interesting drawl and he personified the "good ole' boy" stereotype of Southern white boys. His persona does give off a certain image, but this was actually beneficial to him. As he told his story, he was a bartender and had a college degree from a university in North Carolina when he saw a story about the world's water crisis, with some statistic that unsafe water is one of the primary causes of death for people in the developing world. Something about this affected him in such a way that he held fundraisers (wine and cheese events at bars around North Carolina) with a plan to donate all the money to an organization devoted to this issue. He made an appointment with the charity Samaritan's Purse and spoke with someone high up (the head guy? I can't remember). Instead of accepting the money, the guy asked Doc what he deal was and why was he interested in the issue. As Doc explained it, I felt goosebumps, because this is exactly how synchronicity works. Instead of taking the money, the guy asked if Doc would be interested in working for him. Wow. I've been wanting to work in the international field. This gives me some ideas to ponder. I guess this job offer was due to the fact that Doc defied stereotypes. He may look and speak like a Southern "good ole boy", but he actually had depth and an interest in the world beyond the South.

Doc accepted the job offer and requested to be sent to the worst place possible, which happened to be Darfur in Sudan in the middle of the previous decade, when things were truly bad. He didn't share much of the details that happened in Darfur, but said that it was in his book. He hinted that it was an interesting story, which includes a threat of death by the Danjaweed militia. After getting a basic learning experience about water issues and international relief work, he decided to form his own non-profit organization. He shared how he came across the idea of "Wine To Water", which is a reference to Jesus turning water into wine. Not a bad idea (a bartender who turns profits made from wine and other alcoholic drinks into building wells so that villagers in developing countries in Africa and Southeast Asia can have fresh drinking water).

He shared a little bit about starting a non-profit organization, which he advises that you surround yourself with good people that you trust and to put as much money towards the actual work instead of administrative costs. His organization actually hires local people to build and install the wells with local materials. This is a job creator overseas, which is more affordable than having Americans traveling and staying in expensive hotels. He also shared about how grants work (once you get a grant, you have to write reports detailing the progress, which means hiring people stateside to keep track of grants and writing them as well as the reports). He seems to prefer direct donations instead of grants, which is understandable. Less strings attached.

As I listened to the lecture, I was impressed. The guy has charisma and appears likable, humble, and earnest. He kept emphasizing that if someone like him could do this, anyone can. He's also willing to work in tandem with other organizations devoted to water issues. He said that the dirty secret of the non-profit world is that they can be even more vicious (competitive) than the corporate world, because they are chasing the same donors to fund their organizations.

I kept thinking, this is the kind of work I need to be doing. I majored in international politics, so why aren't I doing it? I guess my problem is that I have not found an issue that really grabs me. Human rights was my focus, but that's a broad topic. Lately, I've been thinking of volunteering with an organization in Portland devoted to refugees and helping them learn English and to understand American culture. I need to get on the ball and see if synchronicity will follow. This lecture really sparked some ideas and it is inspiring to see someone you wouldn't suspect on first glance to be interested in the lives of people in the poorest countries on earth (I've lived in the South long enough to know that most Southern white boys are not like Doc Hendley). It kind of gives me hope for the world that there are people like Doc who feel a need to do something to make the world a better place. If he can do it, why can't I?

I did not buy his book, though. Like the previous post mentioned, I'm limiting the number of hardcover books that I buy and will wait until this one is released in paperback. I wanted to talk with him about how to get a job with Samaritan's Purse (I'd love to go to Burma, if they operate there), but if I wasn't buying a book, I thought it would be awkward to go up and talk with him. Plus, I had a cut on my tongue that made it extremely painful for me to speak this week (karmic retribution, perhaps, for some "unkind" things I had posted on Facebook to a "troll" on the Community of Christ's discussion page?). Hopefully he will be back in Portland again someday so I can talk with him. But I do thank him for the inspiration. More people should learn about his story and perhaps even support his organization: Wine to Water. He requested that people get the word out about the world's water crisis. In fact, March 22nd is "Water Day" or something like that. Here's my part. I guess I need to learn more about the issue. An internationally-focused career keeps beckoning to me. We just have to find each other (the right career / organization for someone of my experience, interests, and skills).

Beliefs or Practices?

2012-01-17T00:47:00.000-08:00

On the flight from Phoenix to Portland on New Year's Day, I was flipping through a copy of the inflight magazine and saw an article about Eric Weiner, which was actually an excerpt from his book, Man Seeks God. I was intrigued and read the excerpt. Basically, Weiner is an atheist (or as he calls himself, a "gastronomical Jew") who, after a health scare, was prompted to search for God when a nurse whispered a foreboding, "Have you found your God, yet?" in his ear during his hospital stay. When he was released without any major health problems (turned out it was his body reacting to the stress of his finishing his last book about happiness), the nurse's nagging question lingered in his mind.

So, he sought out the more mystical approaches to the major religions: Sufism in Islam, Kabbalah in Judaism, Jesuits in Catholicism, and Buddhism, among others (his book mentions a visit with Wiccans and even more strange, a religion in Nevada that is devoted to aliens and UFOs). It sounds like an interesting book. On Monday evening, Weiner spoke at Powell's City of Books and read select passages from his book.

What struck out the most for me was something he said in the Q & A portion of the reading. He said that in his talking with people around the world, most everyone asks him, "What's your practice?" or "What's your experience?" He said that almost no one ever asked him, "What do you believe?" Its his view (which is also what I've thought for many years now) that beliefs get in the way of relating to others and could lead us to wrong decisions. What ultimately matters is not what we believe, but what we experience. This is what the essence of religion should be.

It was interesting for me to hear someone say this, just as a week went by with a constant back and forth on the church's Facebook discussion page about the troublemaker, Cyndi, and everyone else. She's hardcore about her beliefs, which is ultra-conservative in politics and religion. She's practically alienated everyone on that board who had the misfortune of dealing with her. What's the point in believing something so thoroughly and radically that you end up alienating people and potential allies / friends?

For me, I've been fortunate enough to have based nearly all of my friendships since elementary school on something other than what they believe about this or that. I can easily be friends with anyone of any religion (including the annoying Jehovah's Witnesses) or none at all. Doesn't really matter to me, because I don't base friendships on belief compatibility. I'm much more interested in friends who are interesting, intelligent, and have their own ways at looking at the universe and everything in it. Thus, I don't understand when people end friendships, especially over some breech that was committed, a rift in the belief compatibility. Whether my friends are Republican, Democratic, or independent doesn't really matter to me. If you're in my friend category, it means that I like you for who you are, which is a combination of personality, soul, and vibe. A personality as abrasive as Cyndi's is naturally going to repulse me, while a likable personality is one I enjoy being around.

This book signing was interesting, though not nearly as crowded as the Amy "Tiger Mother" Chua event. I decided not to buy Weiner's book, mostly because I'm trying to cut back on book buying expenses as well as my being inundated with too many books already. Also, after frequent moves, I've learned exactly how brutal it can be to have boxes of hardcover books. I actually prefer paperback (except for political memoirs / autobiographies) and can wait until Weiner's book is released in paperback.

Does Weiner find God? Well, you're just going to have to buy the book to find out. ;)

Music Video Monday: LL Cool J

2012-01-16T00:01:00.000-08:00

On Friday, LL Cool J turned 44 years old. I first heard about him in 1985 when I was new in Germany and one of the teens I met on the American base was into rap music and introduced me to Run DMC and LL Cool J. I wasn't impressed. Then in 1987, if I'm not mistaken, LL Cool J released a single that I liked, "I Need Love." It had a nice melody and some racy lyrics.

In the mid-1990s, he topped that with "Doin' It", which has some really explicit lyrics to a nasty funk beat. I had posted this song on Facebook and my cousin (who's father is the most radically religious fundamentalist in our family) mentioned that she remembered me introducing this song to her. Oops...I corrupted my younger cousin! I was just out of the Navy at the time and she had just graduated high school.

I don't know much about LL Cool J, but what I do know is that his rap artist moniker stands for: "Ladies Love Cool James." Pretty arrogant, right? Well, the guy does seem like a smoothie. I bet he did snag a lot of chicks in his day. He has a cool vibe and the lyrics to his racy songs seem a bit autobiographical, though also "bragging" and possible over-hyping, but who knows. A few other hits he recorded include "Hey Lover", "Mama Said Knock You Out", and "Father" (sampling the melody of George Michael's "Father Figure"). So, happy (belated) birthday LL Cool J!

Nobody Does It Like Meryl Streep

2012-01-14T22:36:00.000-08:00

True story: In the summer of 1987, my dad took the family on a three week vacation through England, Scotland, and Wales. We were living in Germany at the time, so we drove to Calais, France and boarded a ferry and arrived in Dover and drove up the east side all the way to Inverness, Scotland before making our way down the west side, into Wales and back into England. Part of the trip included a few days at the British Isles RLDS Reunion (a week long family camp in our church). I was a shy teenager and had to be nudged by my mom to make friends. I thought I would be the cool American and told the British church teens, "I really like your Prime Minister." To my shock, they HATED her. So much for making a good impression. They had asked if I liked Reagan, and I said that I did not. So, we had something in common. We did not like our leaders. This was well before I identified with "liberal". I probably didn't even know what the word meant at the time. But I was probably influenced into liking Thatcher because she received positive press in the United States. You have to admit, she was a tough lady and remains today as the model of female leadership.

Now comes her first major biopic, featuring the most versatile actress on the planet, Meryl Streep, who recently played Julia Childs. She was rather the obvious choice to play Margaret Thatcher, though I have to admit that the actress who played Prime Minister Thatcher at the end of the James Bond film For Your Eyes Only was a dead ringer. I read at least three or four reviews of The Irony Lady and all but one was negative. Most of the criticism rests on the fact that 40% of the film deals with the present day Lady Thatcher, who is suffering from dementia. The Tories in the United Kingdom were livid about this film, which is understandable, considering that conservatives in our country went mad over James Brolin (Barbra Streisand's husband) playing Ronald Reagan in a TV movie several years ago.

Negative review or not, nothing was keeping me from seeing a biopic, especially a biopic about one of my favourite world leaders. Yeah, I know. Her policies were the same as Reagan policies and if I did not like Reagan, had I been born in Britain, I likely would not have liked Thatcher, either. But, she was a dynamic figure. A true icon among leaders. But, I also appreciate the hindsight of history. What happened, happened. The 1980s will always be enshrined as the Reagan-Thatcher era, with Gorbachev and Pope John Paul II playing a role in the drama of the last years of the Cold War.

I had hoped that The Iron Lady would have been released on Christmas Day nationwide, because my family was interested in seeing it and we would've gone to see it together. But, the release went wide on this weekend of the Golden Globes, probably to capitalize on Meryl Streep's Best Actress in a Drama nomination (the film's only nomination, I believe). The annoying thing is that there hasn't been a movie I was interested in seeing since October, which is unusual. In previous years, there is upwards of 5 movies or more that I want to see over the holiday season, which causes me to make tough choices for budgetary reasons. On this opening weekend, there is also another film that I want to see: A Dangerous Method, which is about a love triangle between Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, and their patient. The film promises to be an intriguing psychological drama. As I waited in line, I weighed my options back and forth: Thatcher or Jung, Thatcher or Jung? Thatcher won. Thatcher is used to winning.

The film begins in mundane routine. Thatcher is at a neighbourhood convenience store buying milk and no one seems to recognize her. Then she's back at her place eating breakfast and having a conversation with her husband, Denis, whom we learn shortly enough that he has long passed on. So begins the drama. Think A Beautiful Mind meets The Queen. The movie progresses through various timelines (similar to the flashbacks and flashbacks within flashbacks of Eastwood's J. Edgar), as we see the modern Lady Thatcher struggle with her dementia (mostly seeing and believing that her husband is still there with her), and then segues into her past, starting when she's a teenager and young woman. She meets and intrigues a nerdy young man who is captivated by her passion for politics and her intelligence. He's not intimidated by her and soon proposes to her. Margaret tells him that she won't be a wife who stands silently by a man, holding his hand. He tells her that's what he loves about her. I have to admit, I know very little about Denis Thatcher, but he has to be quite the psychologically secure man to be the "invisible" partner to the most famous female politician of our lifetime.

Thatcher loses her first race for Parliament, but not by much and her husband encourages her to run again and she wins in 1959. They have twins: a boy and a girl, and Thatcher becomes the only woman in Parliament. In 1974, she decides to run for leadership of the Conservative Party. The Labour Party is in power in the United Kingdom, so she's running to lead the party for the next election cycle. She gets advice on how to tone down her feminine ways (one of the suggestions was to get rid of the hats and to speak at a lower register so she doesn't sound "shrill"). Her advisers tell her not to run for just leader of the party, but to go all the way and become the first female Prime Minister. Thatcher reveals that she doesn't believe she'll ever see a female Prime Minister in her lifetime.

And yet, in 1979, the Conservative Party made history when Thatcher leads her party to victory in the elections and becomes the first female Prime Minister. Some of the scenes in the film are so stylishly choreographed, that it looks like the filmmakers copied some of the shots from another excellent biopic, Evita. I actually liked those moments in the film (music montages showing a group of male Members of Parliament and her Cabinet following her around the halls of Parliament).

I'm not up on my British history, but I remember knowing about the Falkland Islands War because I used to pretend that I was a fighter pilot in that war (I know...strange kid I was) during recess when my family lived on Hill AFB, Utah in the early 1980s. I was not aware of the Brighton Bombing, which could have killed the Prime Minister, the strikes, and the controversial budget cuts. This film features the highlights of her years in power and even includes her famous dance with President Reagan in a montage.

As for the film as a whole, it was a good biopic. It kept my interest and was never boring, like J. Edgar was. Though I don't think the device of using her dementia was a bad decision, there were a couple scenes where I thought it went too far (particularly the scene where she doesn't want her husband around anymore and turns up the volume of the TV, radio, and kitchen appliances so she could drown out his voices in her head; and the scene where he finally leaves her and she begs him not to go just yet). My best guess about why the filmmakers decided to use the dementia angle is probably to show that old age is not respecter of power. No matter how important and powerful we are in the prime of our lives, in the end, we are reduced to the slow shut down of our mental and physical capacity. This has to be one of the most humbling and terrifying experiences that await us. If the filmmakers eliminated the two scenes that I thought went too far regarding her dementia, they might have had more time to build up the intrigue of what ended her power. The film seemed to downplay it as Thatcher being overly critical of her cabinet in a meeting in which she acts as a school marm and dismisses everyone when her loyal aide turns in a policy brief that she edits on the spot, while launching acid-tongued criticisms.

I don't know the details of the drama behind her being challenged for the party leadership (like I said above, I'm not up on my British history) but I remember being shocked at the end of 1990 (I believe it was around Thanksgiving of that year) when she announced her resignation. America was building up a presence in Saudi Arabia with Operation Desert Shield, so it seemed a strange time for a world leader, especially one who stood tall against terrorism and dictatorships, to step down. After 11 and a half years, Thatcher left #10 Downing Street.

The movie is a good tribute to the Lady Thatcher and Meryl Streep shines as the woman the Soviets called "The Iron Lady." This is definitely worth seeing, though I liked The Queen much better (which was about Queen Elizabeth II's response to the death of Princess Diana). When I got home, I took my copy of Thatcher's The Downing Street Years off my shelf and skimmed through it, reading select passages. I'll have to read that book sometime this year (my big bedtime reading right now, though, is Condoleezza Rice's memoirs about her Bush years). As I thought about the movie, it struck me as amazing that in the 1980s, the three most famous women in the United Kingdom was a Prime Minister, a Queen, and a Princess. What an era! Who says women can't lead? I'm ready for America to have our first female president, but I want it to be someone good. Will it be Hillary Clinton? Kathleen Sebelius? Elizabeth Warren? Hopefully, whoever our first female chief executive will be, that she will be a Democrat, not a Republican! I don't think we have to worry, though. The Republicans have a pattern of choosing "pretty, but intellectually vapid" women for political office. Whoever does become that historic figure, one thing's for certain: she'll have to be as tough as Margaret Thatcher, the iconic trailblazer.

Persecution Complex

2012-01-13T22:09:00.000-08:00

This past week, a discussion page on Facebook for Community of Christ members came under attack when one of the most vocal and conservative Restorationist ladies returned after a two month absence. She immediately got to work in stirring the pot, throwing out accusations against people for "attacking" her or her kindred conservative soulmates who post on there. Who is this woman and what is her agenda? I'll get to that. First, some background info.

Community of Christ is a worldwide church that began in 1860 in the aftermath of the splintering of the Latter Day Saints movement when the founding prophet was murdered by a mob in Carthage, Illinois in 1844. According to church history, Joseph Smith, Jr. wanted his son, Joseph Smith III to be the next prophet, but little Joseph was just a child at the time of his father's death. Brigham Young claimed to be the real successor and led the largest group to found the state of Utah. When Joseph Smith, Jr. formed the church on April 6, 1830, it began with the simple (but common) name: Church of Christ. Various incarnations later, it became The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and the people who did not move west with Brigham Young reorganized the church into what became The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, led by Joseph Smith III when he was 24 years old. From the start, this smaller group was formed out of the dissent from the painful Nauvoo experience, when the Prophet Smith received his strangest revelations (baptisms for the dead, eternal marriage, men becoming gods, polygamy). He was also the Mayor of Nauvoo, which was bigger than Chicago at the time, and the leader of the Nauvoo Legion, a para-military group. He also found time to run for president in 1844 (yeah, Mitt Romney is not the first Mormon to run for president, nor the second or the third).

As Joseph Smith's church grew and grew, with members creating a "Zionic community" on land reclaimed from a swamp in a bend on the Mississippi River, the power went to his head. What once was a democratic church became more autocratic and dissent was squashed. In fact, his shutting down of the Nauvoo Expositor newspaper when they threatened to publish critical articles about him led directly to his arrest and ultimately his assassination by an angry mob.

Most of the members went west with Brigham Young. Many who remained in Nauvoo did not like or trust Brigham Young. These were people who were dissenters in Nauvoo. They did not like what they saw going on, including Joseph Smith joining the Masonic Order and then ripping off the temple rituals for use in LDS Temple rituals. So, from the start, the RLDS Church was about dissent and keeping together a group of people who did not always agree on doctrine and ideas. Though the membership numbers grew at a much slower pace than the much larger LDS Church and finally seemed to settle at 250,000 (a number I heard my entire life), it has become a very democratic church (the leader of the church is referred to as either President or Prophet and any revelation he receives from God is put to a vote at World Conference, held every few years at the headquarters in Independence, Missouri). For anyone who has been to World Conference, the debates can get quite heated. This was especially true in 1984, when the prophet at the time, Wallace B. Smith (the great-grandson of Joseph Smith, Jr.) presented a revelation to the church body that women could be called to the priesthood.

This revelation did not sit well with the more conservative minded members of the church. Eventually, more than 50,000 members left the church and formed breakaways, using the word "Restoration" or "Remnant." A "Restorationist" is a conservative former member who often still harbours a grievance against the church for "abandoning" them and "following the popular trends of the world." Of course, there have been other "heresies" (in 1996, President Smith retired and called the first non-Smith to be his successor; in 2001, the RLDS Church changed the official name to "Community of Christ", which brings us back to the founding name, with an evolved twist). When I first started posting on the church's official webboard on the website in 1999, I "met" some Restorationists and let me just say that they are very unpleasant in how they discuss issues. They are rude and nasty and do nothing but complain and complain that the church of their youth had abandoned them. Even though they are conservative and disagree about the women in the priesthood, they also hate the Mormons, so they won't join that church. Instead, they just harass members of the Community of Christ, lobbing the usual accusations and epithets that conservative evangelical Christians often do (if you disagree with their very literal view of the Bible, then you are deceived by Satan or Satan's spawn trying to tempt them away from God).

This is what happened this week on the unofficial church webpage. A woman named Cyndi Diercks (who is a Teabagger activist in the Quad Cities, which is another reason why we naturally wouldn't get along) is one of those Restorationists with a grievance against the church. Her modus operandi is easy to figure out.

First, she'll post a very conservative statement, which claims to be directly from God. For example, "If you're pro-choice, you're killing God's children and He will deny you when that day of judgment comes" (she did not actually say this, but I want to give you an idea of what she says on there, and this is her actual belief, anyway).

Anyone who posts a comment challenging it or even questions her statement or comment to someone else's statement, she will claim that you are "attacking" her. In her mind, this gives her a license to launch a full scale attack on you, with all manner of insults. Even more incredulously, she will then write something about how she's trying to discuss an issue but is a victim of personal attacks that she can't believe how nasty and rude they are. So, not only does she have a "Persecution Complex", but she also projects her actual behaviour onto other people. When she levels an accusation against someone else, its pretty much a confession about what she's doing. Everyone can see that except her. I don't know if she's paranoid or schizophernic, bipolar, or just plain batshit crazy (is there any teabagger who isn't a ranting loon?), but she's clearly dysfunctional and a troublemaker. Based on many of her posts, I am so glad that I don't know her in person. What a miserable person she must be to always seek to cause conflict on a rather peaceful board (when we had a discussion about atheists in the priesthood back in December, it was heated but never devolved into personal attacks). Its amazing that this teabagger is so blind to her own actions and gets sanctimonious, pretending that she's a complete innocent and that we who disagree with her political and religious views are "the attackers."

Even worse than her attacks, though, are the "prayers" that she occasionally posts on the page. Its completely self-serving and sanctimonious, in violation of what Jesus advised his followers (as you can read in Matthew 6). Today, a debate had ensued over one conservative young lady's slanted comment regarding how peace can only happen if everyone accepted Jesus and believed the Bible, which is an extremely naive view that ignores Christianity's long history of churches persecuting other Christian churches. The debate covered homosexuality, abortion, sin, and sex. Quite a few times, Cyndi warned this young lady to be prepared for personal attacks, which never came. Whenever someone refuted a point made by one of the conservatives, there was Cyndi lobbing more firebombs of personal attacks, accusing those who disagreed with being against God or deceived by Satan or being Satan's minions trying to trick this girl out of her morals, etc. The same old, same old.

While the debate is long and meandering, I'm posting the "prayer" that Cyndi wrote on there so you can see just how insincere / phony and sanctimonious it is. Here's what Cyndi wrote:

"Oh dear God, please protect Ashley, these people can not stand that she remains strong in commitment to you. Protect her, embrace her in your warmth. These words of Satan attack her as they did Job your servant Lord. Be with her, I pray through Christ' holiest name AMEN! Ashley may the love of God be with and protect you from harm. I am crying for your soul... may you continue to survive the storm."

And:

"They mock you Lord in your temple in your home, they seek the destruction of your kingdom. They equate Man who was made in your image to mammals just animals.......having sex. I am sorry for this page, I am sorry for the hate, I am sorry that you gave your life to be mocked in your home. How you continue to love is beyond my capabilities.... I must ask you for strength to move forward in love. They have no idea what it is they have done.. they cannot understand your love and desire because of their lust.... I pray in your most holy name Amen!"

Seriously...who talks like that to God? Its all condemnation of people she doesn't agree with, whom she feels are "evil" or deceived. What her "prayers" tell me is that she has a very childish understanding of God. She asked "how you continue to love is beyond my capabilities..." Well, obviously, because her comments are drenched in hatred. Her insecurity in the face of intelligent discussion is obvious. For me (a "heathen" in her view), its not difficult to understand how God can love. God is the embodiment of love. The reason I know is because of the spiritual experience I had in August 2001 where I felt "at one" with the entire universe, and the intensity of that love was so powerful, I thought my body was going to explode. If you believe in an all knowing God, then that God would know the true nature and true motives of each person on earth and nothing would be surprising. If Cyndi can't understand how God can love everyone equally, perhaps she's never felt real love before. Her love is conditional on ideological conformity to her view of the world.

In the first "prayer", she wrote "these words of Satan..." which is the kind of inflammatory attacks that she also condemns (the irony of her ideological blindness is hilarious). She's a case study in psychological projection. Here's how its defined (from Wikipedia):

"Psychological projection or projection bias is a psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other people. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting the belief that others originate those feelings.
Projection reduces anxiety by allowing the expression of the unwanted unconscious impulses or desires without letting the conscious mind recognize them."

She does this repeatedly with her accusations of being attacked and then attacking other people all because they disagree with her views.

The following is how Reference.com defines "persecution complex":

"A persecution complex is a psychological condition where a person believes that other people are conspiring against him to bring about his ruin or downfall. This belief has no basis in reality and the actual facts may be radically different to what the individual is convinced is true. The condition based on an irrational fear compels the person to imagine a fantastic scenario, where everyone and
everything appears to be an enemy. According to psychiatrists, a persecution complex is an exaggeration of an actual situation or may be totally without basis in reality, where a person's inner life picture is projected into the environment and the people present there. The symptoms of a persecution complex basically revolve around the fear and suspicion of the individual, where everyone is an enemy. The inner life is tumultuous with an imaginary world that has no basis in the reality around. Every action arouses suspicion, mistrust and anger, as the complex generates a feeling that everyone is trying to harm or destroy the individual concerned. A persecution complex is not a disease, but the symptoms are close to paranoia."

Wow, this describes her, as well. If she's not careful, this could be either the early stages or a sign of mental illness. Ever since my experience with the religiously fanatical Mormon roommate at BYU who I suspected was bipolar, I have been interested in mental illness. What causes it? Is it genetic (I hope not!)? Is it the result of drug use, due to the delicate chemical balance in our brains? Is it a spiritual effect of thinking incoherent thoughts and basking in hate and suspicion of other people? Is it "contagious"?

Besides Cyndi, there was a young man who claimed to be Jewish and Mormon and Community of Christ and RLDS. His rants were incoherent ramblings and he also claimed to have been given a message directly from God to share with the rest of us, which is basically the same old doomsday scenario that we need to repent of our evil ways because the wrath of the Lord is upon us and the only way to save ourselves is to repent. This troubled young man, who went by the name BaurakAle, posted a disturbing picture that he drew that was filled with demons, fire, blood, an all-seeing eye, snakes, a God that looked like a cross between Gandalf from Lord of the Rings and a troll, and even a UFO abducting a human. When several of us reacted in horror to the images and posted our thoughts, Cyndi saw this as another opportunity to condemn us because she saw "beauty" and a "divine message." Really? I had posted a comment, "If this is an indication of what's currently in your mind, I wish you much peace." I don't believe that a person who was truly at peace with himself would have drawn such a dark and disturbing picture. Based on his incoherent thought processes, his drawings, and his messianic complex, I got the strong impression that he was a church shooting waiting to happen. He even bragged that he got thrown out of a church when he told the pastor that he was a wolf in sheep's clothing.

This troubled young man shared that his father was brutally murdered and his mother died of cancer and since his "contact with God", his friends have abandoned him. Well, if he's as confrontation and belligerent with them as he was with those of us on the board, then I'm not surprised. No one likes to be preached at. How difficult is this for evangelical conservatives to understand?!?

Ultimately, he got deleted from the page for violating a request by the moderator not to post negative comments or statements. As soon as the warning was made, he posted a statement condemning all of us to hell. Wow. So insightful. I personally, though, would not have deleted him. I didn't mind engaging him in conversation because I believed my rational way at looking at things could have helped him. Unfortunately, he had no voice of moderation in his life. Perhaps he was schizophernic. I have no idea. All I know is that based on his comments, statements, and drawing, he has much in common with the guy who shot Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords last year. How do we keep borderline personalities in the realm of moderation and community? By engagement. Unfortunately, women on that page get too sensitive and see attacks where none might exist. Guys can be a bit more crude in our conversations and "insults" (most women probably would not like the kind of debates guys have in the Navy). For me, I don't care if some evangelical condemns me to hell or call me Satan's spawn, because I kind of expect them to go that route when they can't match the logic of my arguments. Plus, its not like I believe in a Satan anyway.

This back and forth did get me thinking about psychology, though. I think I should've become a psychologist. I'm very interested in how people think about things and it is fascinating to see someone who is incapable of knowing herself and how she comes across to people. Because she's a high profile teabagger in Iowa, I found a video interview of her online. She speaks with clenched teeth and shifts her eyes back and forth. Her body language reveals a cold person. There's no warmth emanating from her at all. When the guy who interviewed her asked if she likes any politician, she responded that she doesn't. She thinks they are all corrupt. The complete opposite of me. I admire many politicians. I know they aren't perfect and they are only playing the game the way its set up. There's good people doing good things, but ideologues can't see it.

I also laughed when I watched the video. True to form, the demographic group I do not get along with at all is all there. Cyndi is an overweight, middle aged, conservative evangelical white woman. Of course we're not going to get along!! I just survived four years in the job from hell with an office full of employees of those characteristics.

The take home message of this post? Moderation is a great thing. Fanaticism, ideology, and paranoia are not good qualities to have. Life is so much better when you can laugh, be easy-going, and have a process that constantly checks yourself against ideological extremism. The Buddha spoke about the Middle Way. The ancient Greeks wrote about the Golden Mean. A wise man once said moderation in all things. This is good for the mind.

Date With a Tiger Mother

2012-01-12T01:07:00.001-08:00

Hello. I'm back! I realize that I have a lot of back-dated posts to write and I've been wanting to get to them, but since my vacation to the east coast, I've been both busy and lazy. I keep wanting to write posts for December, but I end up postponing the ones I want to write now, such as last Saturday's Republican debate, the Iowa Caucus, and the New Hampshire primary. There are also posts for my 40th birthday, my 1991 newsletter, Christmas at home, the New Year, the Best of 2011, a couple movie reviews, a tribute to Vaclav Havel, to name a few. But, those will be written as I find extra time. There's even craziness going on the church's Facebook page in the past few days (three individuals in particular have a tendency to throw accusations to others about being "attacked" whenever someone happens to disagree with their very ultra-conservative religious views. I'm sure it will be an interesting post). In fact, while the back and forth level of nastiness between the ultra conservatives with a grievance against the church and the liberal minded church members were going on, my blog received a couple comments on an old post I had written last September about another strange woman who went off on me on Facebook, accusing me of being bipolar, off meds, and dropped on my head as a baby all because I did not agree with her negative opinions about the Mormon Church or the Community of Christ. What is with mentally imbalanced middle aged white women and me? I simply do not get along with this demographic (the conservative, uneducated, middle aged white woman who has never traveled much). In case you want to see the comments that people left, check out the post entitled "Fundamentalist Freakshow" from September 2011.

Switching gears, the new year is starting off too great, in terms of lecture / booksignings at Powell's City of Books in Portland. Wednesday night was Amy Chua, who wrote last year's most controversial best seller, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother. Her book is now in paperback and I'm glad to have the opportunity to meet her in person. She's had a rough year. I wrote a post about her book last year, though I haven't read it in a long time so I can't remember what I might've written. In my view, I think she was unfairly criticized. Though there were some things worth criticizing (particularly the incident she had written about rejecting a card that her daughter had made for her because it wasn't "good enough", or the insistence that her daughters had to choose between playing the piano or the violin, which comes off as elitist and stereotypical. Working for a music company, you have no idea how many CDs we have of young Asian prodigies who play piano concertos or violin cantatas), overall, Amy Chua comes across as wanting the best for her daughters and to instill discipline at a critical age so they don't grow up to be at a loss about what to do in life.

The media loves to fabricate its heroes and villains, and based on some of the reviews I've read, Chua became a caricature in the media as a "Mommy Dearest" of the Decade. The mom from hell! So, when I found out that she was coming to Powell's, I was quite excited to finally see her in person and hear her view of things without the media's filter. There are a few more book signings in the next week that I plan to attend, so stay tuned for posts on those (including a book about one atheist's search for God and meaning in life and a bartender's new career bringing fresh water to some of the poorest countries in the world through his non-profit organization called Wine Into Water or something like that).

Amy Chua is an attractive Chinese American woman who is married to a Caucasian guy (if I'm not mistaken, I think I read that he's Jewish, so they are a Jewish-Chinese family). Both are professors at Yale University, so they are academia to the core. Of course they are going to have high expectations for their children and push them to succeed. She has written a few books about economics but no one heard of her until last year when her book captured the media spotlight and caused a stir among the chattering elite about parenting styles. As Chua mentioned, the Wall Street Journal did her no favours when they featured the book a few days after publication last January in an article provocatively titled: "Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior." She said that she was horrified by that title because she felt that it misrepresented what her book was about. She wrote it as a comedic tale about the rebellion of her youngest daughter Lulu to her strict parenting style and in the book itself, she changes a little bit, coming to agreement with her willful daughter on some points of contention. The media, on the other hand, decided to play up the book as a clash of values between Asian versus American parenting styles. The media sold this book as a how-not-to parent guide rather than a memoir.

Despite the controversy, Chua displayed a sense of humour about her experience of the past year. Though her family approved of her book, she mentioned that her oldest daughter (now in college) told her that people are going to view Lulu as the hero and her (Sophia) as the villain (because she went along with her mother's parenting rules without any contention). Chua also mentioned how the book was sold in China. She said that she wished she could put a stop to what they published, but her friends in China said that it has actually inspired a good debate there about parenting. The book is titled in China as something along the lines of "A Yale University Professor's Approach to Parenting."

She did a Q & A after her lecture and then signed books. While waiting in line, there was a lady who brought her young daughter, who might've been around 8 years old and had asked a question of Chua during the Q & A (if Lulu still played the violin). The mother told me that her daughter loves Chua's book and wants to be a writer when she grows up. I was impressed and told her mother to keep encouraging that goal and to read and write something every day. I love seeing children with a passion for something. It made me think of my own parents, who did not encourage my writing when I was growing up and actually criticized my tendency towards writing (though they are the opposite now and would love to see my dream of being a published novelist come true). I could've used a "Tiger Mother" growing up!

When I got up to Chua to have her sign the copy I'd buy, I asked her if she had sold the book to Hollywood yet. She said that she did have some offers but wanted to wait for things to settle down first (I guess it really was a rough year for her). I had told her that the controversy was a good thing because it caused a necessary debate in our country. In her lecture, she sounded shocked about the response her book caused and how many viewed her as an awful mother. But, the way I see controversy is that its a good thing if people are talking about it. The worst thing for a writer is to have one's book ignored and unsold. Getting any kind of media attention is always a good thing, even if you're made out to be the villain. On a personal level, when my novel gets published someday, I would welcome a media debate about it and wouldn't care if people made me out to be a villain. I'm quite used to people thinking all kinds of things about me, so I'm well prepared for controversy and personal attacks. The key is to respond with wit and humour.

I told Chua that if she does sell her book to Hollywood, that she should seek out Michelle Yeoh because Yeoh had wanted to make a movie about Aung San Suu Kyi. Chua was stunned when I said that because she said that Yeoh did approach her to see about buying the rights to the book and she had just seen The Lady and hopes that Yeoh will win the Oscar for that role. I had no idea that movie is out already and can't wait to see it, but I am amazed too. Michelle Yeoh is one of my favourite actresses and I want to see her in more movies. Its not surprising that she approached Chua about her book. I told Chua that she should absolutely trust Yeoh to do a good job with her book. I hope my comments will inspire Chua to contact Yeoh to negotiate the film rights. I understand that a writer wants a faithful adaptation and I have no doubt that a film version of this book will be very interesting and worth watching. Until then, I finally get to read this book I've been wanting to read for a year now (I prefer to buy most books in paperback).

It was a great evening. Before I went to Powell's, I was on the streetcar when a lady with a bicycle got on board. She was a white, petite woman with a "Bohemian" look to her, including glasses and short hair. I loved her style (clothing style of the ankle length skirt and a gray sweater) and wanted to talk to her, but the streetcar was crowded and I hate private / personal conversations when eavesdroppers are present. This lady, the Bohemian Bicyclist, is exactly the type of woman I'm looking for. Had we crossed paths in a less public place (on the street instead of in a crowded streetcar), I might've initiated a conversation. I hope our paths will cross again. I did not see a ring on her finger. She's what I would call "uniquely beautiful", as I don't see her as a type that many guys would jump at the chance to date. Her vibe was very much "Bohemian" or what some may think of as a quirky librarian type. I know I probably should've been bolder about initiating a conversation, but she did get me thinking. I really want to meet my wife this year. That will be my meditative focus. As far as parenting style, I'm the kind who likes to read and observe many styles and take the best of everything I come across. We'll see what the best ideas the Tiger Mother has to say in her book when I read it next week.

Merry Christmas!

2011-12-24T03:06:00.000-08:00

December has been so incredibly busy that I have not been able to blog as much as I wanted to, so I will have to fill in the gaps eventually as there are many posts that I wanted to write but didn't have time due to things that needed to get done before I went home for Christmas (my first Christmas with my parents and sister since 2005).

I don't think my dad has wi-fi and I'll unlikely use his computer much to get on Facebook or to blog. The point is to spend time with family and have great conversations and just enjoy the week because this is the first time I've been home since my sister's wedding in 2009 and I haven't seen my parents since my grandfather's funeral, also in 2009.

My week at home is going to be packed. Part of this is because I'm also visiting friends in South Carolina and North Carolina (from 28 through 30 December) and on my birthday (the 30th), I'm hoping to visit the Georgia Guidestone. After reading one lady's experience there earlier this year, I want my own mystical experience there on my birthday. So, if higher intelligences out there are reading my blog, you heard me. Meet me at the Georgia Guidestone on Friday afternoon, the 30th of December!

I'll likely catch up posts when I get back to Portland on 2 January. Some posts include an annual newsletter for the year 1991, a book review on American Fascists, the Occupy Portland camp, a special post on my birthday, the movie Astral City, and the Best of 2011.

Have a Merry Christmas and I hope you get to spend it with loved ones.

A Well Meaning Gift

2011-12-18T02:09:00.000-08:00

Earlier today, the family that gives me a ride to church gave me a few gifts. They didn't have to, though, but I appreciate it. The lady asked me if I open gifts when I get them or wait until Christmas. I have not set policy, but generally prefer to wait until the holiday to open any gifts. However, her daughter kept insisting that I open it, just to satisfy her mom, as she was so excited to see my reaction when I open the gift. I hesitated, though. She told me that I'll want to read this, that it would go straight to the top of my reading list. She even said that I should open it now because I'll want to read it on the plane when I fly home for Christmas. That intrigued me, so I decided to open it.

I laughed when I saw the title. I had never heard of this book before, but the title amused me because its obviously in reference to a conversation we had about the Facebook debate on atheists holding the priesthood in the Community of Christ. I was actually touched that she got such a book for me, even though I never would have bought it had I seen it on bookshelves. As I flipped through it, I noticed that it seems to be more evangelical Christian and thus why they'd have a problem with atheism. But most of all, the forward was written by David Limbaugh, who is a conservative author (I'm not sure if he's related to Rush Limbaugh, but they seem to have similar views). To me, that strikes at the heart of credibility. Of course, I'm going to read it since someone gave it to me as a gift and it does look interesting.

I appreciate her kindness and thoughtfulness in getting me this book. It truly is a touching gesture and I'm grateful for it. And yet, I also feel a need to express here that when it comes to books, I'm probably a bad person to buy for. This is because I have way too many books and have a hard time parting with any of them, even though I only read them once and then put them on a shelf (I'll use them for reference after they get read). When someone gives me a gift like this (a book I've never heard of, thus never would've bought), I'm conflicted because I don't like giving gifts away (I feel it is bad form, even though it isn't), but this is a book that I likely will not keep after I read it.

As I skimmed through it, trying to get a sense of the book, I had to laugh. This lady read me completely wrong. I don't actually have a problem with atheists. There is a real need for atheists in our society, as they help keep religious people intellectually honest and they ask tough but important questions. Their strict rational logic can be frustrating at times, but that's the way they're wired, I suppose. We can learn much from their rational way at looking at the world. This book looks like it rips on atheists, which may not be accurate information.

What I do have a problem with is people who become atheists but refuse to give up their priesthood calling. To not do so is morally and ethically wrong because it violates the trust between a church member seeking a special, sacred ordinance of the church in good faith from what is supposedly safe to assume, a priesthood member who believes in God and a human soul.

Another friend of mine asked me what I wanted for Christmas and mentioned that he might buy me a book. I showed him my book case and asked, "Does it look like I need another book?" I'm flattered that people realize that I love books and want to get me a gift...but unless you know that i really want such and such a book, its probably best not to buy one for me. I'm trying to keep ahead on my reading list and whenever I'm tempted to buy a book, I always ask myself, "Will I read this before the next payday?" If the answer is "no," then I won't buy it.

My reading schedule for 2012 will be politically heavy. I will read a lot of political memoirs and a few biographies on Obama, Hillary Clinton, and about the 2008 campaign. Its to help put me into a political frame of mind, although I also plan to read the books I have about finding a dream career and dating. Those are my main goals for next year, so religious books are going to have to wait until 2013. The book I want to read the most is Condoleezza Rice's memoirs of her time as Secretary of State. If someone gifted me that book, I'll be thrilled so I don't have to buy it early in the new year.

As for reading on the plane, I told this lady that I would not take this book on the plane with me because it would be too provocative and I really don't want to send the wrong impression to people. When I travel, I always pick a book to read that might be a little out of the norm for most people and one that might spark a conversation if someone initiated one with me. For this trip, I already have a couple books picked out for my journey: a biography on Aung San Suu Kyi and Amy Tan's novel Saving Fish From Drowning (which I've wanted to read for several years now). Another friend of mine gave me a book about Alaska that I haven't touched yet, but want to. Too many books, not enough time!

Music Video Monday: Robbie Williams

2011-12-12T02:14:00.000-08:00

This week's music video selection is in honour of the failed campaign ad by Rick Perry. The ad's title is "Strong" and features Governor Perry proclaiming himself a Christian before lamenting what's wrong with our country. Though the ad didn't specifically slander homosexuals (apparently, many people took it as such), he tried to connect the openly gay servicemen and women with the prayer in school issue, which doesn't work.

Several people on my Facebook friends list linked this video and expressed their outrage. Some even called for the media to ban Rick Perry or to silence him. Why? Just because she showed his true colours? The man's entitled to his opinion. What I don't like was how people automatically assumed his ad was "anti-gay", when in fact, all he said was that he believed there was something wrong with our country when gay people were allowed to serve openly while children in school had to hide their Christianity and couldn't pray in class. The conflating of the two issues is likely to confound his followers (if he has any). Its a ridiculous comparison. One deals with adult issues, in which adults will behave as they will and are entitled to have consenting sexual relations with whomever they choose. The other deals with children who are supposed to be learning subjects in school that will help them in life, not harassing one another for not belonging to the same religion as them. And besides, if you really want to pray in school, there were many minutes available. A silent prayer can be given at any time and no one will notice. You can say one in the middle of a boring sermon. The problem comes when they enforce conformity on people and if one child doesn't "fit in" because he was raised in a minority religion, then it only serves to make that child even more ostrasized.

I think the most interesting aspect of Perry's campaign ad is how he tries to channel Ronald Reagan, from the hair (colour and style), the wrinkles on his face, and the "cowboy look." Its blatantly obvious that Perry is trying to physical resemble Reagan, as if this were enough to get a few people to vote his way. I think its safe to say that Reagan might have been a moron, but at least he wasn't a complete imbecile like Dubya and Perry.

Not long after Perry's ad made the news, people were already pointing out the similarities between the jackets worn by Heath Ledger (as Ennis) in the gay cowboy film, Brokeback Mountain, and Rick Perry in his "Strong" ad. Was this a subtle signal to someone who knows the truth about Rick Perry (there are supposedly rumours that he had an affair with another man and his wife supposedly caught them in bed together).

The controversy is hilarious, because once again, the Republicans do something that they think will resonate with voters but in reality becomes an Internet sensation. I don't think Republicans understand yet the power of YouTube, blogging, and Facebook. Politicians can no longer speak one thing to one audience and the opposite to another audience. Chances are, recordings are made and then the inconsistencies get aired. We are living in a more open age, which is a bad thing for those nefarious individuals who prefer to hide in the shadows.

The title of Perry's ad made me automatically think of Robbie Williams' brilliant song "Strong." I love the line: "You think I'm strong, you're wrong..." So, there really was no other alternative than this awesome song, in honour of Rick Perry, the gaffe riot who is becoming less and less likely to win the Republican nomination.

The Last Crichton Novel (Sigh)

2011-12-09T01:12:00.000-08:00

The last novel by Michael Crichton was released in late November. Shortly after he passed away a few days after Obama was elected president, Crichton's publisher announced that there were two unpublished Crichton novels that would be published. The first was Pirate Latitudes (which I read a few months ago and loved). The second and final one was actually a novel that Crichton was in the process of writing when he died. I was skeptical about this one, since he did not complete it. However, the publisher claims that Crichton had made extensive notes and it was at least halfway written. They hired a writer, Richard Preston (who wrote The Hot Zone, which was a hot bestseller in the 1990s and launched a spawn of killer viruses movies), to work from Crichton's notes to finish this novel. I know there are arguments pro and con about posthumous published works, but one could reasonably argue that Crichton would have wanted this novel to be published and had the misfortune of dying in the middle of writing it. How honourable it is for another writer to see that the work is done and published so fans of Crichton can have one last thrill.

That's certainly my view. Ever since I read Rising Sun in 1993, I was hooked on Michael Crichton. The reason is because before that time, I had a hard time finishing books. I would start them and then get bored (usually around page 100 or so) and set the book down, never to pick it up again. I was curious to read Rising Sun when that novel was mentioned in the 1992 primaries. At the time, anti-Japanese sentiment was running high in America due to our recession and the belief that the Japanese weren't being fair in their trading policies. In the zeitgeist of that time, Crichton's incendiary novel about Japanese business practices was published (Crichton has had the most enviable sense of great timing for his novels. They always seem to be published around the time the issues he explores is in the media spotlight). As I read Rising Sun, I was both hooked and infuriated. Some call this novel "racist" with a negative view of the Japanese, but I was surprised at how many characteristics that the Japanese have that I could understand or relate to. I've only read the novel once and saw the movie once, so I don't remember the details. Perhaps I should watch the movie again for a refresher.

Anyhow, from that novel, I was hooked on Crichton and couldn't wait to get my hands on some more of his books. By fortunate luck, I was sent to Naples, Italy (from Sardinia) to deal with a persistent eye problem and while there, I took advantage of being able to buy books from the American bookstore on the military base. I bought Crichton's Congo and Jurassic Park, which I also read in 1993. My dad mailed me most of Crichton's other novels: The Andromeda Strain and Sphere. I just devoured his books. In 1994, Disclosure was published an a shipmate who had gone back to the U.S. for military training brought back that novel for me to read. It also infuriated me, because its about a man who was sexually harassed by a woman, which many people think is a joke or not possible. As one who had seen the power of a sexually harassing woman in the Navy, I know that it exists.

From then on, each new Crichton novel became a special day for me. I'd rush out and buy it the day of release. This included The Lost World in 1995 and Airframe in 1996. The next few novels were Christmas gifts that my dad gave me: Timeline in 1999, Prey in the early 2000s (I forget which year), and State of Fear in 2004. I bought his Next in 2006. Upon buying or receiving his novel as a gift (Nathan's best man gift to me was a CD version of Timeline), I would immediately sit down to read it and lose myself in Crichton's world. I know that many people criticize his lack of character development. They are essentially there to push the story forward. Its an unfair criticism to make, though, as I learned in literature class that there is more than one kind of genre for writing. Crichton tends to be more action-oriented than character-oriented. If people want character-oriented stories, then buying literary fiction is the way to go. My favourite genre is literary fiction (and I aspire to be a literary novelist) but Crichton is among my favourite writers (he was my favourite, until I discovered Jack Kerouac in 2001). What I love about his books are the way his extensive bibliography gives credence to the idea that his ideas might be closer to reality than we think it might be.

Now with Micro, this is the last hurrah. I had no hesitation to buy it when I saw it in bookstores. I'll never experience the thrill of seeing a new Crichton novel, so I'll take this moment, regardless of how much of the novel was actually written by him. For a week, I could not put this book down. It inspired me and terrified me. And it sent my mind reeling in a hundred different directions. It was classic Crichton all the way!

What is the novel about? Well, it involves technology, of course (Crichton's speciality). An unethical high-tech company based in Hawaii has created the ability to shrink objects such as machines and even humans. The point is to gather information on the tiniest substances on our planet. The shrunken humans get to experience the majesty of our planet at the most dangerous level. This novel will have you looking at nature in an entirely different way!

In classic Crichton style, he has a group of scientists (in this case, science nerds at Harvard) brought out to Hawaii and then shrunken to half an inch. If I were making comparisons, I'd say that this novel is a cross between Jurassic Park, Timeline, and Prey. While most of his novels make it to the big screen, I'm not sure I would want to see this one in theaters. The reason is because as the shrunken humans learn, the insect world (in fact, the animal kingdom) is all about kill or be killed. The endless search for more protein. So, the shrunken university scientists get to be out of the lab with their thesis and experiments, and forced to cope in a harsh, Darwinian world where only the fittest survive. There are moments of sheer terror throughout: giant centipedes, ants, wasps, spiders, birds, raindrops, bats. Being unprotected in the dark is a dangerous prospect, as that's when most of the critters go hunting for food.

I was so enthralled by this novel and I have no idea where the dividing line might be between Crichton's words and Preston's words. It flowed smoothly and the story does represent an authentic Crichton. I bet he would be proud of his work and hopefully his soul is grateful that a fine writer was able to capture his voice and style, completing Crichton's novel for him.

When I finished the book, I was sad because this means no more Crichton. I've read all of his fiction (except for Eaters of the Dead, which I may read next year). Perhaps, the story isn't over. Perhaps, he left a secret cachet of unpublished novels that has not been discovered or disclosed. I really wish that he had written his autobiography, though. His Travels is about as close as we'll ever get to a personal memoir. Its a good one, but I'd love to read more. What led this Med Student towards a writing career that focused on science and technology running amuck?

I truly hope Crichton will reincarnate soon. We need his writing talent. The world just isn't the same without him. Thank you, Mr. Crichton for all the memories. Your novels are awesome!

Here's how I would rank his novels (in terms of personal favourites):

1) Congo
2) Jurassic Park
3) Timeline
4)Pirate Latitudes
5) Disclosure
6) Micro
7) Sphere
8) Andromeda Strain
9) State of Fear
10) Prey
11) Airframe
12) The Lost World
13) The Great Train Robbery
14) Next

Lack of Imagination

2011-12-08T00:08:00.000-08:00

Last night, the bi-weekly discussion group that I attend had the final meeting of the year on the topic of Inequality. The turn out was pretty big (15 people by the end of it) and we weren't in our usual spot. We were crammed in a small corner, which has happened before due to someone dropping the ball on scheduling. We usually have the upper floor of the restaurant (Madison's Grill, which is a great place with a super friendly waitress). I don't mind the coziness of the back corner, but it made discussion a little difficult to hear due to jazz music playing in the background. I knew I wouldn't be able to speak much because it would take a lot of effort to be heard over the music.

The discussion covered the basics of inequality and the Occupy movement and even segued into a debate about whether people of today are smarter or more informed than people of a hundred years ago. There was even talk about those who think that life was better 100 years ago as being afflicted by nostalgia for a mythological past that didn't really exist. What an interesting debate, as this is exactly what Midnight in Paris was all about (nostalgia is fine and dandy, but if you really think about it, life is pretty good right now and we wouldn't want to trade places with people in the past. Life was meant to be lived in the now).

What stunned me the most, however, about the debate is that everyone seemed to be in consensus that capitalism is it. There is nothing better to replace it. I really wanted to jump in at this point, but people are so quick to respond that its difficult to get a word in edgewise sometimes. I'm stunned that so many of my peers have fallen for the "capitalist lie" that as bad as capitalism can be at times, its still the only legitimate economic system to have. I don't buy it. You shouldn't either. Most of the people in the discussion group tend to be liberal / progressive (this is Portland, after all) and I heard many liberal professors in BYU's Political Science department extol on the greatness of capitalism and assigning reading materials such as The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Jihad versus McWorld, and The End of History and the Last Man. That last book is by neo-con writer Francis Fukuyama. I remember when I first heard the title and the premise, I was stunned by the arrogance of Fukuyama's thesis, which is: capitalism won the ideological battle of history. No other system can match it. That may be true, but capitalism is probably better thought of as a parasite. It may be able to defeat ineffective economic systems such as communism and tempt people away from the strict orderly societies under Islamic law and influence, but capitalism also destroys itself as we've seen at the end of Bush's reign of errors.

What I wish that I was able to bring up to the group was this: In college, I was struck by the brilliance of "Hegel's Dialectic." Apparently, so was Karl Marx (that commie!). Essentially, you can boil down Hegel's Dialectic to three important words / concepts: Thesis - Antithesis - Synthesis. That's it. Simple and beautiful. It is a great tool for anything in life. I have used it long before I ever heard of Hegel (a German philosopher). I believe life is cyclical, so a circular or cyclical view of history and progress is probably a smart idea. If we were to use Hegel's Dialectic in developing an economic system, here's how it would be done. The basic framework for capitalism would be written down. This is the thesis. Then, you look at the critic, which would be the antithesis. In capitalism's case, Marx's Communist Manifesto is the perfect antithesis. I've read it a few times and was always impressed by how accurate the critique of capitalism is. However, since we all have an advantage over Marx, we've seen the destruction that communism brought to our planet. It is so toxic and discredited an economic system that in the 20 years since its collapse in Eastern Europe and the USSR, not a single country has gone communist. China has been moving towards a capitalist economy and it appears to be working quite nicely for them (proving that capitalism doesn't necessarily go hand-in-hand with democracy). Of course, the other two "communist" states are the isolated cult of personality prisons known as North Korea and Cuba. Knowing all this, it is amusing that teabaggers still fear communism like its 1955!

So, if you take the pros of capitalism and fix the cons as pointed out in the Communist Manifesto, you'd have an improved upon system. This is synthesis. But it doesn't end there. Its an ongoing process. Self-correcting. Evolving. That's the nature of life on this planet. Stagnation leads to death. And that's the problem with our system. Once people get to the top, they want to hoard all their wealth and they game the system to the point where it collapses on itself because the greed and wholesale looting is unsustainable. Under the reign of George W. Bush, we saw capitalism at its ugliest and greediest. It is my hope that people will stop buying into the lie that we've been fed all our lives about capitalism being this great economic system. Its not. We can and must do better. Our evolution as a species depends upon it.

It was strange to hear all these much smarter than me people agree that capitalism is hear to stay. Am I the only one who sees another way? That way is "ETHICONOMY." Ethics needs to be the guiding principle in our economic system. Greed must be rooted out of the system and people who are greedy must be punished or frozen out of the system. Read about "the tragedy of the commons." Greed always ends up destroying what is good for the most number of people. Until more Americans cry out for economic justice and not allow greed to stand, we're going to continue to be suckered into this losing economic scheme. Counting on winning the lottery someday and voting in favour of tax policies advocated by the wealthy class is just plain stupid. America needs "capitalism with a human face." Like Soviet communism, I believe American capitalism is on its way out. History has a way of evening the score, so if we want to be on the winning team, we need to make drastic changes. Realizing that we've been indoctrinated with lies is the first step down the long road to liberation. Will you join me?

The War On Christmas Rages Through Another Year

2011-12-07T22:55:00.000-08:00

President Obama may have kept his campaign promise to end the war in Iraq, but there is one war that has been going on for far too long that shows no sign of resolution. The war? Why, none other than the Fox Propaganda Network's war on its own viewers. Keeping them dumb, compliant, and focused on non-issues while ignoring the substantive news that really matter. This agenda is getting old, and the casualties are well-meaning people who aren't wise to manipulation.

Believe me, I know! I've seen a few of my friends on Facebook post comments or article links about the so-called "War on Christmas." It stuns me that so many people can be so easily manipulated into falling for a non-issue that was concocted in a meeting at Fox headquarters. That's where Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Ann Coulter get together to coordinate their propaganda. The best way to manipulate people is for the principles to be "on message" and repeat the same story over and over until their lies "become truth" in the minds of their gullible and unsuspecting followers. I don't say this with any joy, because I like the people on my Facebook friends list, particularly those I know in person. It is sad to seem them fall for such propaganda and repeat the lies to their Facebook friends list.

I wish more people would get into the logic frame of mind. It would force them to ask questions like, "What 'war' on Christmas?" Apparently, the outrage is over store clerks who wish customers "Happy Holidays!" instead of "Merry Christmas!" Think, people. THINK! I know you're capable of it! Seriously. Sit down and empty your mind for a second. Oops, I forgot. It's already empty. Okay, that's a good start. So, think about it. A cashier at a store in a mall gets a lot of customers. Most browse without buying. Those who buy, maybe you make some small talk while ringing up their purchases. In your experience, how often do you engage strangers (or customers) in religious talk? Do you ask someone you just met what religion they are? No? Really? Okay. So, if you don't, then why would a cashier? For one thing, they could probably get fired if they did, or at least get called into the boss' office for a "chat."

A cashier ringing up purchases has no clue what your religion is. You could be a Christian or a Jew. Maybe a Muslim or a Buddhist or a Hindu. Or perhaps an atheist, agnostic, or humanist. Or maybe a Wiccan. What about Jehovah's Witness? They don't observe Christmas. In the time it takes to ring up a customer's purchases, does the cashier have time to accurately guess the customer's correct religion in order to say, "Merry Christmas" or "Happy Hanukkah" or "Happy Winter Solstice"? Doesn't "Happy Holidays" catch it all? From Christmas to Hanukkah to Kwanzaa to other religious holidays that fall in the month of December. What is so "insulting" about "Happy Holidays"? Its not exactly a "Fuck you!"

Still don't get it? How about this? If you require an underpaid cashier to validate your religious beliefs, maybe your faith isn't as strong as you think it is.

Having said all that, I am in favour of changing the greeting to a more appropriate one for our country's true religion. So, with that...

H A P P Y

C A P I T A L I S T M A S ! ! !

The 2011 Nonconformist of the Year is: Mohamed Bouazizi

2011-12-06T00:13:00.000-08:00

For the 2011 Nonconformist of the Year Award, I decided to honour Mohamed Bouazizi. It is amazing to reflect on how one individual was able to change the course of human history. No other person deserves the honour this year than Mohamed Bouazizi. Here's why...

On 17 December 2010, a young, frustrated Tunisian young man had had enough of being mistreated by the police. He was a college educated Arab facing the same problems that many of his generation face: no jobs available after getting a college education. He had to resort to selling produce at the market place in Tunis, with money earned to help his family, which included younger siblings. The harassment of the police for not having the appropriate paperwork to sell his goods was simply one humiliation too much.

He took his grievances to the Tunisian government that denied a hearing. So, in frustration, on 17 December, he set himself afire in protest. Suicide in the public square. A horrific way to go.

Miraculously, he survived the burning and was hospitalized for a few weeks before dying of his injuries on January 4th. His death became a rallying cry as Tunisians rose up in protest against the government of long-time dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, who had been in power for 23 years. By mid-January, the leader of the country fled into exile and people all over North Africa and the Middle East rose up against their governments.

Egypt became the next focal point and eventually, Hosni Mubarak had fled the country after promising to hold elections and not run for another term. Mubarak had been in power since Sadat was assassinated in the early 1980s. Another dictator down because of the mass of people rising up to demand justice.

The spirit of Bouazizi next went to Libya, which took a lot longer for the people to oust long-time dictator Muamar Gadhafi. But, eventually, he met a violent end thanks to air cover by NATO forces led by President Barack Obama.

Now, Assad of Syria has been facing down protests in his country (and committing "war crimes"). Will he follow the same fate? The media seems bored with the Arab Spring, so Syria may actually end up like Iran or Burma during those uprisings of the past few years. Other countries faced public outcry: Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Morocco, Qatar, Bahrain, and the other Arab Gulf states.

Amazing that one man's martyrdom resulted in the ouster of three long-time dictators. Would those three men still be in power now if Bouazizi kept allowing himself to be humiliated day after day, week after week, trying to eek out a living on merger sales of fruit? Many religions consider suicide a sin, but what if it took such a drastic action to spark the kindling to set off the powder keg? For far too long, the people of the Middle East and North Africa have lived under oppressive regimes that have been in power for the entire lives of the majority of the population. People can only take so much abuse before they lash back. The questions is never "will they lash back?" but "when?" What does it take to spark a revolution? What outrage must be committed that results in the last straw that broke the camel's back?

The ripple effect of the Arab Spring did not stop in the Middle East and North Africa. In the United States, progressives, liberals, and Democrats came out of their hibernation to protest the anti-union moves made by Koch-funded newly elected governors in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Florida. Voters finally saw the horror of electing Republicans to state governments, not just Congress and the White House. The rallies against Governor Scott Walker in Wisconsin were large enough to inspire Sarah Palin to come down and rally an opposing tea party protest, defending the governor, who is likely to be recalled as soon as the date arrives when recall petitions can be made.

If that weren't enough, a Canadian anti-consumerist magazine (Adbusters) had an article suggesting people Occupy Wall Street starting on Constitution Day (the day in September marking the anniversary of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution). This sparked an American Fall, with Occupy movements forming in many cities and towns across the United States and all over the world, with tent cities and clashes with the police and the emergence of pepper spray as the weapon of choice.

With the European economy collapsing, protests are imminent in Europe. The people in power ought to be running scared, because there are more of us than there are of them. The winds of change are blowing, and with the Mayan 2012 date just around the corner, one has to wonder what's going to happen in the next year. However, when it comes to 2011, it is difficult to imagine the year playing out as it did without Mohamed Bouazizi's death providing the spark that set off the powder keg. As my favourite church campfire song goes, "It only takes a spark, to get a fire going / and soon all those around can warm up to its glowing / that's how it is with God's love, once you've experienced it / you want to sing, you want to pass it on..."

By selecting Mohamed Bouazizi as this year's Nonconformist of the Year, I'm not condoning self-immolation or suicide as something to do. There are other ways to make your point across. Its important to be alive to help build a movement or to participate. However, we never know how desperation can lead people to extreme measures. A nonconformist lives by a principle that doesn't follow the crowd. Its a tragic death, for sure, but worth honouring because of the positive ripple effects. If Mohamed's soul is looking down from heaven, I can imagine that he might be surprised at the public outcry over his death. He cut his life short, but he inspired millions to rise up and take action. The result is amazing: three long-time dictators are gone from the world scene. Let's keep his spirit alive! Long live Mohamed Bouazizi!! May your soul be in the highest degree of glory in the spiritual realm.

Music Video Monday: Ain't No Fun

2011-12-05T23:08:00.000-08:00

This past weekend, Republican candidate for president Herman Cain "suspended" his campaign, which allows him to still collect money from donors and use for whatever he wants. This announcement came after speaking to his wife when a lady came forward, claiming to have had a decade-long affair with the married, "family values" conservative.

Of course, Herman Cain still denies that the allegations are true. His denials don't make sense, though. Think about it. If your goal was to attain some job, that this job was your dream, and someone came forward to lie about you, why would you give up your dream? Wouldn't that be letting the liar win? To give up on one's dream so easily means that he really wasn't serious about becoming president. It was all a scheme to become more famous, and it worked. I had never heard of him until he jumped into the Republican race. When I lived in Georgia, he supposedly ran for the Republican nomination of the U.S. Senate seat in 2004 but I don't remember hearing about him at all. If Republicans in Georgia did not want him as a Senator, why would the rest of the country want him as our president? My theory is that Herman Cain was a convenient way for teabaggers to claim that they aren't racist, even after some of the ugliest protest signs in the summer of 2009 that conjured up images of our minstrel show era of the early part of the 20th century.

Herman Cain's claim to fame is being a businessman who saved Burger King and then Godfather's Pizza. However, he helped those companies gain stronger financial footing by closing restaurants, which means he put people out of work. No job creator experience at all. Godfather's Pizza is not in the top three pizza chains and I don't remember seeing one in Georgia. I remember eating at one when my family lived in Omaha and I used to like it, but it has been over 25 years and I'd need to eat there again to see how I like it. I used to like Pizza Hut as a kid, too, but not so much as an adult. Living in Italy changed my taste in regards to pizza. Now, the only pizza places I'll eat are Papa John's and Pizzicato.

When I was in Powell's City of Books recently, I saw a few copies of Herman Cain's book. I was shocked by how thin the book was, yet the price was $25. I think it was less than 200 pages and hardcover. It was mostly his life story and included a section on his policy goals, which had about as much substance as a marshmallow. The guy is an embarrassment (as one can see in the video where he couldn't even answer a question about Obama's Libya policy). That people found him credible is shocking. He was a token candidate at its worst. He was used by the rightwing to bash our first African American President without being accused of racism and now that several white women have come forward regarding his history of sexual harassment and sexual relations, he's disposed of like toilet paper.

The song that comes to mind when I think about the disastrous Herman Cain campaign is Snoop Dogg's "Ain't No Fun." The lyrics are vulgar but somehow, it seems to describe the way Herman Cain views women. One of the cardinal sins in American politics and culture is that a black man better not mess with a white woman. In the past, black slaves and African American males in the Jim Crow era got lynched for daring to have sexual relations with a white woman. We see this prejudice reinforced in classic novels such as To Kill a Mockingbird, in the O.J. Simpson trial, in the negative ads for Harold Ford, Jr.'s Senate campaign in Tennessee in 2006. Had Cain merely harassed African American women or had sexual relations with an African American woman, the outcry might not have been as loud. That's because as Fox News knows well, when a white woman cries rape or sexual harassment against a minority male, the country rallies to her like a knight in shining armour to protect her honour. Its the most racist legacy of our country, even if the woman is lying.

So, good riddance Herman Cain. Count me among those who was not fooled by your fake campaign. I know what you were really after: lucrative speaking engagements, a contract with Fox News to be a conservative commentator, and to sell copies of your poorly written and thin book. That he thought people would part with $25 for such a skimpy book shows just how delusional he truly is. Even Sarah Palin's memoirs offered more substance than Cain's book. I know the campaign "ain't no fun", now you're free to make third-rate pizzas. May we never hear about your pathetic life ever again.

A Historic Meeting of Two Great Ladies

2011-12-02T22:22:00.000-08:00

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton becomes the highest level U.S. government official to visit Burma in half a century. After Senator James Webb of Virginia visited Aung San Suu Kyi in Burma a year or two ago, he recommended that the U.S. government adopt a policy of engagement with the military junta rather than continue the devastating isolationist policies that doesn't work. His example was Vietnam. Once we normalized relations with Vietnam in the 1990s, it has become a thriving country and the lives of its people have improved. I was pleased to hear someone else advocating the same view that I've come to believe. Sanctions only seem to work on a country like South Africa, where there is a fairly large middle class who stand to lose money and their livelihoods affected by international boycotts. In countries with totalitarian rule of a tiny elite, sanctions and boycotts only serve to keep the country isolated in a cult of personality. We may not agree with the government, but by engaging the country with open trade, this leads to international contact and information exchange. That can only be good for the people who are only cut off from the rest of the world.

I was thrilled when I heard the Obama Administration announce that Secretary of State Clinton was being sent to Burma to talk with the government and to meet with Aung San Suu Kyi. This is a step in the right direction. Hillary Clinton is so lucky to be the one to meet the famous dissident.

There does seem to be a change blowing through the air, as the military junta has called for new elections and allowed the National League for Democracy to register as a political party and be on the ballot. This is the party that won a landslide in 1990 and had the military junta honoured the election, Aung San Suu Kyi would have been the prime minister. But because they did not honour the election results, Aung San Suu Kyi became a powerful symbol and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991. Her years of house arrest, during which her husband was dying of cancer and she was not allowed to see him or her sons, has made her into international icon. U2 wrote a song about her ("Walk On") and now French director Luc Besson is showing his film, The Lady, at film festivals around the world in which Michelle Yeoh plays the Burmese dissident.

In 2007, Buddhist monks led a rebellion against the regime that ended in brutality. Had the people kept up the massive demonstrations against the government, they might've won. A typhoon also devastated the country, which exposed the weakness of the government. Perhaps the regime finally came to the realization that they can't run the country on their policies anymore. Maybe they have looked to Thailand as a model. In Thailand, which is a Constitutional Monarchy led by a King, any time the prime minister does something the powerful don't like, the military steps in with a coup to remove him from power. Now Thailand has a female prime minister and it'll be interesting to see how long she lasts before the military steps in. Perhaps Burma is finally at the place where they will allow people to vote in elections and for the opposition party to make cosmetic changes, while monitoring the situation and possibly stepping in if the party does things the military junta doesn't like. It all remains to be seen.

As one guy at the World Affairs discussion group pointed out at the last meeting, he believes that Burma is looking for new allies after China's dam project is affecting Burma in a negative way. This is how international politics gets played. Incredibly nuanced, which is why ideologues who are ignorant about the intrigue and complexities should not be allowed to play.

Before anyone says that this visit is proof that Hillary should be president, let's get real. If she was president, she would not be meeting with Aung San Suu Kyi. The person she selected for Secretary of State would be the one meeting with the dissident. Until relations are normalized, the leader does not meet with foreign governments or political figures. This is why the Secretary of State position is actually the best job in America. I'd much rather be Secretary of State than president. You get to deal with foreigners and build relationships, and you're meeting with interesting and intelligent people around the world. There's no denying that Hillary Clinton's popularity around the world is due to her outspokenness and advocacy for women's rights. If she was our president right now, her approval ratings would be about where Obama's are, because she would be attacked by Republicans for her domestic policies.

Hillary has said that she'll be vacating the position at the end of Obama's first term and that she has no intention of serving in political office after 2012. I'm not sure how serious she is, because I think the best thing Obama can do for his reelection campaign is to ask Vice President Joe Biden to become Secretary of State and ask Hillary Clinton to be his second-term Vice President. This will secure her place in history as the first female Vice President in history and give her a front-runner spot for the 2016 presidential nomination.

But, I suspect that this is Hillary's swansong. Her place in history is already set. If Democrats want the first female president in history, we need to start recruiting and electing into office female candidates for Congress, the Senate, and the governor's offices around the country. The Republicans are doing that because they are desperate for an energizing, historical figure. I hope the first woman president will be a Democrat, not a Republican. And I also hope that Aung San Suu Kyi will become Burma's Prime Minister after the next election. Its time for great women to lead their countries in an era of peace.

A Feast at the Horn of Africa

2011-12-01T21:49:00.000-08:00

Last night, a group of us gathered at the Ethiopian restaurant, Horn of Africa, in north Portland. This is only my third time eating at an Ethiopian restaurant (the first time was in 1995 in Washington, D.C.; the second sometime in the early 2000s in Atlanta) and I keep forgetting how good it is! But of all the three places I've eaten, Horn of Africa has the best decor. The building is loft-style, with a private room upstairs for groups. It looked like we were inside a tent.

The purpose of the gathering was to hear Jeff's presentation on his ten weeks in Cape Town, South Africa this past summer where he measured the air quality in the townships. I learned a lot about South Africa, even though I'm quite knowledgeable about the country already. However, I haven't been to Cape Town, which is one place I hope to see some day. I had no idea that the main part of the city is in a "bowl" between Table Mountain and the Atlantic Ocean, and that most of the people live on the area on the other side of Table Mountain, away from the ocean.

South Africa still has a lot of problems in the post-apartheid era. One of them being that young, educated white South Africans face unemployment prospects if they stay, and the temptation to emigrate abroad. This is what happens when a country has spent decades building up a system of inequality in which one racial group reaped all the benefits while the other groups were denied a fair chance. Any plan to equalize the employment is controversial, especially since the education system is still unequal.

Jeff told us a funny story about how some African was asking him about his religious beliefs. Jeff considers himself a "hardcore atheist." I had no idea that he was, as the topic of spirituality has never come up in our twice a month discussion group with the World Affairs Council. Anyhow, he said that the African asked if he went to church, what holy book he bases his beliefs on, who he prays to, etc. When he said all this, I was laughing along with everyone else, but probably for different reasons. On the Community of Christ Facebook wall, the debate about atheists in the Priesthood continues. Its amazing that people still have no idea what atheism really means. Based on comments people have made on the Facebook page, they seem to think that atheism is merely the rejection of the God of the Bible, not a "strict scientific materialist" view of the universe. So, it is not surprising that an African would be confused about what atheism means.

The dinner was a feast and I couldn't help but think of the awful joke that a few guys made in 1985 when Ethiopia was suffering devastating famine. The worst was: "How many Ethiopians does it take to fill up a bathtub? I don't know, they keep slipping down the drain." When I mentioned to someone before that I had eaten at an Ethiopian restaurant in D.C., they had asked me in all sincerely, "Did you get enough to eat?" Well, did I? Man, I was stuffed last night. No one walked away hungry.

Most of the people in the group attend the World Affairs Council discussion group, though there was one lady no one had met before. She started her own non-profit organization building schools in Tanzania. When I heard that, I was stunned, because that's exactly what Orphans Africa does, another non-profit organization based in Washington that was started by church members (in the Community of Christ). I asked if she knew about Orphans Africa and she did. She named one person in the organization that she knew. Small world! But she said that the non-profit world was small and interconnected. That's interesting to know. A friend of mine wants to start a non-profit next year, but based on helping underserved youth locally.

It was a great evening among internationally connected friends, enjoying an excellent meal of Ethiopian cuisine while hearing about the challenges facing South Africa. I could use more days like this!

Doesn't Honesty and Integrity Matter Anymore?

2011-11-30T23:35:00.000-08:00

After several weeks of no activity (no comments), the discussion about atheists in the priesthood on the Community of Christ's Facebook wall kicked up again. Of course, I got into it because I'm absolutely stunned that there are church members who are absolutely OKAY with members of the priesthood who are not only atheists, but also keeping it a secret from others in the church. I wrote a post on this blog about it (can't remember what day, though). Its outrageous that people think its okay for someone to maintain a sacred office of the church (part of the leadership) if they do not believe that God exists, that an afterlife exists, that we live in a spiritual universe. Its baffling that such a person would go along with something they believe to be a lie. I cannot comprehend this at all. It defies logic. And it infuriates me that there are members in the church who are a-okay with the deceit and the hypocrisy.

Then came the news that another teacher was suspended after a reporter revealed his porn film star past. One guy (who happens to be openly gay) on my Facebook, who is okay with closeted atheist priesthood members, posted an article link on his wall. As expected, he does not believe that anything a teacher has done in the past should affect the teacher's job. He shows a consistency in belief, which is: it is okay for someone to withhold critical information from others because their priesthood office or their teaching career is more important than the needs of the community. This gets to the heart of the integrity issue. I fall on the side of disclosure. If you're in a position of some privilege or leadership in which you have power to make decisions over others, then there does need to be a higher standard that is imposed. If they cannot abide by it, step aside and let those who have no problem take their place.

About the porn star turned English high school teacher and crew coach, the local Fox affiliate station in Boston ambushed Kevin Hogan with their discovery that he had starred in some porn films last year under the cheesy name Hytch Cawke in films with provocative titles like: Fetish World, Just Gone Gay 8, and Ass Fucked By a DILF. When confronted with his alleged past, Hogan said: "I don't know what you're talking about." The overzealous reporter seems confident that Kevin Hogan is Hytch Cawke. Having seen pictures of both, I'm not certain. Hytch Cawke looks a lot skinnier than Kevin Hogan, though a guy could put on weight in a year's time.

Earlier this year, a substitute teacher in Florida was discovered to have been in a few porn films and was dismissed from his teaching duties. When he approached the American Civil Liberties Union for possible legal action for wrongful termination, an ACLU lawyer said that if he had been in most any other job, he'd have a case, but because his job involved being around underaged children, they would not touch his case at all. The great defender of our civil liberties denied representing the fired substitute teacher! What does that tell you?

I've read a few comments people have made on the current porn star turned teacher scandal on various articles. I'm stunned by the cluelessness and lack of moral principles. Many seem to think that this scandal is a violation of the teacher's right to privacy or right to have a sex life. If only it were that simple! Yes, a teacher who is gay or an atheist does have the right to a private life. They shouldn't be fired for what they do in the privacy of their own bedroom (so long as it doesn't involve underage people). But that's not what this teacher is accused of doing. He starred in a few pornographic films. That means he put his sex life out into the public for consumption by others. This means he made public his private activities and therefore, he forfeited his "right to privacy." It simply does not make logical sense for someone who wants to be a teacher to make a porn film. I mean, who makes a porn film anyway? Don't these people understand that anytime you have a job that puts you in close contact with children, you are going to be scrutinized more? Especially if you're a man. The fear of child molestation is very real, as we've all been reminded of again most recently with the Penn State scandal (which I've been meaning to blog about).

Like it or not, teachers are a role model for children. They have a lot of influence on their students. Perhaps an even bigger influence on children than parents once they reach a certain age. It is difficult for a teacher to maintain his or her authority and respect if his or her students were aware of something like this. More than any other profession, the moral standards of teachers has to be held to a high level because children do look up to teachers, whether we want to admit it or not. I know myself and how I was as a teenager, and I certainly did admire a few teachers, including one to an almost hero-worship level. I would have been devastated if I learned that one of my teachers (particularly one I admired) had made a pornographic film (especially a gay one). It would be hard to respect such a teacher. Making a pornographic film is an indication of poor judgement. And in this economy when there are many people with a teaching degree and not enough teaching jobs available, it makes sense that standards would be set high.

I'm not saying that Kevin Hogan is a bad person. There is nothing illegal about making pornography. But let's get real here. Teaching is probably not the best career for Hogan. I wish a reporter would ask him why he wanted to become a teacher and what he was thinking when he decided to make a few pornos. That's just not a logical career trajectory for someone who wants to be a teacher. I can understand someone who volunteers as a tutor or teaches English as a Second Language. But with the various stories of porn stars becoming teachers, it appears to be an indication that maybe these men had an attack of conscience and after their stint in porn, they decided they wanted to redeem themselves by giving back. However, it doesn't work that way. Don't people get it? We live in the Age of the Internet. Everything you put out there is a potential boomerang (yes, my blog counts!). If someone really wanted to keep his or her life private, it would be a wise idea to not put anything out on the Internet or on video. And if you decide to, then take ownership. If someone discovers something and faces you with it, then don't cry about it.

I guess despite the lesson in this story, I'm still baffled that there are people out there who are okay with deceit and hypocrisy. How can we establish trust and relationships based on respect if its considered okay for a person to withhold critical information from others? Information such as not believing in God if they happen to be an atheist Priesthood member or that they had done a pornographic film in the past. Of course people aren't going to be honest if they covet the Priesthood or a teaching position and they have something in their past (or present) that they know would disqualify them. But that's what living an honest life (a life of integrity) is all about. You disclose and let the chips fall where they may.

This brings to mind an Orwell quote that I love: "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." So, enablers, stop defending those who would deceive others. If we value honesty, we have to start by being honest. This means not withholding critical information from others who have a right to know. This is called living with integrity. There's no other way to live.

Public high school teacher starred in porno movies released last year: MyFoxBOSTON.com

No, I haven't Been Raptured

2011-11-29T01:08:00.000-08:00

I haven't blogged in a long while and there's a reason for that. Though I did add a few tonight, there are quite a few more posts that I'm planning to add for November, so you're just going to have to read back over them if you're interested (planned posts include: Jim Jones and Jonestown Massacre; Irish dancing; film review of The Descendants; 1991 Christmas Newsletter; book review of Higher Ground; and perhaps a few on the Republicans, or maybe not).

The last post I had on here was the film review of J. Edgar, from November 12th. I fell behind because that was a depressing weekend. It was the weekend when the mayor of Portland ordered the evacuation of the two squares that had been Occupy Portland's camp for over a month. I was enthralled and hooked to the TV and the livestream video on the Internet for the entire weekend. I've been meaning to write a post about the Occupy movement, but I felt like I needed to learn more about it before I could write about it. Then, I got busy with my social life (amazing, huh?). It just became completely overwhelming. Then Thanksgiving was approaching and I had to get my newsletter finalized and printed, and spend time writing the cards to people. There never seems to be enough time! Add to that, the daily hilarity with one Republican presidential candidate after another. If it wasn't Rick Perry's idiocy, it was Herman Cain's or Michele Bachmann's. I had planned to write a post about how making fun of the Republican candidates has become the equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel. It was just too easy and seems almost cruel.

So, that's where I've been. This post might appear pointless at some future point, once I've filled in the dates for November when a post should have been published on my blog. Instead of writing past posts chronologically and trying to catch up, I will maintain a daily post and if I have time, I'll write an older post to appear in November. I'm striving for 22 posts per month. No particular reason. Just because I love that number. Thanks for sticking by me. I've never gone this long without posting something, since I first started the blog in 2007!

Don't Go Apeshit!

2011-11-22T00:45:00.000-08:00

This is just an announcement that the first Christmas cards of the season have been sent out to various people, with yet another creative newsletter. Its turning out to be the case that odd number years have more creative newsletters than even number years. In 2007, I took advantage of the "007" in the year to write a James Bond-themed newsletter (featuring the title of every James Bond movie, except one for obvious reasons, in a sentence somewhere in the newsletter). In 2009, I wrote from Sarah Palin's perspective, which proved to be a huge hit among those who received it. Last year, I had planned to write it up in Restaurant menu style, but I had stupidly saved the document on the work computer and when I was given 10 minutes to clear my desk, I did not have time to have that newsletter sent to my email. I just deleted as much as I could from the computer. It would have been a great newsletter, and maybe I'll do it someday but not this year nor next year (yes, I already have plans for next year's newsletter as well!).

So many newsletter ideas, so few years to try them! Maybe I should go half-year! Ha.

Last year, one of my good friends sent a newsletter for the first time. He said that he was inspired by me (I'm flattered). He's a journalism professor at a university in Kentucky (the same university where George Clooney had attended one semester before he dropped out to pursue acting). His newsletter was appropriate: News headlines. I was stunned how much he was able to convey in just news headlines. He should write for "The Onion"! He was hilarious. When I talked to him about it, I told him that I envied his ability to say so much with so few words. I write a narrative each time and push the two page limit (using a smaller-than-I-really-should font), but I would love to do a newsletter of nothing but news headlines.

My favourite newsletter each year is hands down Jantzen (my other roommate in D.C.). I feel like he and I compete each year for creative newsletters. He has written from the perspective of his unborn son and newspaper articles, and even one where it was like a missing persons bulletin. Most of all, his sense of humour comes through and I always laugh. I look forward to them every year. If you do a Google search about how to write a Christmas newsletter, you'll get quite a few options to click on. Some of the people giving free advice seem to repeat the cliche that people hate receiving newsletters every year, yet its such a tradition for a lot of people. Really? I LOVE newsletters, even if some of them are annoying brag sheets. I love seeing the creative ways people share the events of their year. I've also gotten great feedback on my newsletters, so I'm not stopping. It just encourages me to try different approaches year after year. This year marks Volume XIII. I started in 1999, during my last semester at BYU because I got tired of handwriting the same basic info in card after card. This allowed me to write the events of my year once and then hand write a personal note specific to the person I'm mailing the card to. I wish I had written a newsletter since 1990. Last year on my blog, I wrote a post as though I was writing my 1990 newsletter. I will do the same this year with 1991. That will appear on "Black Friday."

So, check your mailbox for a card coming to you. If you don't get one this week or next, don't go "apeshit." I'm busy and I'll get them out to my mailing list before Christmas. Promise!

Music Video Monday: Gloria Estefan

2011-11-21T00:31:00.000-08:00

For this week of Thanksgiving, I selected a song by Gloria Estefan that I "rediscovered" recently and I love the lyrics. I don't think I ever really paid much attention to the lyrics when I first heard it more than 20 years ago (I believe it played on the current radio playlist in 1989). I've always preferred Gloria Estefan / Miami Sound Machine's uptempo songs, but as her career progressed, she sang more and more ballads (I theorized at the time that it was because her ballads charted higher than her dance songs). I love her "Don't Wanna Lose You", "Coming Out of the Dark", and "Reach" (the official theme song of the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games), but its her high-energy dance songs ("Conga", "Rhythm Is Gonna Get You", "Get On Your Feet" and others) that really get me moving.

How did I recently "rediscover" this song? Well, every year when I write the newsletter, part of my tradition includes an appropriate song lyric to include at the top of the newsletter (and sometimes also at the signature line). This year, however, I'm doing something really creative and will utilize more than one song. "Get On Your Feet" made the cut for the songs I'm featuring this year. I think they lyrics are quite relevant regarding my year.

One thing I love about "rediscovering" old favourites is that it gives me new appreciation for the song and artist. I don't have Gloria Estefan's greatest hits, so maybe I should go look for a CD to buy. Gloria Estefan was among my favourites as a teenager. She's just an incredibly beautiful woman (a Cuban-American) and a great talent. Her "Miami sound" was a mixture of pop and Latin music, with "Conga" being the classic in terms of capturing that unique sound. I haven't heard anything from her lately, but I hope she hasn't mellowed like other favourite artists from the 1980s.

If you're ever feeling down and need a reason to pick yourself up and face life again, try this song. Its a perfect "pick-me-up". Who needs Prozac when you have music?

Music Video Monday: Stephen Bishop

2011-11-14T23:53:00.000-08:00

Today is Stephen Bishop's birthday. Who, you ask? Exactly! He was a singer-songwriter who was big in the late 70s and early 80s. He turns 60 years old today. The song I remember him for is "It Might Be You" from the Dustin Hoffman film Tootsie, in which Hoffman plays an actor who is struggling to get an acting job and when a soap opera is hiring a female role, he decides to cross-dress in order to win that role. This complicates matters when he falls in love with the star actress, who views him (er, her) as a good girl friend to confide in. Even more complications ensue when she invites Hoffman-as-Dorothy home to visit, and her father falls in love! Its been quite a few years since I've seen the movie. I remember my parents taking us to see it when it played in theaters (1982 or 1983). It seems like a strange film for parents to take elementary school age boys to see, but I was amused by it. The gender switching roles were confusing. I also remember seeing Victor / Victoria, which was even more confusing (Julie Andrews played a woman who plays a man pretending to be a woman, or something like that). What I remember most about Tootsie is that I liked Dorothy and it was weird to think of her as being an act by Michael Dorsey (Dustin Hoffman's character). That was also the problem for the female lead, Jessica Lange's character. She felt like Dorothy was a great friend and Michael just didn't cut it. Charming film!

Anyhow, as I looked on Wikipedia for birthdays, I was stunned to learn that "It Might Be You" only made it as high as #25 on the Billboard Top Singles Chart in 1983. I loved this song as a kid and had I been in charge of charting the song, this one would definitely have reached #1! If I'm not mistaken, the song also appeared in the film Waiting to Exhale, when the four African American ladies are in the car and this song comes on and they sing along. Timeless! The song's melody captures the early 1980s sound that I like: soft pop, but not quite elevator muzak.

Also celebrating a birthday today is Condoleezza Rice! None of my friends can understand it, but I will admit to having a crush on my dear sweet Condi. She was the only member of the Bush Administration that I liked and I would not even mind seeing her become the first female president if she's interested in running in 2016. However, I think her political days are over. As her new memoirs point out in the title, there is no higher honour than serving as Secretary of State.

Well, this is a perfect birthday two-fer. Happy Birthday, Condoleezza! Remember, "It Might Be You"! ("Something's telling me it might be you, all of my life...").

All Work and No Play Makes "J. Edgar" Boring!

2011-11-12T22:12:00.000-08:00

Fall movies mean one thing, usually. Oscar showcases! Film studios hoping to impress the voters of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences release the most serious films in the fall. This includes biopics, movies adapted from best selling literary novels, period pieces, and some of the best acting performances. Since I'm a big biopic fan, I will go see any major one that gets released. This year's Clint Eastwood film is a biopic on the first director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations, J. Edgar Hoover. He was a legendary figure who was instrumental in nationalizing the crime data (through the use of fingerprints and a centralized database) and ran the Bureau from the early 1920s until his death in 1972. He served under eight presidents and probably most humiliating for him was having Robert F. Kennedy as his boss from 1961 to 1964 (Kennedy was born in 1925, one year after Hoover was promoted to head the Bureau).

I've never liked J. Edgar Hoover since I learned about him. My opinion is based on his testy relations with the Kennedy brothers and his view that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a communist. Hoover had too much power and kept secret files featuring the private peccadillos of various politicians and notable public figures, which he used to leverage power. Since his death, the FBI Director now serves for a period of ten years and the headquarters in Washington, D.C. bears his name. I toured the building in 2000 during my internship program. Not nearly as cool as the CIA headquarters, but it was still an impressive old-style government building with a nice museum inside.

When I was in college, a fellow political science student I knew (he was from British Columbia, Canada and seemed more interested in America than Canada) was a fan of J. Edgar Hoover. He lost credibility with me when he did not even know that J. Edgar Hoover was known to cross-dress and was likely a closeted homosexual. I knew those details back in high school. It was just more reasons to not like Hoover very much. He bended the rules to suit his purposes and he was on the wrong side of history in regards to his surveillance and harassment of the Civil Rights leaders.

As for the film, J. Edgar, Leonardo DiCaprio does an excellent job in the role. He actually does lose himself in the role and you really believe that you are watching J. Edgar Hoover rather than Leonardo DiCaprio. Best Actor nomination worthy for sure. The film, though, jumps around too much. While a straight linear film can be kind of boring, the constant jumping around in time (at least three different timelines seemed to be running) made it difficult to follow. The screenplay was written by the same guy who wrote another biopic, Milk. In one storyline, an older Hoover is dictating his memoirs to a writer, which takes the audience back to 1919 (the year my grandfather was born!) when Hoover as a 24 year old saw the sloppy investigation of a bombing. He was the right man to push for changes in investigation procedures and he was singularly anti-communist and anti-anarchist (if I'm not mistaken, two presidents were assassinated by anarchists: Grover Cleveland and William McKinley).

From the Palmer Raids to busting the mob to investigating the kidnapping of Charles Lindbergh's baby to wiretapping Dr. King's hotel room, this film covers the wide expanse of Hoover's working life. The presentation, however, is rather dull. Hoover doesn't appear to have much of a life outside of work. And when he does get away, he gets away with his right-hand man, Clyde Tolson. They eat lunch and dinner together, vacation away together, and work together. There is debate on whether the two had a romantic or sexual relationship, or were they more like brothers who spent a lot of time together? What makes things even more compelling is that Tolson inherited Hoover's house, received the flag that was on Hoover's coffin, and eventually was buried near Hoover's grave. The movie implies that the two had a homosexual relationship, though it appears that it may not have involved actual sex. Perhaps they were just two men who enjoyed each other's company?

The actor who played Robert F. Kennedy (Jeffrey Donovan) did a great job. He actually kind of resembles RFK, at least moreso than the actor who played Robert F. Kennedy in the recent miniseries The Kennedys. Too bad that he didn't play RFK in the miniseries as well. His role in J. Edgar was rather small. Dame Judi Dench plays J. Edgar's mother and she has a great line that she tells her son when he admits to her that he doesn't like dancing with women: "I'd rather have a dead son than one who is a daffodil." Day-um! That's quite the euphemism! Naomi Watts plays Edgar's secretary, Helen Gandy. At first, Edgar shows romantic interest in her and takes her on a date to the Library of Congress to show her the card catalog system that he supposedly created to make it easier to locate books (I had never heard that attributed to him). He proposes marriage without so much as a romantic spark. Its all based on his cold reading of her being intelligent and virtuous, and thus a good match for him. She declines and becomes his long-serving secretary.

While the film has plenty of interesting moments, overall, the tone is rather dull. This could be the subject matter, though. Hoover may have accomplished a lot and helped make the Federal Bureau of Investigations what it is today, but he appears to be a boring person. Sure, there's the salacious hypocrisy that he's interesting in knowing the details of other people's private, sexual lives while he hides his own homosexuality and cross-dressing tendencies, but ultimately, the movie is boring because J. Edgar Hoover is boring.

When I left the theater, I overheard some other people who saw the movie mention that during the movie, they took a quick nap, they made a mental list of things they needed to do, they counted sheep, etc. So, I'm not the only one who found the movie boring. Let's hope that The Iron Lady (about Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher) is not boring. I don't expect it to be, because I find her to be a fascinating icon. My generation grew up in the Reagan-Thatcher-Pope John Paul II era. One can't separate any of those three individuals from the era in which they shared the world stage.

Below is a picture of the real J. Edgar Hoover. He has a face that only his mother could love! He looks like a human bulldog. I bet he makes a really ugly woman. I wonder what it is about some men that makes them interested in dressing as women. He didn't seem like the type. The movie doesn't really get into that (there is only one brief scene, but in the context of what happened right before, his reasons did not appear perverted). If there is a lesson to learn from Hoover's life, I'd say that its probably a good idea to not work all the time. Its okay to relax and enjoy life outside of work. After all, as you've probably heard: "no one on their deathbed wishes that they had spent more time at the office."

11:11:11

2011-11-11T23:21:00.000-08:00

Happy 11/11/11 Day! This date has significance, if only because of the repetition of the number 11. In numerology, 11 is considered a spiritual number. I would have loved to have gotten married on this day, but apparently many couples had that idea. Las Vegas Wedding Chapels were fully booked today. I had hoped that something significant would happen on this day (like meeting a lady that I really hit it off with, which leads to a relationship and marriage), but that didn't happen, either. Nothing profound happened. Nothing spiritual. Nothing out of the ordinary. It was just another day for me.

It was also Veteran's Day, which meant that Applebee's was doing their annual free meal to veterans. This is my third or fourth year participating. The previous two years, I invited a fellow Navy vet from church and he said that he would, only to flake out on me both times. I invited him again this year and he said no, so at least that was better than agreeing, then making an excuse not to come (though last year he did attend a funeral on the day, so that's understandable). This year, though, my friend G and his girlfriend joined me and we had a great time. The waitress was also quite cute (and quite married). Just my luck.

I did cause some controversy on Facebook today when I reposted a photo from someone on my Facebook friends' list. Rather than write a critique on her wall and face the hostility of people on her friends list, I decided to share the photo to my wall for my friends to see. The photo was of a horse with an American flag draped around its neck. Based on the comments I read on the friend's wall, I just thought it was ridiculous. People have no clue what patriotism is. Whenever they see the American flag, they get a knee-jerk reaction and call it "patriotism." Ug. To me, based on what I learned in the Boy Scouts, a flag was meant to fly on a flag pole or draped over a coffin of a military member who died or folded into a triangle. It is NOT patriotic to have the flag on shirts, pants, underwear, a cape, placed on animals, used in car dealership lots, as a blanket, etc.

The comment I posted with the picture was:

An example of flag desecration. This is not "respecting the flag" (for those who believe in that sort of thing). It's also disrespectful to the horse, because the horse doesn't give a s$#% about national borders or governments!

I'm not much of a flag worshipper. I just don't get people's devotion to it. I see it as a form of idolatry. To me, its just a piece of cloth flying in the wind. Pretty, perhaps, but honestly...whenever I see people burning it, my heart does not beat faster nor does my blood run with rage throughout my body. I just don't get hyped up on stuff that other Americans do. I know there's room for disagreement, but this is one issue where I will claim to be right because I've studied what "idolatry" means and most Americans who have emotional reactions regarding the flag are engaging in idolatry.

It did not take long before someone commented. This woman hardly ever comments on my Facebook wall. She had in the past over some political post, but considering all the political comments I've made over the years without inspiring her to comment, I was surprised to see her post. But, then again, it wasn't a surprise. She loves horses. She basically commented that she did not agree with my opinion. She didn't want to argue or discuss it, just wanted to let me know that she disagreed. It was important enough for her to comment on my post that she disagreed with me. At least she didn't do her usual thing, which was starting off with: "Nick, I love ya, but..." Now that would have freaking annoyed me because she and I don't know each other well. Her parents and my parents are close friends and I know her parents more than I know her. She and I don't have much in common. She's a stereotypical conservative Southern woman. I'm not a fan of people who throw the "love" word around because they cheapen the word if they don't really mean it (and I know she doesn't mean it because she hardly ever made a point to initiate a conversation with me during the times she was at her parents house the same time I happened to be there).

My response was that I was not surprised that we disagreed on that point. Our life experiences are far too different. I wanted her to realize that. She did seem to agree on that point. Hopefully her parents realize that too. I can imagine that my parents probably don't like my political commentary if people get offended or disagree, but personally, I don't care. I'm very open about my beliefs and no one should be offended. I don't base friendships on agreement with my way of thinking. Besides, I did not Facebook Friend request any church member back in Atlanta because I knew that their political views and mine didn't match and I didn't want them to get mad at my posts and commentary, because I'm not going to censor myself. Those who are my actual friends appreciate reading what I think (they tell me so all the time) so of course I'm going to go with what my true friends enjoy rather than those who aren't really friends. So, if church member friends in Atlanta get offended by my political views, oh well. Maybe now they understand why I had to get the hell out of the South for my own sanity. Nothing personal against them, just that I'm a proud liberal Democrat who loves living in a liberal city.

Speaking of which, one person on my Facebook friends list de-friended me this past week just because I had deleted a comment he had posted on my Facebook wall that included the explicative: "fucking." I had posted some political cartoon or article and he just went off on a rant, using that word. I was shocked and I thought it was out of line. Its just rude to go on a profanity laced rant on someone else's wall. Of course I was going to delete it because I have a lot of church friends and as I learned at Bend Institute, people actually do read what I post. So, I am mindful not to use vulgar language (even though I personally don't have a problem with it). There have been some hilarious cartoons that I wanted to share on my wall, but declined because of the "vulgarity" of the joke.

Well, this guy couldn't understand that. He angrily told me that no one censors him and the reason why he was angry was because religious and conservative people have been abusive towards him all his life. So he's going to de-friend a fellow liberal? He couldn't get over his rant and ego to see that he was wrong to post a profanity-laced rant on my wall without consideration to my group of friends? What a loser. Weird. Its not like I know him personally though. I can't remember how we came about being Facebook "friends." He probably liked my comments on someone else's wall and Friend requested me (I don't friend request people I don't know personally). But that's the shallowness of Facebook "friendship." If people don't like your views or if you delete their comment, you're de-friended. Such shallowness! Obviously, the guy has "issues." He sounded really angry in a lot of his political rants. I just laugh it all off. People need to chill out.

Anyhow, not much to report on 11/11/11. I wish I had a spiritually significant day. There was an interesting news story about a boy who was born on this day at 11:11 a.m. to a two military couple. How about that? I love synchronicities like that. Hopefully the media will follow his life. Hopefully he will have an especially blessed life!

An Evening Among Nerds

2011-11-10T21:45:00.000-08:00

Last night, I skipped my biweekly Young Professionals discussion group (the topic was on the European economic crisis, which doesn't really interest me) in order to attend a lecture and book signing at Powell's City of Books. I generally make a point to attend the lectures / book signings of Hollywood celebrities because I think its cool that they come to Portland to promote their books. The last ones I recall seeing were Alicia Silverstone in 2009 and director Paul Verhoeven in 2010. Last night the celebrity with a book was Chris Hardwick, whom I remember fondly from MTV's dating game show, Singled Out. I had forgotten all about the show and vaguely remember it. What I remember most was what a pair Chris Hardwick and Jenny McCarthy made.

The book Chris wrote and is promoting is called The Nerdist Way, which is a comedic handbook for people who fall under the "nerd category" of high school stereotypes. The book actually got a good review in the snarky Portland Mercury alternative weekly newspaper. I wasn't sure I was going to buy a copy, but it did look interesting.

The lecture was one of the more popular ones I've been to. I figured it would be, as it always tends to be crowded whenever a Hollywood type comes up here. I've probably been to at least 50 book signings / lectures since I moved to Portland in 2006. So I can say without exaggeration that Chris Hardwick's presentation is the absolute BEST ONE EVER! The guy is seriously witty and had us laughing like crazy. He started by taking a picture of the audience (actually, his camera phone has a panorama feature, so he took quite a few shots to cover the entire area). He said that he wanted evidence to show people that he was able to bring out a huge crowd for his book lecture tour. After that, he started reading someone else's children's book, using a strange accent for the girl (claiming that he pictured the girl in the book actually talking that way, which he did in an annoying style). He then allowed the audience to pick what part of the book to read and then read a few sections, though with commentary thrown in.

Before he threw out some profanities, he actually asked the Powell's employee if it was okay to use swear words. When he was told that he could, the actual word he used was "jerked off." As in, he said that when you're telling someone something and you sense that they aren't really paying attention, to end it with: "and then I jerked off." He swears that it will get their attention. Funny!

After he read his selections, he opened the floor for questions and surprisingly, he went well beyond the usual hour that most of these events run. I learned a lot and laughed a lot. I had no idea that he has podcasts or a website or a TV show. He does stand-up comedy, too. His background is interesting, as his father was a professional bowler who ended up owning a bowling alley and Chris pretty much grew up in one. Chris claims to be a nerd and even defined the term for everyone. I never pictured him as a nerd, though. Never would have guessed it. I didn't even think the crowd was all that "nerdy." The people who attended the lecture looked like the typical Portland hipster. I guess we all have our interests. There were a few Dr. Who references thrown around and I didn't get any of those, as I've never been interested in that show (my brother loved the classic show shown on TV back in the 1980s). One much older guy (a Baby Boomer) asked Chris a question about Mozart and Chris played it well. They bantered back and forth, but the guy was strange. He seemed to want to know who Chris thought was the best composer and if Mozart would qualify as a genius. It was great to see how quick on his feet Chris was, able to entertain even the oddest question for the audience to laugh.

Even when Chris shared some personal stories, he mentioned that he was a private person and prefers to keep some things for himself (which is understandable). Here's what he said about his stint on the show Singled Out (I found it online, but it was basically the same as what he shared with us at Powell's):

The whole time I was hosting that show, it was kind of nerd vengeance. It was very "Revenge of the Nerds" in my mind. I feel like I was horrible to people on that show. There were so many screaming people on that set, I realized pretty quickly that if I made horrible comments under my breath into the microphone, people at home watching would hear but no one on the set would hear. My nerd rage forced me to be kind of douchey to people because I finally got to say the things that I never got to say to people's faces. That part of it was really satisfying.

I still find it kind of difficult to think of him as a nerd, though. However, the way he describes "nerd" is a socially awkward person who tends to live in one's head a lot and obsessively focuses on a singular pursuit to be an expert on something. Nerds are good at details on whatever it is they grasp hold of. His motive for writing this "self-help" type of book (a manual for nerds, in other words) is to help those who fall under this category to have more success in life. He claims that "the war is over and nerds won!" As we can see with Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, the Facebook founder, and other high tech companies founders, where would the jock types be without the nerds?

It was a great lecture and definitely the funniest one I've been to. Before this, David Sirota's lecture at Powell's earlier this year was the best one I had been to (because he had a PowerPoint presentation). But its hard to beat a witty guy who is making it cool to be a nerd. I waited in line (a long, slow moving one). He was cool about it all. I saw a few people ahead of me request getting pictures taken with him (he did the one eyebrow lift for one pose). I thanked him for writing a book like this, even though I don't think of myself as a nerd. I told him that I had been to about 50 book signings / lectures at Powell's and that he was by far the funniest and best one yet. He made me a fan. One thing that he did during his lecture that the audience enjoyed was sing "The Pi song" which is simply all the numbers to the nth decimal. It was an impressive memory, though I can't vouch for any of it being correct. All in all, a great night.

So, what is a "nerd"? To be completely honest, people have categorized me as a "nerd" in high school, but I never felt that way. I did not like science at all and I did not like hanging out with those who were definitely known as "nerds". As Chris pointed out in his lecture, nerds can actually be quite vicious to other nerds. He said that he didn't mind getting insulted by a jock because the insults tended to be lame and ridiculous, but an insult from a nerd tended to get under his skin and just lodge itself in the brain for him to obsess over. He made a plea for nerds to not be mean to other nerds. But he also said that he didn't like being mean (or "douchey").

My social circle in junior high school and high school did tend to be other military "brats" and most of my friends did seem to prefer science and math classes (I was more into history and English). I played Dungeons and Dragons once but never really got into it (one year for Christmas, I got a James Bond role playing game, which was more my style). I was more into art and writing. I didn't fit in with the jocks and the popular kids. But I wasn't like those I considered the "nerds" who seemed to have no friends. I didn't get along with any of the nerd types I knew in school. I always thought of myself as outside the high school social structure. People did have trouble putting me into a convenient box. If anything, though, I think there is a consistent view of me as the writer / artist type. That has never changed. Does that make me a "nerd", though?

Wikipedia describes a "nerd" in part as:

Some nerds show a pronounced interest in subjects which others tend to find dull or boring, too complex and difficult to comprehend, or overly mature for their age, especially topics related to science, mathematics and technology. Conversely, nerds may show an interest in activities that are viewed by their peers as stupid and immature for their age, such as trading cards, comic books, television programs, films, role-playing games, video games, and other things relating to fantasy and science fiction. Nerds are often portrayed as physically unfit, and either obese or very thin. Nerds are also sometimes portrayed as having symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder such as showing extreme interest in rules. Comparisons to Asperger syndrome are common, due to the tendency to engage in intense, specific interests and to experience difficulty in social situations.

Particularly in the case of males, nerds may be perceived as being uninterested in traditionally masculine activities such as sports (either participating in or following) or "locker room talk".

Ah hell. I guess I am a "nerd." I hate that word, though. Geek sounds better to me. Yeah, I'll confess to being a geek. But it is interesting that nerds seem to be into science fiction and fantasy when it comes to movies and books, while I've always been more grounded and prefer reality (especially with regards to history). I don't own any video games, either, because I find them to be a colossal waste of time. I know how addicting they are and I much prefer to use my time learning. If any character from a movie resembles me, I'd say it would be the robot Number 5 from Short Circuit (when he reads books like crazy and demands "more input!"). Yeah, I realize the irony. I just compared myself to a character in a science fiction movie!

Though the Wikipedia article does define me in part (I don't watch or follow sports either, but I do enjoy watching the Winter and Summer Olympics, and the World Cup), I long for the day when we don't need these labels that are the relic of the superficial adolescent world. In fact, as much as I love the concept of reincarnation and plan to keep on reincarnating, the worst part of the life experience is enduring the superficial world of high school. I wish there was a way to end the shallow categories of people. I knew smart kids who were part of the cool and popular crowd. I knew jocks who were intelligent and nice to the outcasts. There is no fine line.

If there is a term that I embrace, though, it would be "Bohemian." I love the vibe of that word and all it implies. Yes, I am a Bohemian (not a nerd). And I don't give a shit what the popular kids think of me. A shallowness of mind is punishment.

Below is a video clip of Chris Hardwick during his Singled Out days in the mid-1990s. Enjoy! And check out his book, The Nerdist Way.

Atheists in the Priesthood?!?

2011-11-09T02:50:00.000-08:00

The Community of Christ wall on Facebook had an interesting debate this week when one church member posted an article about a Dutch church in the Netherlands in which some members of the priesthood were actually atheists. This church member then asked the provocative question to the group if anyone would have a problem with this in our church.

What really got the discussion going was the allegations by Mr. Anti-Government that he personally knows of several church members who are atheists but he refuses to name them. Nor will such people identify themselves. This really caused an uproar and I admit that I am among those who are outraged. In my view, the priesthood is a sacred covenant that goes beyond that of membership. Its a calling and responsible to the church organization. If anyone was an atheist and a member of the priesthood, there's only one decent and ethical response. Turn in your priesthood card. This does not mean you cannot be a member of the church. It simply means that you should not be participating in ordinances that you don't believe in.

The more some church members defended the right of priesthood members to be atheists, the more incensed I got. This is one position I won't back down on because it does not make sense. If a person is an atheist, that means that they do not believe that God exists, that we live in a spiritual world, that we have a soul that will transcend the death of the human body. In my view, there is nothing wrong or immoral or evil about atheism. Its simply a viewpoint held by people who are logically-based and materialist minded (particularly, scientific materialism). These people are generally highly intelligent and require physical evidence before they believe. The problem with atheists holding the priesthood offices, though, is that if you don't believe that God exists or heaven exists, that you believe we will become non-existent when the body dies, WHY WOULD YOU PARTICIPATE IN SOMETHING YOU BELIEVE IS A FRAUD?!? That's what I don't understand. To remain a priesthood member when you're an atheist would make you a hypocrite, a liar, and a fraud. Your credibility would not exist. It simply does not make logical sense, and Mr. Anti-Government who claims to be all about logic was defending their right to remain in the priesthood. He, himself, is an atheist (though raised in the church and once was such an in-your-face rightwing Jesus freak who went around trying to convert people when he was a teenager).

As I tried to explain ad nauseum in the dialogue, how can an atheist priesthood do his or her duties as required by the office if he or she does not believe that God exists? What do priesthood holders do? Well, it depends upon the office. There are teachers, deacons, priests, elders, seventys, evangelists, and apostles (forgive me if I left any other office out). Priests can officiate weddings and baptize people. The problem of atheists in the priesthood really presents itself with the evangelists. In the Community of Christ is an ordinance known as "Evangelist's Blessing." I got mine in 1999. Basically, this is a special prayer (which you get a written copy of) which can give direction to your life (mine was vague on that part, but helpful in other ways). When I decided to get mine, it was the right time. I was nearing the end of my experience at BYU and looking at starting a career in Government in Washington, D.C. I wanted some guidance for my future. I decided to pick a female evangelist just so that I could have proof that women made effective priesthood members as men (it was one of the main arguments I had with Mormons at BYU who tried to convince me that women weren't meant to have the priesthood).

I picked a lady who attended the Salt Lake congregation (where I had been baptized at 8 years old in 1980). To prepare, I had to be interviewed by her twice and I had a week where I had to fast something of importance to me (I chose music, which meant that I had to go a full week without listening to music, which was difficult then; that would be impossible now with my current job). I had scripture verses to read, meditate, and pray over. It was a week focused on spiritual preparation. On her end, she also did the same preparation. When we met, she gave me my Evangelist blessing and I was surprised by what it said. Obviously, the words of guidance were specific to me and she didn't really know me well enough to say the things she did, so I think that shows the mysteries of God and the spiritual world.

Now, imagine for a minute...how on earth would an atheist who held the office of evangelist be able to perform such an ordinance to a member who asked for one? There is no way an atheist would be able to do it without lying and it would be morally and ethically wrong to go through with it when the member was sincere in asking for the special blessing. To me, it is just unfathomable that an atheist would pretend for the sake of appearances. If they keep their priesthood offices and remain in the closet about their real beliefs, they are doing a huge disservice to church members. And this actually does erode confidence and trust. Not to mention promote cynicism where it doesn't belong (one thing I love about church is the idea that we can leave behind real world concerns and fellowship with one another as true equals and that there is a level of trust that exists which is difficult to find in the outside world).

Last year, during the Vision Project, there was a special worship service where people sang hymns and a few priesthood members were available for special prayers. I went to one I trust completely, Erik the co-leader of YAPS. I was in my unemployment period at the time and as I sat in the chair, those who were singing hymns started singing "Touch Me Lord With Thy Spirit Eternal" (which is in my top three favourite hymns). I saw this as a "sign from God" and as Erik said an amazing prayer on my behalf, I felt tears welling in my eyes. It was a great experience and the prayer was amazing, because a couple weeks later, I landed a job that I was perfect for and that was what I was looking for. Amazing how that happened! Would the special prayer on my behalf by a priesthood member been as effective if it had been an atheist? I doubt it.

At Bend Institute over Labour Day 2010, I had sought out two members of the priesthood to give me a special prayer (which included anointing my head with consecrated oil) regarding my stressful job at that Awful Place That Shall Not Be Named. I trusted the faith of both people who placed their hands on my head and prayed on my behalf. After the prayer, I fell ill and had to have a barf bag on hand in case I threw up on the way back to Portland. By month's end, I was out of my awful job. Was it because of their prayer that helped me get out of the awful work situation that I had tried for four years to leave? Would I have experienced the same outcome had they been atheists?

The debate did inspire a mini-debate on what atheism is, which is also absurd. Some people are far too loose in their interpretation. They wanted to include agnostics, humanists, pantheists, panentheists, pagans and deists in the category of "atheists." I know atheists and they would disagree. In fact, because I had been involved in an atheist group in the early to mid-1990s, I know how they think and why. I even had a few atheist books. I ultimately lost interest in atheism when so many were dismissive of my coincidences that I shared with them. In their view, it was just a coincidence, but in my view, the coincidences were too unlikely to happen because they were the case of the outer experiences reflecting inner thoughts. Synchronicity, according to Carl Jung.

As I tried to explain to my well meaning and open minded church members, atheists are different from agnostics and the other categories because they are hardcore about their belief in a strictly scientific materialist world. Atheists don't believe in God, heaven, coincidences, spiritual experiences, souls, ghosts, psychics, ESP, Near Death Experiences, etc. This is beyond mere doubt. This is in your face unbelief. I know because an atheist had de-friended me on Facebook earlier this year after being tired of reading my spiritual comments. So, knowing what I know about atheists, why should our church allow them to continue to hold the priesthood office? You can bet that no atheist organization (American Atheists, The Freedom From Religion Foundation, etc.) would allow a "religionist" or God believer to hold a leadership position in their organization. It is just cowardice of an atheist to continue to hold the priesthood office when they believe that none of it is true. I'm very ecumenical and tolerant of different beliefs, so I have no problem respecting atheists as equals whose beliefs deserve to be respected (to be free from being proselytized) and even if they want to attend church or be a part of the church community. What I won't agree with is the deception they are engaged in. The president of our church resigned over a personal problem (that has never been publicly disclosed) a few years ago and he turned in his priesthood card. If he could do the honourable thing, an atheist priesthood member should be able to follow his lead.

Ironically, my stance of no atheists in the priesthood put me on the side of the conservative church members. It was weird to side with one, in particular, especially when she brought up her view that allowing atheists in the priesthood would lead to Satan taking over the church. Uh, since I don't believe in Satan, this puts me in the heathen camp according to the conservative church members. I'm sure some of them probably think I'm an "atheist", but that's ridiculous because I believe in a spiritually directed universe and that we all have a soul and that reincarnation is reality. I'm okay with the idea that my New Agey beliefs will probably mean that I will never get called to the priesthood. I never saw myself as priesthood material (there are certain standards that I could not abide by, anyway) but I still respect the role and its importance in the life of the church. When I've had no where else to turn, I have gone to a priesthood member that I respect, whose faith is unquestionable, and asked for guidance. They've never let me down. If atheists in the priesthood is widespread in the church, I would be saddened because it would make trust much harder to establish. I would have to interview each priesthood member before asking them to say a special prayer on my behalf. I don't want to do that. Trust is crucial.

So, if you are a priesthood member in the Community of Christ and you are an atheist (that is, you don't believe in God, a soul, heaven, or that we live in a spiritually-directed universe), please do the honourable thing. Turn in your priesthood card. If you can't do that for whatever reason, then if someone approaches you to ask for a special prayer or blessing or some other sacred ordinance of our church, please decline for their sake. Church members deserve an authentic believer in God to perform the sacred ordinances of your priesthood offices. Its the ethical thing to do. Engaging in deceit just because you like the "prestige" of having a priesthood office does damage our church community and the sacred trust among members. Think about it, please, and be honest about your doubts and lack of faith.

Cain is Clearly Not Able

2011-11-08T01:49:00.000-08:00

I meant to write about this last week, but I never got around to it. Republican front runner (in some polls), Herman Cain found himself in a scandal when it came to light on Politico that he had signed a settlement agreement with two former employees who had accused him of sexual harassment. This brought to mind the Clarence Thomas - Anita Hill hearings from 20 years ago, in which President Bush (the elder) saw his Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas come under fire for sexually harassing employee Anita Hill. It became a battle of he said / she said and people's opinions rested on who they found more credible (I found Anita Hill more credible).

Cain's response to the scandal has been rather pathetic. He kept changing his story and made a ridiculous claim that he did not sign a settlement, but was merely told of an agreement. Its hard to buy his claim of being ignorant, because he was head of the National Restaurant Association and the settlement amounts were $45,000 to one lady and $35,000 to another lady. This was a year's severance for each and happened in the 1990s. What kind of CEO would allow such large checks to be written to employees without his knowledge? If he truly is that detached from his job, he's not fit to be CEO of America. Granted, the budget of the U.S. is complex and no president knows the full accounting of every cent. However, Cain's denial brings to mind Reagan's infamous denial that he knew anything about weapons being sold to Iran with the money diverted to the Contra rebels in Nicaragua. And we've seen the disastrous results when a president allows his Vice President to make decisions and carry them out. Do we need a president like that?

Cain's wife was supposed to make media appearances but cancelled when this news story broke. It makes you wonder why she doesn't want to go out and defend her husband. It appears that perhaps she had gone through this before and she probably did not want to relive that (I bet Cain had the conversation with his wife when the initial allegations were made and the settlements agreed upon). The women had to sign a non-disclosure agreement as part of the deal, which sucks. Cain defenders get to live in the illusion that their perfect candidate is being falsely accused in order to bring him down. Ironically, I bet many of Cain's supporters were fans of Paula Jones, Gennifer Flowers, and Monica Lewinsky during the Clinton presidency. When the stain is on their candidate, deny, deny, deny! Its all a liberal media conspiracy to bring him down.

And yet, who did Cain blame for leaking the info? None other than fellow Republican Rick Perry! I believe that this came out in the news because the Republican establishment does not want Cain to be the nominee. There is no way they will allow a black man to lead their party's nomination. It leaves the racists in the party no choice. The ultimate nightmare for a racist white Republican (please not that I'm not saying that all Republicans are racist, just that there are racist voters in the Republican party) is having to choose between two black men for president.

To show how absurd the Republicans are, both Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter weighed in on the scandal. Naturally, they use this to defend Cain and lambast the "liberal media." The ultimate irony was uttered by Ann Coulter, who proved how racist she is by her comment, "Our blacks are better than their blacks!" She had said in a rant that it was easy to be a black Democrat, because the majority of African Americans are Democratic voters. She said that it was more difficult to be a black Republican because they risked the wrath and being ostracized by their people. This is patently absurd. Its easy to be a black Republican because the Republican Party is so desperate to show that they aren't racist that they put African American Republicans in prominent positions (Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, Michael Steele, J.C. Watts, Alan Keyes, Herman Cain).

The worst part of Coulter's comment, though, is the use of "our", "their", and "blacks." If she doesn't realize that her statement was racist, then she truly is ignorant. The use of ours and theirs is a sign of ownership, which shows how she thinks. Her mind is still a relic of the slavery days. She thinks parties "own" African Americans. As to the use of the word "blacks", it is no longer an acceptable word to use. We've dropped the use of "yellows" (for Asians), "browns" (for Hispanics), and "reds" (for Native Americans) long ago, yet some still cling to the terms "blacks" and "whites." The acceptable terms for people is identifying by geographic origin of one's race rather than skin colour. Maybe she'll understand that someday, or maybe not. Her use of the word and what she said only brings to mind what Donald Trump had said earlier this year: "I'm good friends with the blacks." I just love hearing racist people use racist language while claiming that they aren't racist. Don't they realize that their words convict them?

As for Cain, I believe that his popularity is shallow. He's only in the race so that teabaggers can delude themselves into thinking that they aren't racist because they support him for president. Yet, when the voting time begins and they slide the curtain on their booth, I bet most of them will end up voting for a white man. Cain is a fool. Just like Alan Keyes before him. Not to mention Michael Steele (who was a disaster as the head of the Republican National Committee). His supporters might think that liberals are being "racist" for not liking him or for having a double standard, but they don't get it. Cain's views represent the narrow-minded, xenophobic views of his party (building an electric fence to kill Mexicans coming into the country? Scaring voters with the spectre of Sharia Law in America? Proposing a ban on hiring Muslims in his administration?). In addition, he has never held political office. He ran for the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate seat in Georgia in 2004 and came in third, behind two white candidates (no surprise in Georgia). When he was CEO of Godfather's Pizza, he put the third rate pizza chain on solid financial footing by eliminating stores and reducing employees (which makes him a job eliminator rather than a job creator). There are many reasons why Cain should not be president. His skin colour has nothing to do with it. He, Michele Bachmann, and Rick Perry seem to be in a race towards the bottom. Who can make the nuttiest, most nonsensical statement and policy position possible?

The best quote I've seen about Cain calls to mind the Biblical story of Cain killing his brother Abel. In the Bible story, Cain was the rebel child and Abel was the angelic one. As people have written online: "Clearly, Cain is not Able." I wholeheartedly agree!

Music Video Monday: Tracy Chapman

2011-11-07T01:28:00.000-08:00

In honour of the Occupy Wall Street movement, I nominate this Tracy Chapman classic as the official anthem of the revolution. I love it! In fact, its been my favourite Tracy Chapman song since I first heard her debut album in the late 1980s.

Its heard to believe that this song is 22 years old (at least from the date the album was released. Chapman probably wrote and sang it years before her debut album was released). Its even more relevant now than it was then. Every time I hear it, I always think about Jesus' ministry. I like how she sings about talking about a revolution sounds like a whisper. It evokes the image of the unseen. People who live on the surface of things don't know the reality on the ground, of what people are really living. This is what happened in Eastern Europe when communism no longer worked and the people were fed up with their living conditions and dared to rise up. When the mass of people rise up, the tiny elite that rule run for cover. You can't hold back the tide of a mass of people demanding justice. The French Revolution, the fall of communism, the Arab spring all attest to this fact.

So, Americans, rise up and revolt! Our time is now. Its time to stop talking about a revolution or whispering it and act. The economy needs to be democratized. If the power elite refuse to live by a code of ethics and integrity, then they should meet the same end as Nicolae Ceausescu, the dictator of Romania who was executed along with his wife on Christmas Day 1989. Its harsh, I know, but if the wealthy class fear one thing, it is death. They have built their heaven on earth because they don't believe in the spiritual heaven. Death would strike fear into their hearts because they believe it to be the end of existence. There's a reason why Jesus had told his followers that "it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven."

The Blue Pearl

2011-11-06T22:49:00.000-08:00

On Saturday, I decided to attend the Body Mind Spirit Expo rather than the business meetings of the Mission Center Conference. I hate that both are held on the same weekend, but having been to the last two Body Mind Spirit Expos, I was not missing this one!

For those who don't know about the Body Mind Spirit Expo, the best way to describe it is a weekend event in which booths are set up from vendors of all types under the umbrella of "New Age spiritualism" and a lot of lectures to choose from. The lectures are about 50 minutes and can be hit or miss. More than a few are "psychic / mediums" offering to give cold readings. This happened at my first selected lecture. The woman started off by telling her life story. She was kind of boring. No one comes to these things to hear their biography. She could use some advice on knowing what to share about her life and what to leave out. Most want to hear enough to establish credibility. When she got around to cold readings, it was interesting to hear what the person's reaction was. After giving readings to a few women, she said that she wanted to give a reading to a man, and there were only two of us in that session. The other guy was older and seemed hesitant. Since I wasn't sure if she was legit or not, I decided, why not?

I went to the front of the room to sit in the chair. She put her hand on my shoulder and said that I'm going to be making a big change or move soon. She said that it was a career change and by move (I asked for clarification), she said that it didn't necessarily mean a move to another city (at this point, I'm not really desiring to move away from Portland), but could be a move to another job (though I love my job, the low pay means that I will not hesitate to move on if I get a better job offer, particularly one that might include travel, which is what I want the most). Then she said that I was due to be in a relationship soon. She said that this would change my life in a big way and she thinks I already met the person. She acknowledged something I have never shared with anyone before. She said, "I know that you are concerned that you might spend the rest of your life alone, but you don't need to worry about that." When she was done, I was stunned because she said exactly the same thing as the psychic I had seen in the spring had told me. Two different women, half a year apart, sharing the same message: career change and relationship. Well, the other one had said "by September" and that didn't happen. I really would like to meet this lady and begin a relationship before the year ends. That's my one wish.

In another session, the psychic lady led us in a group meditation. I prefer guided meditation than self-directed one. I need to be more disciplined about it. However, during this meditation, I was stunned because I saw the most incredibly blue light I have ever seen. It was so beautiful! A dark blue with light shining through. It was intense and so amazing that tears dripped out of my closed eyelids. I've heard that there are scenes of incredible beauty that the body's only natural reaction is to shed some tears. Wow, amazing! I wanted to stay in the brilliance of that light forever! When I told my friend about it later, she asked me what shade of blue and when I said a dark blue, almost indigo. She offered "cobalt" and showed examples of cobalt blue at the Saturday Market. I will concur and say that it was cobalt blue that I saw. Translucent cobalt blue, that is. Later on Saturday evening, I Google-searched what it means to see blue light during meditation and read a few sites that came up. Apparently, this is something that people who meditate strive to see. I've meditated occasionally (not on a regular basis) and have only seen pitch black or a white light. This was the first time I saw a blue light and it was the most beautiful blue I've ever seen. According to various websites that describe this, there's a spiritual theory that this blue light, known as "The Blue Pearl" is the shell of protection for one's soul. To see it is a blessing of meditation. I kind of like that theory!

In another session, a lady spoke about "shoulds" being a problem that we need to be aware of. We need to end our emphasis on "shoulds" and anytime it appears, we need to ask ourselves what might be causing our desires for "shoulds." Though the lady was reading her presentation (and a few people did walk out early on), I guessed that she was probably more comfortable speaking from prepared notes than speaking entirely from memory. Thought its always better to attend a lecture by someone who can speak at length without notes, each person is different and her information was good. I could've used this knowledge during my last job. It might have diffused tense situations. Then again, probably not. Dealing with an OCD control freak is not easy, no matter how reasonable and understanding you try to be.

The final session I attended was true to the previous two Body Mind Spirit Expos that I attended. Each time I attended a lecture by a guy, I ended up regretting it. I don't know what the deal is, but the men who lecture are WEIRD. At the one in the spring, the guy spoke about 2012 and us having to make a choice in February (choosing which portal to walk through). He also made us do a strange ritual and advertised for an expensive initiation ritual he was giving elsewhere that will help us transition during next year's upheaval. I don't know what it was, but I felt that he was a fraud. The one last fall, I had attended a lecture by a guy whose lecture was too philosophical and academic, not to mention boring and circular. Many people walked out of his lecture. I didn't have the guts to and hoped that he would get better, but he never did. He came across to me as someone in love with his own intelligence and his entire lecture seemed designed to show off how smart he is, but many people were just turned off and left.

At this Expo, the final lecture I attended was by a guy who wanted all of us to walk up front and look everyone in the eye and see each others' beauty. A few people did so at his insistence, but I didn't participate and quite a few did not do so either. I'm glad. I thought it was a stupid exercise. I know that it was about getting us out of our comfort zone and having the courage to look strangers into the eye and recognize their beauty, but this exercise would be more effective if we had all day together and was a team-building exercise. For a 50 minute session with people we're likely never to see again, uh, no thanks!

Nevertheless, I left the Expo and headed to the Portland congregation to meet Susan, who came down from Alaska with another delegate from the congregation up there (in Mat-Su Valley, home of Sarah Palin!). We were supposed to go to a Lebanese restaurant for dinner and return for game night. However, when the final session of the evening ended, I mentioned a Thai restaurant that was next to the New Renaissance Bookstore. Susan is a friend I've known for a decade. She had lived in Atlanta when I was there and is cousins with a lady from church who is good friends with my family and currently lives in Peru. The three of us didn't fit in well with the Atlanta North congregation because we're too liberal, non-traditional, and international in our life experiences. In fact, Susan had hiked the entire Appalachian Trail in 2000 and this past summer walked El Camino de Santiago de Compostela. She's well traveled and now lives in Alaska (moved there in August). She drove to Palmer, Alaska in her Prius from Florida! Now that's a road trip!!

The Thai / Lao restaurant we ate in is a Victorian style house. I ate there once a few years ago. This time, I enjoyed it even more because I got to catch up on Susan's life and hers on mine. Nancy was along for the company and was quiet most of the time but I tried to include her in the conversation. Its difficult, though, because I wanted to focus my conversation on Susan and hate excluding people. It takes awhile to get to know someone, so it was kind of awkward for the third wheel. The food, though, was incredible. Susan ordered a lettuce wrap and I had a dish that was called The James Bond something or other. I ended up liking Susan's dish better than my own! Yes, we were able to share each others' plate. Next time I eat at that restaurant, I'm getting the lettuce wrap! It is seriously delicious!

I knew that Susan would love the New Renaissance Bookstore. We spent a lot of time in there and she bought quite a few things: a DVD, a couple meditation CDs, a couple books, and a 2012 journal. She is like me regarding spirituality: open to ideas that aren't Christian. It is so nice to know others in the church who share my spiritual openness. I had no idea what Nancy might have thought of it all. Nancy has lived all her life in Alaska and said that she knows Sarah Palin. Here's the jaw dropper. She said that Sarah is "surprisingly deep." Uh, I seriously doubt that. I've read a lot about that woman and have seen many interviews, her debate performance, and other media appearances. If Sarah Palin is "deep", then I'm Albert Einstein!

We were in the bookstore so long that by the time we made it back to the church, game night was over and it was time to head over to the Southeast Grind for the young adult activity. I knew that Southeast Grind was not a good place for our group of a dozen people. It was crowded, as usual so there was no room for us to sit together and talk. We waited for a section to open up and sat on whatever we could find. I haven't seen Andrew since his wedding in June, so just had to say to him, "May I suggest...?" He laughed. That was the song that was sung by the wedding party (Bridesmaids, Groomsmen, Bridesmen, and Groomswomen) when he was waiting for his bride to walk down the aisle. I love talking with him because he's cool, funny, and smart (his father is a psychology professor at Lewis and Clark College and he has a psychology degree from the church's university, Graceland). I don't get the impression that his wife likes me very much, though. She's beautiful and amazing, but whenever I try to talk with her, she appears to be uncomfortable and wanting to end it as soon as possible. Why do beautiful women hate me so much? Really. I get this a lot. It makes me wonder if she's really shallow. I like her, though, and its upsetting that she seems so uncomfortable talking with me.

There are signs that MAYAs is truly defunct. I could sense in Rachel that she doesn't appear comfortable talking with me as well. She's been rather cold to me in the past few times we've seen each other at church events. My opinion of her has declined anyway, because I had the impression that her involvement in MAYAs was purely to find a church-member husband. Once she found him, she discarded the group for the exclusive relationship. I guess that's to be expected, but it still doesn't sit well with me. Her husband won't even talk to me, either. I noticed this at Andrew and Emily's wedding. I tried to make conversation with him but it was like pulling teeth. I don't get these people at all. What truly pisses me off the most is that I remember what they said at the Vision Project and the dishonesty bugs me. They had complained about the lack of young adults being involved and had even mentioned game night being a good way to get together. Well, a family from the Tuality congregation did offer a game night last year and I was the only one who showed up! My guess is what they really meant is that young adults that they like aren't involved and since they don't seem to like me for whatever reason (perhaps my outspoken political views, perhaps for my open spiritual views that aren't exclusively Christian), they aren't interested in MAYAs anymore or regular Young Adult meetings.

Oh well, their loss. Its not like I lack for a social life. I've moved on from MAYAs, too. After Christine left, I moved on. I became involved in the World Affairs Council Young Professionals discussion group, I've met friends from various political campaigns, I became friends with a few people at the Tuality congregation, and I'm not meeting new people through the Movies and Meaning group sponsored by a Presbyterian Church near where I live. It saddens me that others don't value me the way I value them, but its not surprising. I've lived long enough in my body to know that there are shallow people who won't like me no matter what, and there are true friends who value my friendship. Its the greatest irony of my life that I am close to four of my Mormon friends from BYU than I am to members of the MAYAs, who are fellow church members. This is probably a big reason why I'm post-religion / trans-religion.

By the time I hit the bed on Saturday night, I realized that I had experienced a perfect day! I was ecstatic about the psychic's reading, the Blue Pearl, re-connecting with old friends, and being among church members (even if some of them don't like me much). Because of the joy of seeing so many church members I know and not having enough time to talk with all of them as much as I wanted to, the pain of the past has officially dissipated for me. Last year, when I went to the Portland Congregation, all I could feel was emotional pain. That was due to the fact that my memories of Christine were still too fresh. I associate that congregation with her since she was the reason I attended that unfriendly congregation from 2007 through 2009. I'm glad that that ghost has been exorcised. I still won't attend a regular church service there, though, but at least I don't feel emotional pain when I attend the Mission Center Conference, which is held at that congregation.

On Sunday, after the awesome church service (at Mission Center Conference, its a mini-reunion in which church members from all over the Greater Pacific Northwest Mission Center come to Portland, so I get to see people I haven't seen in a year or since the last Mission Center event, such as Bend Institute or the Young Adult Retreat), I led Sharon and Nancy to Cafe Yumm! for lunch, then a tour of Occupy Portland camp, and finally to the Saturday (and Sundays, too!) Market. I was stunned by how many empty spaces there were compared to the last time I walked through in the spring. This is a bad sign. I've never seen this market place with open space for booths. Obviously, the economy is affecting the artisans and their business. But I did see a few things I want to get before they close on Christmas Eve (I need a fleece face mask for a long rainy and cold winter of waiting for three buses on my daily commute).

After walking the marketplace and returning them to their car at Lloyd Center, I bid farewell to Susan and Nancy. Susan said that she might see about living in Portland next summer. She's a physical therapist with a contract that only covers the school year, so that means she'll have to find a job for summer and she might want to come to work in Portland. If she decides to stay in Alaska next summer, I may go visit her for a week. Not enough time to explore Alaska, but enough to give a taste (and you can bet that if I visit, I will be checking out the city hall in Wasilla and go on a driveby of the Palin property).

So ends a great weekend!

Remember, Remember the 5th of November!

2011-11-05T00:56:00.000-07:00

"Remember, remember the fifth of November and the gun powder treason and plot..." So began the famous quote regarding a "terrorist" known as Guy Fawkes, who attempted to blow up the Houses of Parliament in London, England in 1605. Each year, supposedly, English people burn in effigy Guy Fawkes in commemoration to the failed plot. This does not make sense, though. Why would you keep the memory alive of a failed terrorist plot? Such a thing tends to make a folklore "hero" out of Guy Fawkes, especially if people in the United Kingdom know 5 November as "Guy Fawkes Day."

Americans only know Guy Fawkes through a film by the creators of The Matrix, the mysterious Wachowski brothers, who based their film on the graphic novel, V For Vendetta. This is one of my favourite films from 2006. It was released at the right time, when President George W. Bush's popularity was in the 40% approval ratings (post Hurricane Katrina, he never saw his polls above the 50% mark) and many people began questioning his policies. When I saw V For Vendetta in the theaters, I was struck by the thought, "This is one of the most subversive movies ever made!" Its amazing that it got made at all, as the allusions to the Bush Administration were not quite subtle. In fact, a part of me wonders if this film's depiction of the British government being the actual culprit behind some devastating terrorist attacks gave rise to the 9/11 "truthers" movement.

We never quite know how hides behind the Guy Fawkes mask, but in the years since this film's release, the mask has become quite popular. The hacker group known as Anonymous wears the Guy Fawkes mask. Now, the Occupy Wall Street movement and the local Occupy movements around the world, have witnessed a few protestors in Guy Fawkes mask. This is not accidental. I believe that twenty-five years from now when we Generation Xers look back on this moment in history, historians will point to the film V For Vendetta as one of the most influential films of all time. When one decides to wear the Guy Fawkes mask, they are showing solidarity with Anonymous or Occupy Wall Streat (or both). These are strange days we're living in. Make no mistake, Guy Fawkes was a terrorist. However, as the famous quote goes: "When people fear the government, you have tyranny. When government fears the people, you have democracy." What brings fear to governments around the world? Massive protests and a complete refusal to budge one inch in the name of justice. When one has lost a great amount of dignity and the injustices pile on, of course a figure like Guy Fawkes would appeal to people.

Thanks to the catchy opening line, I am able to remember, remember the 5th of November. Not for Guy Fawkes, though. As it turns out, two of my friends celebrate their birthday today. What a great day to be born, because it makes things easier for their friends to remember, thanks to V For Vendetta!

M. Night Shyamalan's "Devil"

2011-11-02T01:16:00.000-07:00

On Halloween, I decided to watch a scary movie, since I rarely watch this genre of film and think its okay to allow myself to watch something that might make me jump on the one night of the year that is all about spooks. I had requested the movies Devil and Scream 4 from Netflix, but only Devil arrived, so that was my choice.

If you have not seen this movie and you intend to, I would not recommend reading this blog post any further because spoilers will be revealed. So, you've been warned.

Devil was released in theaters last year, but I did not go see it, partly because of the creepy factor, but mostly because I do not trust M. Night Shyamalan's story telling abilities anymore (The Happening was truly awful and I never saw The Lady in the Water because I heard nothing but awful things about that movie). However, the strange thing about Devil is that M. Night is not the director. He's not even the screenplay writer! So why is his name attached? Because the movie is based on a story by M. Night Shyamalan! This is like author James Patterson getting credit for stories that other authors write for him. Its all about the "brand name" and M. Night's brand tends to fall under the supernatural, things aren't as they seem, with a twist (or two). I liked Shyamalan's The Sixth Sense, Signs, and The Village. I even liked Unbreakable when I saw it, but the movie left a bad residue in my mind.

Out of the three films of his that I like, I would say that The Village is my favourite because it is the perfect allegory for the Bush Administration. He had said in an interview that it was a political film, which might confuse some people, since there is not politics in the movie. But, if you're a metaphorical thinker like I am, then you understand the message he was trying to convey and it was absolutely brilliant. I saw that film in the theater and I could tell from the audience reaction that they did not understand nor liked it (but a lot of this was due to the deceptive trailer for the film, which was false advertising). I think that film was the beginning of the end for him, and then his arrogance in making The Lady in the Water, which bombed, alienated a lot of people in Hollywood. He was supposed to direct the film version of the awesome novel (and book club favourite) The Life of Pi, but that fell through. I thought he was the perfect director for the movie, but now I think he would only just mess that story up.

When I heard the premise of Devil, I was intrigued. To sum up the movie, it goes something like this: five strangers are stuck in an elevator of a high rise office building. One of them is actually the Devil. Creepy, right? Being stuck in an elevator has to be on most people's fear list. I can't imagine a greater hell than being stuck in an elevator with Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and Herman Cain, but I digress.

The film is interesting, as it begins with a police officer investigating a suicide. As the voice over narration says, the devil appears whenever there is a suicide and then goes to work. By the end of it, all the principle players will end up dead. While the police officer is a no nonsense kind of guy and looks at things logically, one of the security employees in the highrise building is superstitious and starts seeing the devil's hand in the events that transpire when they learn that the elevator is stuck. For the people in the elevator, every time the lights go out, one of them ends up dead. This creates a panic and the police officer who is investigating the suicide ends up being called to investigate the murder(s).

As I watched the movie, I was thinking that the trick was going to be that none of the five were the devil. But when it comes down the last person standing, the twist arrives. The devil's motives are rather lame. But the message was actually a good one. So, despite the faulty delivery, the take home message was impressive. The narrator is a Hispanic building security guy and I was wondering how he knew so much about the devil. A signature M. Night Shyamalan reveal was when the security guy tells the police officer that nothing is what it seems, as they are all participants in the drama for a reason. As it turns out, the last person alive in the elevator takes responsibility for a drunken hit and run he was involved in five years earlier, which killed the wife and child of the police officer. The devil disappears after the guy takes responsibility for his past actions and in the end, the police officer forgives the guy who had killed his family.

So, what was the message this movie was meant to convey? What I got out of it was that it is a message for each one of us. We need to take responsibility for our actions and not blame others or even blaming the devil. And apparently, the devil does not want us to forgive, either. Though I don't believe there is such an entity as the devil, I've always been fascinated with Faustian tales since childhood. The first novel I wrote in the summer before my senior year in high school was a Faustian tale (a woman marries a man that the entire town loves and who appears perfect, but in reality, he's Satan). I kind of want to write a better story about the devil because I keep thinking about how our economic system actually embodies the values we associate with the devil: greed, lust, selfishness, lack of compassion, materialism, love of money, ungratefulness, and blaming the victims for their lot in life. I find it ironic that many of the people who claim to be Christian or outright "Jesus freaks" also are die hard supporters of capitalism because in their minds, if you aren't a capitalist, then you are a communist. There's no middle way for these folks. You're either this or that. Well, what if capitalism was a Satanic economic system? After all, in the famous story about Jesus facing three temptations by Satan in the desert, the final one was about bowing to Satan to gain power over the entire world. Dick Cheney appears to have made such a deal (who has five or six heart attacks but doesn't die? Cheney is the only one I've heard who's had that many and lived to commit more evil).

I was intrigued by the film enough to post a question on the church's Facebook wall. When I mentioned not believing that Satan exists, a well meaning and conservative church member expressed concern and bore a testimony that she knows Satan is real because he appeared in her bedroom. Oh my God, really? Her response sparked a debate. I asked her how she knew he was the actual Satan and she claimed that she just knew like the way you know your own mother has entered the room even if your back is to her. I'm not buying that, though. But it did start an interesting dialogue. At the same time as I was commenting on that thread of dialogue, there was another thread of dialogue on the same Facebook wall of the church, in which a conservative church member claims that he has an actual interpersonal relationship with Jesus and he went so far as to say that Jesus was more real to him than I was to him! What's with all the kooks.

So, that made for some interesting dialogues. A woman trying to convince me that Satan is real because he appeared in her room (she did not share what he was doing there) and a man trying to convince me that Jesus told him that the Book of Mormon is a real, historical document (and not a concoction created and plagiarized by Joseph Smith, Jr.). In my experience, it seems to be the case that conservative minded people are more likely to claim to have actual visitations by Satan or Jesus. Its not possible that their imaginations are running wild or that perhaps some other spiritual being appeared to them (in all my readings regarding the spiritual realm, there are malicious earth bound spirits out there who can and do pretend to be other people through games such as the Ouija board). Since conservatives tend to be authoritarian in nature and don't like debate where everyone is viewed as equal, it doesn't surprise me. In the conservative mind, there always has to be an authoritarian figure that lays down the law, closing any debate. This is why conservatives love to quote the Bible, hoping to settle any argument while getting infuriated because final authority doesn't work on liberal minded people. So, for a conservative who claims to be visited by Jesus, its not possible in their minds that it might just be their personal spirit guide. What is most interesting about people who claim that Jesus is a real live being in their lives, is that their version of Jesus seems to endorse their prejudices or whatever worldview they have. I find this a credibility killer.

As for the movie, though it had some interesting moments and a good message, I won't be seeing it again. I still have no idea why M. Night Shyamalan did not direct this film. He gets over the title credit without having to do the work! But perhaps that's a good thing. After The Happening, I simply do not trust Shyamalan to carry a story logically. There were so many absurdities involved with The Happening that I'm surprised it ever got made. Oh well. I heard the next film in this new "M. Night Stories" series is going to be called Reincarnate. If its about what it sounds like, I may actually see this in the theater. I think Shyamalan has interesting and thought provoking ideas, with a spiritual view of the world ("things aren't as they seem" is his common theme). Unfortunately, though, he really needs to work on his delivery of the stories. I'd love to help him out.

Happy Halloween!

2011-10-31T02:02:00.000-07:00

Check out this awesome light show set to Michael Jackson's classic "Thriller." I guess Christmas isn't the only holiday where people decorate their homes with lights for passerbys to enjoy. I've never seen anything like this before. They get points for clever creativity!

Hope you have a Happy Halloween! I'll be watching Devil instead of passing out candy. I'll post a review of this year old film from the mind of director M. Night Shyamalan. Stay tuned and stay safe!

Finding Meaning in "Finding Joe"

2011-10-30T01:19:00.000-07:00

On Friday after work, I headed downtown to see the documentary film Finding Joe, which was supposed to be the Movies and Meaning selection this month, but due to conflicting schedules, no one could make it and I ended up going by myself. I could have waited, but this screening had a Q & A with the director afterwards, so how cool is that? The director, Patrick Takaya Soloman, was only there for two showings on Friday, so I decided that I could not wait.

First, though, I ate dinner at Chipotle's and then decided to check out the Occupy Portland camp, which I have been meaning to do for a couple weeks now. I will write more about this movement and my impressions in another post. It was great to see and my vibe was definitely in a near blissful stage. If I lived downtown still, I'd probably spend nearly every evening at the camp, hanging out with people and having meaningful conversations and perhaps even attend strategy sessions. Because I live so far out (a 45 minute bus ride one way), I have to be mindful of not missing the last bus if I were to hang out for hours. But that's another post for another day.

The showing I attended was practically sold out. I wasn't expecting much, as I've seen enough "documentaries" of a New Agey / New Though spiritual bent and they are pretty much all the same: take a spiritual topic, interview a bunch of well-known practitioners from a diverse field, have a minimal acting sequence, throw into blender and presto! Instant New Agey documentary! Just this year, I've seen I Am and Happy.

Finding Joe is about the ideas explored and developed by Joseph Campbell, a mythologist who was best known for coining the phrase "Follow your bliss." The film is less about him than it is about The Hero's Journey. The film even illustrates the Hero's Journey through a group of kids acting out some interesting stories from mythology (such as the Golden Buddha of Thailand, and others). While it was kind of charming, it was also "low frills" (and likely, very inexpensive) entertainment.

The use of children to act out the mythological tales and the principles of the Hero's Journey, I guessed that the director is aiming his documentary towards the younger generation, which truly needs to learn about this way of looking at their lives. I wish I knew about the Hero's Journey in elementary school. It might have helped me deal with some grief better (particularly bullying and racist xenophobia). But on the other hand, I experienced life and gained an understanding before I knew what I needed to look for. Once I discovered Joseph Campbell in the late 1990s, I could relate.

There's an actual circular chart that illustrates The Hero's Journey. I don't have it handy at the moment, but the main stages includes: The Call to Adventure, the facing of one's dragons, the belly of the whale, apotheosis, and the return. There are quite a few more stages in between those ones. What is important to understand is that our lives are a constant circle of experiences. Forget linear time and think circular. Each cycle we endure brings us a new understanding and contributes to our own evolutionary growth.

While I did find the film to be inspiring and I enjoyed hearing from Deepak Chopra, skateboarding legend Tony Hawks, surfing legend Laird Hamilton, and a few other people I've never heard of. Their comments are peppered throughout the documentary. There was so much good stuff, I wish I had taken notes on what they said so I can refer back to it later. Unfortunately, though, I thought the documentary stuck to the surface of things for the most part. It was not incredibly detailed or thought provoking enough. It was basically made for those who have not been exposed to Joseph Campbell and wanted to get the Cliff Notes version, which is pretty watered down.

During the Q & A, the director explained that he wanted to make a film where someone without a high school education could understand it and it is his hope that schools will play the film for children. He has been met with resistance in California, which is kind of surprising in one way and not in another way. The feel good, inspirational qualities might be an easy sell, if not for the fear of many school boards of pissing off the evangelical parent, who would likely consider this film to be "evil".

I think it would be a great idea for children to see this documentary and let it fire their imaginations. However, adults might find themselves wanting more depth. I certainly did. If this were a college course on Joseph Campbell, this documentary would be a basic primer, "The Hero's Journey 101." Hopefully the Movies and Meaning group will see this film. I'll skip it and attend the discussion group just to hear what the others have to say about it. I'm betting that they will likely find this film a little too much on the shallow end of spirituality. That's the trouble when you dumb down a movie so that people with low IQs will watch the film and possibly learn something new.

Flashback Friday: Eros Ramazzotti

2011-10-28T01:30:00.000-07:00

Today, Italy's most popular and successful singer Eros Ramazzotti turns 48 years old. I first heard about him in 1988 in my last year in Germany (as an Air Force dependent) but I did not hear his music until 1991, when I was stationed in La Maddalena, Sardinia. I bought the cassette tape of his album In Ogni Senso in the fall of 1991 (twenty years ago, now!) and listened to it a lot in the last two months of the year. In fact, even today, whenever I hear the album, I'm transported back to my first Christmas alone, my first Christmas in Italy. Its not a Christmas album, but in my memory, it certainly evokes Christmas images for me.

I learned from the beautiful Italian front desk ladies at Calabro Hall barracks that the album title In Ogni Senso means "In Every Sense." This phrase is used in every single song on the album, which I thought was brilliant. In fact, this album is probably in my Top Five foreign language albums (behind Indochine's Le Baiser, France Gall's Babacar, and Monte Negro's Bailando Con El Presidente and ahead of Falco's 3). Its truly a great album and one that I have used as background mood music as I eat a special dinner. Would love to try this on a lady when I cook her a meal. The melodies and the Italian language just exudes romantic vibrations. Who wouldn't fall in love with this album playing in the background?

Eros has one of the most unique singing voices I've ever heard (very distinct, like Youssou N'Dour's, who has the most unique singing voice, I think). I don't know much else about him, but he definitely looks Italian. In 1998, his greatest hits CD was released in the U.S., which surprised me. On the disc was a duet with Tina Turner, "Cosas della Vita," which reminded me of the bilingual duet between Youssou N'Dour and Neneh Cherry, "7 Seconds" (in French and English, which was a huge hit with me in 1994). I love the concept of bilingual duets (Eros singing in Italian and Tina Turner singing in English). I wish more international singers would do this! This particular song sounds like it should've been a James Bond theme song and is worlds better than Tina Turner's own "Goldeneye."

While I pretty much like every song on In Ogni Senso, these in particular are my personal favourites: "Dammi la Luna" (I believe it means "Gimme the Moon"), "Canzoni Lontane", and "Cara Prof" ("Dear Professor"). The music video is of his song, "Se Bastasse una Canzone" which is a beautiful ballad.

I wish Eros Ramazzotti had found chart and radio success in the United States. Its one of the worst flaws of our xenophobic culture. When I was in the Navy, so many sailors absolutely REFUSED to listen to any music that was not sung in English because they were afraid that the singer was singing anti-American songs! How's that for brainwashed? It always baffled me, if not angered me. How ignorant to think that foreigners only sing in their native languages because they are singing about anti-American / subversive stuff knowing full well that we won't understand what they are singing about! The reality is that people sing in their native languages and its usually about the same kind of themes and ideas as any song in English. I don't know much Italiano, but I can guarantee that Eros Ramazzotti's songs are mostly about love. You can hear the emotions in his voice. That's what's so brilliant about his music: the somewhat somber melody and his unique vocals add up to incredibly romantic music. This is the CD that I would play the next time I have a romantic dinner with a lady (well, either this or another favourite Italian singer Antonio Venditti).

In case you need an equivalent comparison to a musician you know, I would say that Eros Ramazzotti is Italy's Bryan Adams and Antonio Venditti is Italy's Phil Collins. If you like either of those singers, you should check out the Italian versions. Nothing sounds more beautiful than Italian being sung. It is the most romantic language in the world (yes, even more than French and I say this as a big time Francophile).

Hope you enjoy the taste of Eros' music in the video above. Enjoy it in every sense of your being. This is beautiful pop at its best. Buon compleanno, Signor Ramazzotti!

Remembering Allen Schindler

2011-10-27T01:59:00.000-07:00

Nineteen years ago on this day, U.S. sailor Allen Schindler was brutally murdered in a public restroom at a park just outside the U.S. Naval base in Sasebo, Japan. His death sent shockwaves throughout the Navy. He was murdered for being gay. I don't remember if the news of his murder played into the 1992 election, but one of the issues in that election was then Governor Bill Clinton's promise to end the ban on homosexuals serving in the United States Military. This made Clinton very unpopular with the military (along with his being a Democrat and avoiding the draft during the Vietnam War). I was in the Navy, stationed in La Maddalena, Sardinia. At the time, I supported the military's ban on homosexuals because I believed what the government stated was the reason for the ban: homosexuals were a blackmail / security risk and they affected unit cohesion.

However, news of Schindler's brutal murder was one of two incidents that caused me to question the ban. I did not really know any homosexuals, so it was easy to fear and even demonize them. Guys often made jokes about gay people or situations that might appear gay. It was all in good fun. Basic Training was full of sexual innuendos and insinuations. For example, the Company Commanders told us that the front flap on our Crackerjack uniform pants was called a "Marine dinner plate." This got a lot of laughs from everyone in the company. Also in Basic Training, when we were told to drop and do pushups or just to hold the up pushup position, guys would arch their backs so that the derriere is the highest point, which seemed to put less pressure on our arms than maintaining a flat posture. Whenever the Company Commander saw this arched position (in Yoga, I believe its called "Downward Dog"), they would ask the sailor if he was "advertising." During our evening shower when 40 guys were huddled around two shower trees, there were nervous jokes about dropping the soap. So, in such an atmosphere, its easy to understand why most guys would have an intolerant view of homosexuals in the ranks.

I did not know any gay people at the time (well, except for one sailor who propositioned me when I was drunk, which scared the crap out of me because I was in a vulnerable position of being smaller and alone in my barracks room) and I did not care to know any. I even had the view that I would end a friendship if I learned that any of my friends were gay. Though I was of the view that I did not want any gay people in my life (mostly it was based on the fear that they were obsessed with sex and would rape me if they had the opportunity), I was more of the live and let live variety. Thus, I was shocked to hear some guys views of wanting to commit acts of violence on any gay person. I did not understand this mentality, either.

The murder of Allen Schindler put a human face on the issue. Though I did not know him, the location of his death helped me to find a "connection" with him. In Yeoman "A" School, I had scored high enough on the first two tests to get second choice in a class of about 23 sailors for our duty stations. The way the Navy gave us duty stations was determined by a billet sheet in our "A" School class. If we had 23 students in class, the billet sheet had 23 duty stations. The person with the highest GPA got to pick first and it went down from there. So basically, I had my choice of duty stations. The person with the lowest GPA got what was left over. I studied my ass off to make sure that I got to pick first. My score was actually tied with another sailor and the tie-breaker was the date we entered the Navy. The other guy was in an earlier Boot Camp company than I was, so he got first choice. He picked a stateside shore duty billet. On the list were four overseas assignments. When I joined the Navy, I wanted duty in Hawaii or Japan. However, Hawaii was not on the billet sheet, but Sasebo, Japan was. I would have picked it if there was a better ship. I did not want to serve on a "Gator freighter" (the derogatory term for any Navy ship that has a large population of Marines on it, such as a Tank Landing Ship, which is what the duty station in Japan was). There were three duty stations in Italy (Naples, La Maddalena Sardinia, and Sigonella Sicily) and I leaned heavily towards Naples, but another guy who had a GPA below mine really wanted it and my parents emphasized that I should pick Sardinia because people actually vacation there and they heard good things about it.

Had there been a better ship in Sasebo (like a Guided Missile Cruiser or Frigate), I would've likely went to Japan instead of Sardinia. I'm so glad I did not have that choice, because I met so many great people in Italy and can't imagine my life without them in my life (especially the friends I made in France). However, had I went to Sasebo, I might have crossed paths with Allen Schindler. Would we have been friends? He was a Radioman, which meant he was fairly intelligent (I learned in the Navy that the AFQT score on the ASVAB test is a good measure of intelligence and who I would get along with. Certain rates require a high score and Yeoman and Radioman were among those). Schindler did some dumb things, though, such as broadcasting an unauthorized radio signal throughout the Pacific Fleet announcing that he was gay (remember, this was during the outright ban, which automatically got you processed out).

In 1994, Esquire Magazine had an in depth article about the murder and the guys who committed the murder. It was a gruesome read, especially the abuse suffered by the murderers when they were children (I remember reading that one of them was locked in the closet by his dad and if he soiled himself, he would be beat up by his abusive father). The abuse suffered by the murderers is no excuse for the brutal murder they committed on Schindler, but it does make you think about the ripple effect. We never know how people will act to others and what responsibility we might share in pushing them one way or another. You can read more about the incident on Wikipedia's entry.

What the murder of Schindler did for me was show me the ugliness of homophobia. As I wrote above, at the time (I was 20 in 1992) I wanted nothing to do with homosexuals. I didn't want them as friends or to know any, but I also did not the kind of hatred that other guys had for homosexuals. I was more neutral. What was it about gay people that made some men go violent? As I learned psychology years later, there are concepts such as projection, or where the thing that most annoys us in another person is something that we are neglecting to deal with in our own actions or beliefs. If someone can trigger a passionate reaction in you, that means its an obvious issue for you. Perhaps its no surprise, then, that the Navy portrayed the murderers of Allen Schindler as repressed homosexuals themselves. Who knows if they are or not, but you do have to wonder about the intensity of their hatred to do what they did to Allen Schindler. Its sad to contemplate that his life ended at 22 years. He barely begun to live life. His murderers deprived him of a full life.

The murder of Allen Schindler was enough to inspire the direction of my novel (which I am hoping will find a publisher soon since the zeitgeist seems to be manifesting the ideas I present in my novel), which deals with the questions of what it means to be a man in a world where women expect equality and homosexuals challenge the notion of masculinity / femininity. For centuries, homosexuals were thought to be effeminate and any man who was less than masculine was often suspected of being gay, even if they might not be. Did the murderers of Allen Schindler feel more "manly" after they ended the life of the detested homosexual in their ranks?

The second incident that influenced a change in my views regarding the ban on homosexuals serving in the military happened on a luxury bus waiting at the pier in Naples, Italy. In front of me sat two guys and I overheard their conversation. One of them mentioned that some of the streetwalkers in Naples were really transsexuals or transvestites. The other offered the suggestion that they should go looking for them so they can beat them up. I was stunned to hear that comment because here we were in Naples, with opportunities to see many different tourist sites (Mount Vesuvius, Pompeii, Capri, Sorrento, the Amalfi Coast, outdoor markets in Naples or even day trips to Rome by train), and these sailors wanted to go out of their way in search of some person they don't even know minding his own business and "teach him a lesson!" I did not understand this mindset at all. One thing that has also been true in my life, when I see someone acting ugly, I run the other way. If this was what homophobia looked like, I did not want to be like them. I guess I just never saw the point in targeting a hated minority group to deal with one's anger issues. Thus began the long process towards tolerance and acceptance of homosexuals as human beings who don't need to change their behaviour.

So, thank you Allen Schindler for being one of my teachers from afar. Its heartbreaking to read about your last night on earth and how brutally violent it came to an end. I hope your passage to the spiritual realm was swift and painless. When my novel finds a publisher and appears in bookstores, I plan to mention how your story influenced me in a good way, how I saw the ugliness of others and did not want to be like them. We never got to meet and be friends, but the memory of your existence will never be forgotten. Nineteen years after your death, the military no longer has a ban on homosexuals. It was a long process, but a sign of progress. As people feel more secure about their own sexuality and not threatened by those who are different, there will be less controversy and resistance. The world is getting better, inch by inch. Rest in peace, good sailor.

Birthday Wishes to Natalie Merchant

2011-10-26T01:31:00.000-07:00

Today is the 48th birthday of singer Natalie Merchant. Since yesterday's post was about a rude lady who had no attitude of gratitude in my dealings with her (when I tried to explain our process, she interrupted many times and was quite rude about it), I couldn't help but think of this beautiful song by Natalie Merchant, the former lead singer of the alternative 80s band 10,000 Maniacs.

In my final sermon at the Orem congregation in 1999, I had this song played as a thank you to the congregation for being there in Provo, as a beacon on the hill (with the three visible crosses that annoyed Mormons who drove past it). I don't think I would've survived BYU without their support and generosity. One young lady who had attended our church's college in Iowa, Graceland, told me afterwards that she did not know that you could play a secular pop song in a worship service and this supposedly inspired her. I had given a sermon that Sunday, as well. It was about what I learned at BYU. Some Mormon visitors had even attended the service (I did not know them, though).

This song is just beautiful and was released during my college years. She had scored a few solo hits earlier in the 1990s with "Carnival", "Jealousy" and "Wonder". I first fell in love with her voice in the fall of 1988 when I heard the 10,000 Maniacs song "What's the Matter Here?" In 1996, Chelsea Clinton had suggested to her dad that he select the 10,000 Maniacs song "These Are Days" for his reelection campaign theme song. Because of that, every time I hear that song, I think of Clinton's second term, when the economy was booming, when the music on the radio was still worth listening to, when gasoline was around $1 a gallon, and when the future looked so promising. Yeah, it was easy to be optimistic in those days. Such a great song. Perfect for a campaign.

I don't know much about Natalie Merchant, but she has a similar look to actresses Barbara Hershey, Frances O'Connor, Janeane Garofalo, and perhaps even Parker Posey. Interestingly enough, this happens to be "the look" that I find most attractive. I would love to meet a single lady in Portland who has a similar look (or a similar look to Audrey Tautou). I don't know why I find this look to be the most attractive, but recently, a friend on Facebook had posted a video of some Aussie ladies swimsuit competition. He thought I would appreciate it. I watched and it didn't really do much for me. Yeah, they look nice and have hot bodies, but what I find attractive is much deeper. In the case of someone like Natalie Merchant, I just love her look and her "vibe." There's something about her that I can't explain, but she is an attractive woman. She seems like a "Bohemian"-type, as well. I even noticed in the "These Are Days" video that she's wearing an ankle-length skirt. Yeah, for a couple decades now, I think a woman in an ankle length skirt is truly attractive. The style just denotes "class" to me. Sure, the mini skirt might get me to steal some quick looks, but it is the ankle-length skirt that denotes a classy style to me. This is the woman worth knowing!

In honour of Natalie Merchant's birthday, I'm dedicating this song to the difficult and greedy woman I recently dealt with via phone at work over royalties that she is due. Hopefully, she will learn the lesson of gratitude someday. The kind of gratitude that Natalie displays in the lyrics of this beautiful song. Now that is a beautiful woman!

Greed or Gratitude?

2011-10-25T23:42:00.001-07:00

Last week, I finally dealt with my first difficult person in the performance of my job duties. Since hired on last December, I have been correcting the mistakes made by my predecessor. For the first six months on the job, it was pretty much cleaning up his mess. Once I finished and got up to speed, I really thought I had everything fixed. Yet, occasionally, when I least expect it, I come across yet another mistake made by him. I'm always stunned by it. How can he have made so many errors? These are little mistakes that are a pain to fix. Mistakes like wrong codes, which affect the accuracy of the reports I have to print each quarter. It's obvious that the guy was not a detail-oriented person or had pride in his work. He was essentially sloppy and careless. He should have never been in that position. Nor should about four or five people before him. In fact, I think about how much better off the company would be and I would've been had we found each other in my first couple weeks in Portland in 2006, when I was looking for a job. We would have saved each other FOUR YEARS of grief!!

Anyhow, one of my clean-ups of my predecessor's mess is that many royalty payments were not made to songwriters because the guy was too lazy to send out an independent contract. In my job, I'd say that about 75% of the songs I have to license are done through an independent agency that sends us the contracts. Its all quick clicks of the button on the screen. For songs that aren't done through that particular website, I have to print up a two-page contract. This involves searching for the publisher online and typing over the template with the appropriate information and mailing (or emailing) the contract. A little more work, but nothing difficult. However, while I have never met my predecessor, I can tell that he was probably a lazy guy who had no pride in work. He simply did not care and songwriters did not get paid.

One of my joys in the job is contacting a songwriter who has no idea that he or she has money owed to them. They are generally thrilled to learn that they will be getting some money. Most of the time, its a small amount. But one guy got a nice three digit amount and was very happy and grateful for it, even though I wish his songs had sold even more so he could get a four figure check. But, when the songwriter is happy to get anything from us, it does make me feel good in my job. As I told people who've asked what I do, I usually say: "It's a good karma job."

Last week, though, I finally had my first difficult person. Instead of being happy to know that she has money coming to her, she was very demanding and rude. She wanted to know why she hadn't been paid sooner if the album had been out for a year. Because I had only discovered my predecessor's error during this month, it was too late to include what we owe her on the third quarter reports, which have already been run, printed, and tabulated. This woman wanted to be paid and she wanted to be paid NOW!!!

To make matters worse, my supervisor asked me to run a report on that particular song to see if there were other albums that it appeared on and did not have a agreement for. When I did that, I learned that there were five more albums that my predecessor neglected to do. So, that's five more agreements I had to send to this lady. As expected, her response was even more livid when she learned that we had five more albums in which we did not pay her royalties. Great, my predecessor has really made the company look bad because of his lazy ass. This pisses me off, especially when I was the one who discovered the discrepancy and brought it to the copyright holder's attention. Instead of being greeted by a thrilled and grateful person, I get chewed out for my predecessor's errors.

It's obvious that this woman has no sense of gratitude. She's all "gimme gimme gimme" like that ABBA song and "now now now!" This is nothing more than GREED, not gratitude. I actually feel sorry for her. In fact, she so ticked me off, and my supervisor off, and even the guy who worked in my job five years ago and is in a different job now. According to the files, he had requested several times an agreement from this lady for the same song on a different album. She never bothered to respond! Now, she wants her money NOW when five years ago, she didn't even bother? Wow. It's probably the result of the economy. She wants money wherever she can get it. What she doesn't realize, though, is that we don't have to use her song on any of the mixed CDs we produce. In fact, after dealing with her for three days and her rude, demanding tone, I have recommended to the company that we no longer use her song on any future release. Why should we help her earn money if she's going to behave this way? There is a reason why people should express gratitude. People will want to help you more and be on your side, rather than alienating people.

I take this experience as an important lesson, because when it comes to the principles of the Universal Law of Attraction, the one advice everyone gives is to show gratitude every day, in every thought and action. As the novelist Paulo Coehlo wrote: "the entire universe will conspire to make things happen" once you do. Oprah Winfrey had recommended people keep a gratitude journal every day. Counting blessings and thanking people for their kindness, thoughtfulness, and good actions is the way to get results. Not that you should expect anything in return, though. Its simply that having a grateful heart when others help you or do something for you, there is an energy boost or connection that makes this world a little bit better place for everyone around. Too bad that this greedy, ungrateful lady doesn't understand the principle of gratitude. Because of her attitude, she's losing out on future royalties. The company has thousands of songs to choose from in making CD compilations, so we can easily do without her only song.

Something to think about when you're dealing with others. Don't piss them off when they are trying to help you or to give you something!

Music Video Monday: Snoop Dogg

2011-10-24T00:11:00.000-07:00

Last week, Calvin Broadus reached the milestone age of 40. He's better known as rap star Snoop Dogg. I had no idea that we were born in the same year. Dang, if we went to high school together, we would've been in the same graduating class. That's hard to imagine. I often think about stuff like that when I meet people and find out that we are the same age or graduated in the same year. Would we have been friends in high school?

Snoop Dogg hit the big time in 1993 / 1994. His first single, "Who Am I? (What's My Name?)" played a lot on European MTV (I was living in Sardinia, Italy at the time with the U.S. Navy and watched MTV a lot in 1993 and 1994 when the barracks got satellite TV piped into individual rooms). This music video amused me because of the use of dogs and making them move to the beat of the song when they are in the bar, trying to look hip and cool. I'm a sucker for the personification of animals. I also loved how they morphed a cocker spaniel into a lady, and Snoop Dogg as a Doberman? Awesome! When I was in Italy, an African American girl I was smitten with laughed at the part of the video when an obese lady ran off with a plate of food when the dogg pound invaded the picnic. She said of that particular image, "Oh no she didn't!" It was funny how she said it in response to that scene.

The song has a great rhythm and sound to it. It got bounce and hip hop rarely gets better than this. Snoop Dogg was a protege of Dr. Dre, best known for popularizing (if not coining) the term "Chronic" as a euphemism for marijuana. Though I did not agree with Snoop's promotion of drug usage and the exploitative / kind of vulgar rap lyrics, I have to admit that I can't help but laugh because he has a great, mischievous sense of humour. Anyone who makes me laugh basically earns my loyalty and admiration for life. This presented a problem when around the time this song was tearing up the airwaves, Snoop was arrested for being an accessory to murder, which is a serious charge. It seems to be a part of rap culture, though. The only way to gain legitimacy among the urban fans. Though I'm bothered by it, I can't say that it stopped me from listening to his music.

His debut album, Doggystyle, had an ugly cover drawing, but the songs are pretty fresh. Its a definite musical feast for the ears and irresistible. Too bad there's not an instrumental version of the album, because that's enough to love this album. The lyrics, though funny, makes it difficult to play the album in public without someone likely to get offended. I particularly like "Ain't No Fun". Mostly for the melody, but the lyrics are also amusing (many blatant references to fellatio).

The reason why I put Snoop Dogg in the "cool" category is because the guy's an undeniable talent. He's one of few rap artists that I actually like, and that's because he's a musical genius. He managed to create a unique sound that my ears are addicted to. I also like that he has a serious look, like he's going to fuck you up if you mess with him, but beneath that exterior lies someone with a wicked sense of humour. It's great to see someone who can be funny while keeping a deadly serious face. It plays with your expectations. No where is this more obvious than his appearance in Katy Perry's California Gurls video.

So, in honour of Snoop Dogg's 40th birthday, enjoy his debut video that brought him success and fame in 1994. I can't remember if it was accurate or not, but when I first heard about him, I called him "Snoop Doggy Dogg." I wonder what Charles Schultz would've thought of the idea of a rap artist taking a name from the most famous dog cartoon character in the world.

The World Doesn't End...Again

2011-10-22T12:19:00.000-07:00

Friday, the 21st of October was supposed to be the real "last day of earth" according to the crazy fundamentalist preacher Harold Camping. However, we did not hear much about him like we did during the week leading up to his May 21st "rapture date". Perhaps that was a slow news week while this past week has been a busy news week, with the Republican debate and the killing of Muamar Gadhafi in Libya.

Since that May rapture date, Camping has not been seen and the news reports that he had suffered a stroke. Not to sound like a cold fish, but "GOOD!" Charlatans make me sick and when I hear about people quitting their jobs and spending their entire savings to help spread Camping's fear-based doomsday messages, I get angry. A lot of this might have to do with having a gullible brother who has fallen time and again for charlatans and swindled out of his money on get rich quick schemes and going to churches that preach doomsday scenarios. There are naive people out there, looking for something to believe in and they have no ability to gauge deceit. As my brother had once asked me, "How do you know when someone's lying?" For me, its just a gut level feeling / instinct. Its like my mind can gauge deceit based on a person's body language, what they say, and what I know. Knowledge really is power. Because I know the basic beliefs and practices of various religious groups, I'm able to use this information against potential missionaries and proselytizers.

A part of me can't help think that maybe there is a spiritual reason for Camping's stroke. I'm not saying that all people who have a stroke are being punished, just that I find it curious that Camping had one in the aftermath of nothing happening on May 21st like he swore it would. He was absolutely certain that it would happen. Guaranteed it. There is a price to pay for deception, especially on a scale as this one was. I wonder how it felt for him to know that one man had quit his job and cashed out his entire retirement savings to buy billboard ads telling people to get right with God before the day of reckoning came. This is money he cannot get back. Will this foolish man live in poverty during his retirement years?

I'm glad that there weren't any reports of people going into hysterics about the potential for the end of the world. I can't help but wonder if its because Camping lost such credibility that he has no supporters / followers left. He is like the boy who cried wolf. The preacher who cried Armageddon! I also hope that there won't be a mass hysteria in the week leading up to December 21, 2012 (the last day of the final Mayan calendar that has inspired dozens of books in the past few years). The world is not going to end. The predictions of Nostradamus extends way into the 3000s. So relax!

I saw the above picture in a Google search and just had to "steal" it for this occasion. I love it!

What I do find interesting, though, is that May (the date of the rapture, according to Camping) saw the death of Osama bin Laden. So, the world did end for him in May.

Now we come to October, the date of the actual end of the world according to Camping, and we see the death of another Middle Eastern supporter of terrorism, Muamar Gadhafi. I wonder if these things are related / connected. You think? Quick, we need a new doomsday date so we can go after Assad of Syria!

The big news of the week, of course, is the death of Muamar Gadhafi on Thursday. Though his government had fallen to the rebel forces weeks ago, it was only a matter of time before the coward was found. Like his fellow dictatorial brother (metaphorically speaking, of course) Saddam Hussein, who was found in a spider hole, Gadhafi was found in a sewage pipe. What is up with these cowards? There was video footage of his capture. I watched it and felt nauseous. Not that I have sympathy for a brutal dictator, but I was shocked to see a man with blood all over his face and looking like he was on drugs or something, unaware of where he was. The video did not actually show the shooting, but his golden gun was seized (who knew that he fancied himself a Bond villain?) and his last words were supposedly: "What did I ever do to you?"

What an amazing last question to ask before bullets rip through your brain! Was he not aware of how his brutal grip on power for over 40 years affected all the Libyans who lived under his rule? The people he massacred over the years were somebody's father, brother, son, mother, sister, daughter, cousin, uncle, aunt, nephew, niece, friend, lover, spouse. The end that came for Gadhafi was karmic. Not that I agree with his immediate killing. Like the announcement that Osama Bin Laden had been located and killed by special forces, I was unsettled to hear about these deaths because both men needed to face a war crimes tribunal. They needed to be charged for their crimes and have the case made against them in a court of law for the entire world to watch. Only after the trial concludes and a guilty verdict rendered would a death penalty be justified. I know that some prefer no death penalty and I believe that God probably does not want humans to kill other humans, no matter how evil they are, but on a personal level, I do think the death penalty is appropriate for people who have committed mass murder, such as Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, and Muamar Gadhafi. It would be interesting if the three of them are in a hellish spiritual realm, being tormented by the demons that have attached themselves to these three individuals, who helped create hell on earth.

In the mid-1990s, I wrote an essay about karma in the real world. I was inspired to write it when I had read that Saddam had slept in a different place each night because he feared getting assassinated. What was the point of power if you live in fear? Both Saddam and Gadhafi came to power in a coup, killing the previous leader. For Gadhafi, it was in 1969, for Saddam, it was 1979. They both wore military uniforms and ruled with an iron fist, creating a cult of personality with their picture on the currencies and their face everyone you look in Iraq and Libya. There was no escape from the eyes of these two brutal dictators.

Between the two brutal men, Saddam was probably the scarier menace. Gadhafi was crazy and had some interesting personality quirks. He had called Condoleezza Rice his "African Princess" and wrote her love letters and made a scrapbook about her. In one of the articles I read, Gadhafi said that he loved seeing Condoleeza tell Arab leaders what to do. Apparently, that gave him a hard on. Creepy. Gadhafi also tried to be buddies with President Barack Obama, because of his African roots. The man was kooky, what can you say? Though he was probably the best dressed leader on the world stage, it is a good thing that he is gone. One less evil in the world. That it came the day before Camping's "end of the world" prediction just made it all the more sweeter. Yes, the end of the world did come. For Gadhafi! Good riddance, crazy one. Hope you burn in hell until your karmic debt is burned away (however long that will take). I hope those who will form a new government in Libya will embrace a democracy rather than another autocratic dictator. It seems like the Arab world prefers strong, authoritarian leaders than democracies with term limits on power. For the Arab spring to be successful, they have to transition to more democratic governments.

It was interesting to read the reaction of Republicans to this latest foreign policy success for our President Barack Obama. Some have gone so far as to praise FRANCE for this operation!!! FRANCE!!! Remember, Republicans were so hateful of the French in 1986 for not allowing American bombers to fly over their airspace from the United Kingdom on their way to bomb Gadhafi in retaliation for the Berlin disco bombings that were traced back to him. Also, in 2003 when France and Germany refused to support the Bush Administration's invasion of Iraq, the Republicans called the French "cheese eating surrender monkeys" and had the french fries that were served in the cafeterias in the U.S. Capitol building renamed "Freedom Fries" (never mind that French fries are Belgian in origin). I heard a lot of hatred of France from conservatives over the years and now, they are going to praise the French for the demise of Gadhafi?!? Really??? Well, I'm not buying it. They are only doing so because they hate Obama even more than they hate the French. They cannot bring themselves to admit that Obama's policy of leading from behind was the right call. They cannot admit that Obama has been more successful in foreign policy in just three years than Bush had been in eight. Sucks to be Republican right now! Their worldview is collapsing.

When my Young Professionals discussion group had the Libya military operation as a topic, I was one of few people who were in complete support of it. Among liberals, I felt like a minority on this issue, but I believed it was the right thing to do to prevent genocide. Had we not intervened, Gadhafi would have massacred the people who dared to rise up against him, being inspired by the way Tunisians and Egyptians were able to oust their leaders. We had seen this abandonment before: Kennedy's disastrous Bay of Pigs and Papa Bush's cutting short the Gulf War to a mere 100 hours of ground combat, which left the Shia rebellion around Basra vulnerable to Saddam's elite "Republican Guards." Also, after we helped the Mujahadeen defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan, we abandoned them which led to a power vacuum in which the Taliban came to power, a regime far worse than the Islamic radicals that rule Iran. It is simply bad karma to abandon people in their hour of need, leaving them to be slaughtered. So, I supported Obama's actions and am happy that it turned out well. The operation cost our country $1 billion and there was no American casualties. I believe when historians look back and compare the policies of Obama versus Bush, they will compare how we acted in Iraq versus how we acted in Libya. Iraq is our trillion dollar, almost decade long war, in which at least 5,000 troops have committed the ultimate sacrifice. Libya was mostly a backup support while allowing the Libyans to direct their own revolution.

Special message to Republicans: you look really desperate and hateful when you are unable to praise Obama's leadership on the Libya operation. We know that you really hate the French, so such praise to them is not fooling anyone. Yes, France and Britain did a great job, it's great to have allies on board and not alienate them the way Bush did with Iraq. But let's get real here. Obama did what needed to be done. If you can't admit that he's more successful than Bush, then you can do something for yourself. Pick a competent, non-ideological, pragmatic candidate to be your nominee. In case you are so blind that you can't determine who that might be, I'll give you one hint. He's the one who skipped the debate in Las Vegas and called it an embarrassment.

I Wish What Happened in Vegas, Stayed in Vegas

2011-10-20T23:07:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday night, the country was subjected yet again to another Republican presidential debate. In Oregon, we had a Democratic debate for the three candidates running to replace disgraced Congressman David Wu. So I went to the campaign headquarters of my chosen candidate, the only female in the race and the one who is expected to win. The debate was low key, but I saw the full staff of her campaign. All I can say is that I have never seen so many people on a non-presidential campaign before. This is the most professional and organized campaign I have ever seen, which has good points and bad points. It seems more like a Senate campaign than a Congressional campaign.

Anyhow, I did not get to see the Republican debate yet. In fact, I've missed the past several. I don't know why they are having weekly debates. What more could they discuss that they haven't already? I don't remember this many debates in 2004. In 2008, there were a lot on both sides, but I figured that the interest in the presidential campaign was higher in 2007-2008 because of the desire of the country to move on from the Bush disaster, as well as the historic nature of the real prospect of having our first black or first female president.

In the post-debate analysis, it appears that once again, Mitt Romney was the winner. Herman Cain was the center of controversy this time as the moderator Anderson Cooper and the other candidates just harped on his 9-9-9 plan. Things got really testy between Rick Perry and Mitt Romney, which led to Romney at one point putting his hand on Perry's shoulder. Wow, you don't see that very often!

What these debates are good for, though, is seeing the audience reaction. Its become a gladiatorial battle of sorts, with the conservative audience screaming out for blood. In previous debates, the audience showed a preference for killing prisoners, for letting someone without health insurance to die, for disrespecting an active duty soldier serving in Iraq just because he happens to be gay. In this debate, the idea being promoted is a fence along our 2,000 mile border with Mexico. Cain said that it should be electrified so it could kill Mexicans who dare to climb it. Wow. Really? Bachmann was in favour of a double fence. How strange this party has become! From Reagan's famous declaration in Berlin: "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" to now advocating an ugly wall to seal our border with Mexico. Even Perry had some sense about the futility and expense of this. He said that it would take a decade to a decade and a half, and tens of millions of dollars. Who's going to pay for it? Its doubtful that corporations care about illegals coming into the country, so that leaves cash-strapped state governments or our federal government to pick up the bill, which teabaggers don't want to pay for. What a freaking party! It is baffling that anyone in 2011 could still consider themselves a Republican. This party is such an embarrassment that I wish they would just stay in Vegas and shut the fuck up.

For me, one of the most telling things about the debate is the line-up, which is based on the candidate's popularity in the polls. Notice how Michele Bachmann is now on furthest edge (the far right for those watching them). A few debates ago, she was in between Romney and Perry. Now, she's practically marginalized. Herman Cain has moved into the top three positions occupied in the center. Huntsman opted to campaign in New Hampshire rather than participate in another debate. That's probably a smart choice.

Let's hope that this is the last debate for awhile. I wish moderators or pundits would read the Miranda rights before the debate. They should tell the candidates: "Everything you say can and WILL be used against you in the general election next year!" So, pandering to the ignorance and prejudice of the conservative evangelical Christian base might help win the primary, but it will not win the independent voter. A famous Abraham Lincoln quote comes to mind about remaining silent so people can think you are wise, rather than risking it by speaking your mind and removing all doubt. This is good advice for the Republican candidates to follow (though it's too late now).

When Atheism Just Doesn't Go Far Enough...

2011-10-19T01:03:00.000-07:00

It should come as no surprise to those who know me, but I got into it with yet another atheist on Facebook. A mutual "friend" on Facebook had posted a photo of a church sign which stated that the fundamentalist Christian church took on the atheist's challenge to really read the Bible and realized that the atheist was right about religion. I can't remember the exact wording on the sign, but I thought it was funny.

This post by the Facebook friend had a few comments, which then got nasty between two particular people. One guy who goes by "Om" wrote a nice comment about how he used to be one of those who demanded proof of God's existence before he believed and who had trouble with religion, until he had a personal experience that confirmed for him that God / spirituality is real. Nothing in his comment or subsequent ones were "preachy" or condemning of other people with different views.

Thus, I was shocked that a self-described "anti-theist" started attacking Om for "ramming religion down his throat" and being intolerant and other nonsensical accusations. I couldn't believe it. What was he reading into that I wasn't? So, I felt a need to respond on Om's behalf. I don't know either of these two men, but Om's comments were very calm, personal, and positive. It was stunning to see how anyone could be offended by what he said. In contrast, the anti-atheist was belligerent, insulting, and full of anger. He used ALL CAPS in some of his personal insults and rants. He just went off on Om and then me.

Clearly the guy has issues. I tried to dialogue with him, saying that just because someone shares their personal experiences with spirituality does not mean they are "preaching" or condemning others who disagree. People read into other people's comments with all kinds of trigger points and imagine attacks where none exist. I see this trait a lot among people who are ideological, no matter if its religious fundamentalism, political, or even anti-religious. If someone disagrees with their view, then the other person becomes an enemy and a threat. It is very difficult to communicate with a person who has this kind of personality trait because you have to go far out of your way to reassure them and stroke their egos so they won't feel so threatened. I just don't have the patience for it, though, because my view is: "you're an adult. Get over yourself!"

The debate kept getting nastier and nastier and I think I actually caused the person whose wall we were having the debate on to delete the entire discussion. The level of hostility that this atheist showed towards religion just seemed delusional and angry. To my understanding, people generally aren't passionate about something unless something personal happened to them. I know atheists who don't have angry tirades at spiritual or religious people. They just aren't interested in religion or spirituality. To have the kind of anger that this atheist showed, though, I wondered if some priest had done him wrong. Let's be real, here. There are a lot of religious hypocrites out there and their behaviour or abuse of others causes a lot of damage. In fact, I believe that they are held partially accountable if their abuse of others contributed to the abused victim turning away from God and spirituality or religion. I know its kind of a cop-out, but some people's exposure to God and religion might only be through the negative experience so its understandable that they would spend the rest of their lives angry and hateful about what the religious person did to them. Because I was raised in a loving faith community and only experienced intolerance and other people's hypocrisy and judgmental attitudes in other denominations within Christianity, I am able to understand that you cannot clump all Christians or all Christian churches into the hypocritical or bad or even "evil" category. Christian denominations are as diverse as the human species. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater, as the saying goes.

This ranting "anti-theist" claims to have spent 3 years in a seminary with the goal of becoming a minister, but at some point in his journey, he lost his faith and believed that everything he was taught was a lie. I can't vouch for his story, but I imagine that learning "the truth" about Christian history might be disconcerting to people who grew up under the spell of the basic mythology. I went through my own "deconstruction process" in my late teens and early 20s. When I achieved "reconciliation with God" as a young 22 year old, it was the end result of several coincidences that I could not deny as being the evidence I needed that we live in a spiritual universe rather than a strictly materialist one. My personal "covenant" with God was that I would not have to believe the lies we're taught in Christian dogma and that my own personal spiritual experiences were enough to live in communion with God.

I imagine that for some people, particularly ideologues who believe in "absolute truth", if the truth they once believed was proven false, then they can't accept other explanations or other ways at looking at the stories they were taught was true. I've heard and read that many Mormons who end up leaving the LDS church actually become atheists, which surprised me. But as one ex-Mormon / current atheist told me, it's because they were taught that their church was "THE ONE TRUE CHURCH" of God and since they have come to view it as all one big lie, they can't find other churches to be credible, either. Atheism is the only place they can go.

That's sad, to me. There's a whole spiritual world out there, full of personal experiences that defy the strict scientific view of the world. These experiences transcend religious dogmas. Find what works for you and experiment with it. I love what the Buddhist monks say about how to achieve enlightenment. They will tell you how to go about achieving it and then say, "But don't take our word for it. Try it for yourself!"

The anti-theist ranted so much about being "preached at" (which was not true) that I was curious to see who this guy was, so I looked at his info page on Facebook. I can't say that I was all that surprised. He fits what I know about most hardcore atheists I've met. They are so enamoured of their own intelligence that they cannot allow themselves to be interested in any spiritual idea because they don't want to be duped. Being duped is the worst thing for any self-respecting intelligent person. I share this trait, because I do value intelligence and I hate being duped, so I scrutinize every idea. However, what makes me different from the hardcore atheist is that I don't reject everything just because I had a negative experience. I look at what the negative experience was teaching me. Plus, I think I just have a mind / personality that naturally gravitates to the spiritual view of things. I've seen too many unexplained events happen to myself and others to deny it. Also, it seems kind of lonely to be so in love with one's own intelligence that they reject others who don't share their beliefs.

Here's what Mr. Anti-Theist wrote on his Facebook info page:

Do not, under any circumstances, send me a friend request that isn't accompanied by, at the very least, a message explaining why you think we should be friends. It's rude and I will ignore you.

I am intelligent and like to surround myself with others who are, as well. I have little to no tolerance for deliberate stupidity or ignorance. I would rather be stung, momentarily, by an ugly truth than to believe a pretty lie only to discover it's deceipt later. Inasmuch, I won't sugar-coat, lie, placate or 'dumb down.' Catch up or be left behind.

Arrogant? Yes, and I won't apologize for it.

When I read that, I understood a lot about him. Wow. He actually thinks an unsolicited "Friend request" is "rude"?!? For me, I'm flattered when people send me a Facebook request. I generally accept most requests without requiring a reason. It reminds me of one former co-worker (in my current job) who had accepted my Facebook friend request and later on, I read a comment he posted on his wall that he would de-friend anyone who makes a stupid comment. He told me not to worry, that I was in no danger of being de-friended, but ultimately, he did de-friend me (I suspect that it happened around the time that I had posted comments doubting that Osama Bin Laden had been killed the way our government claimed). I suspect that the anti-theist is like that. He has little tolerance for diversity and expects people in his social circle to conform to his view of the world.

Well, Mr. Anti-Theist might hate religions and view them as a cult, but he's also in a cult devoted to his own mind. I consider it ironic, though, that the person I admired the most and who was instrumental in helping me break out of the mold of religious dogmas, was an atheist, yet the atheists I've met since him twenty years ago have been rather arrogant, angry, and ideological.

In the Dream, Think, Do, Be series that I've been attending at the Presbyterian Church on my route to and from work, I was stunned last week that these fellow Christians also share the same views as me regarding the dogmas we've been taught. One lady even mentioned that if she learned that Jesus did not even exist but was entirely made up, she would be okay with it because just the idea about him was powerful enough. Whoa. Not sure I'd go that far, though. However, on the drive home from the retreat on Sunday, I was stunned to hear Sheyne say the same thing. Its strange to go nearly 40 years in life not hearing people make that comment, then in a few days time, I hear two people who don't even know one another basically state the same thing. Yikes. For me, I long ago made peace with the fact that I don't believe in the Virgin Birth or that Jesus was born on December 25th. However, not believing in those things has not made Christmas any less special for me. It still remains as the most beautiful of holidays, with the music, the decorations, the feelings evoked, the reminder of what's important.

What I love about this series I'm attending with the Presbyterian Church is that we need to look at our Christian beliefs from a mythological or metaphorical perspective in order to find the deeper meaning that being literally minded cannot find. We have to be active seekers of the miraculous, but faith and belief are the required building blocks. It is sad that so many people want to throw away all religious ideas just because the church they were a part of disappointed them or deceived them or perhaps even abused them. There are thousands of churches out there and hundreds of religions. There are even atheist groups. Despite our diversity of beliefs, we can still find common ground.

Unity in Diversity and the Worth of All Persons

2011-10-18T01:05:00.000-07:00

This past weekend, I spent up at Samish Island near Bow, Washington at my 6th consecutive Young Adult Retreat. I think only Sean, Chris, and I have been the only ones who attended each year since 2006. I love that there is a mix of people every year, as I get to meet new people and expand my personal network within the church. Basically, you meet a person once and you're friends for life.

I carpooled up with two ladies from Eugene and one young man from Roseburg (of all the people at the retreat, he traveled the furthest). They were an hour late, and I panicked because they did not call me nor answer their cell phone when I called. So I ended up having thoughts that they were flaking out on me and would have been bummed all weekend. But, they did arrive, and I only ended up missing 45 minutes of work on Friday afternoon.

Because of the distance we traveled and our late start, we did not make the evening dinner at a restaurant before the retreat (I believe this is the first time I missed out on that). We had our own dinner stop somewhere in Southern Washington (Burgerville). We missed the mixers, which no one in our carpool minded very much. We walked in while the others were in the middle of playing the Mafia game. So glad that I missed out on that one, too. We made it for campfire, introductions, and snack. And then we played the popular game, Catch-phrase. I love that game! I may have to buy that for my sister for Christmas.

I got my cabin assignment and almost wished I could switch to the motel-like cabins, but I stuck out the more traditional cabin to get a feel of what camp has always been about. Only three of us opted for the old cabins, and we each had our own.

Saturday was a full day with worship service and two productive class sessions. We also made our own pizzas (a popular feature of the Young Adult retreats, and each year, my pizza gets better and better. I bet I can even make a better pizza than Herman Cain!). The theme of the retreat was taken from our church's "Enduring Principles" that is getting a heavy promotion, it appears. The two Enduring Principles that were featured for this retreat was "Unity in Diversity" and "Worth of All Persons."

For our morning exercise, we sat at tables where an envelope was filled with small square cut-outs of 50 values and we had to put them into five different categories ranging from "Always Value" to "Seldom Value." This took awhile and if we did not find one that represented one of our values, there were a few "wild cards" in which to write our values. I did this for one: Loyalty. I pretty much knew that loyalty is my strongest value when I was offered a job in Alaska in 2007 but hesitated taking it because they wanted me to start right away and not wait two weeks. That I was still willing to give my employers when I hated my job a two week notice for a job that I had only dreamed about, well, what can you say? Even best friend Nathan knew this trait about me years earlier when he told another friend about me: "He has the kind of loyalty you can't even find in a dog."

After our values were separated into the five categories, our next task was to pick our top ten values and put the rest away. Then, once this happened, we had to whittle it down to five. Here are the Top Five Values that I selected: Loyalty, Honesty, Integrity, Knowledge, and Friendship. Some of the ones in my Top Ten included Spiritual Growth, Personal Growth, and Fairness. I figured that to me, knowledge, spiritual growth, and personal growth are all the same. Honesty and integrity are kind of the same and I did not really think about it at the time (choosing one and allowing the value of Fairness to be included in my Top Five). But we did not have much time at that point to really weigh each Value for our Top Five. Our next activity was to go around the tables and see everyone else's Top Five and then having a conversation with them about our shared values. I saw quite a few where I had two values in common, but no one in which I had three or more values in common. After this exercise, we had to once again go around the table to find someone in which we had no values in common. There was one guy who had no values in common with me so we talked. It was interesting because for him, Competition is his top value. He said that his natural state is viewing everyone else as competition, so he never likes to lose. Its something that he feels intuitively. He said that he tries to control it, because sometimes its over things that really don't matter, but that's his nature: a true competitor.

Wow, I'm the complete opposite. I never really cared about winning in team sports. I honestly don't care if people beat me at various sporting events because I never based my self-esteem or value on beating someone else. But I did understand this guy's natural inclination, because just as he feels discomfort when others are beating him, I feel discomfort whenever an action I might take could be disloyal. My bonds of loyalty last a long time, even if the person is no longer in my life. I don't know where the loyalty gene came from, but it is definitely much stronger influence on my behaviour than in most people I've met.

So, in talking with someone I shared no values in common with, I was able to find something in common: the feeling of discomfort we both have when something violates our primary value. After this exercise, I had a thought that more businesses and corporations should do this kind of training so that employees can understand one another better. However, I can also understand why this might not work. People in a workplace environment might not want to be exposed and vulnerable, because if people knew what you were really about, they might use that info against you. It does require some level of trust.

The next exercise was taking a short and very basic personality / behaviour test in order to determine our personality / behaviour type. The categories kind of reminded me of the basic categories proposed by James Redfield in The Celestine Prophecy. But the categories in this exercise were: Controlling, Supporting, Promoting, and Analyzing. I fell along the borderline between Supporting and Analyzing, though I leaned more towards Supporting. According to the description, Controlling personality / behaviour types value time more than anything else and hate it when people or situations waste their time. In contrast, the Supporting type values friendship / relationships the most. That is certainly true in my case. An example of this was when the guy I had ghostwrote for had asked me if I felt angry for "wasting my time" on a losing campaign last year. He's obviously a Controlling personality type. My response surprised him because I said no. I felt like I gained a good friend out of the deal, since the candidate realized that I am one of the few reliable, dependable, and loyal people he's probably ever met. Certainly on the campaign, I was probably the most loyal, even when he lost his temper a few times (normally, I lose respect for people who lose their temper, but in his case, I understood his frustrations with the local political scene so it wasn't upsetting or shocking).

Once we learned which of the four categories we fell under, we had to go to our respective poster board with our group and brainstorm on how to get our opposite to be involved in planning a party. Each type has positive and negative traits. For example, Promoters are exciting people who know how to sell and they get bored with the details. Analyzers are better at the details and not so good at selling their ideas. Controllers want to lead (or dictate), which includes delegating tasks. Supporters aren't willing to lead and prefer to do the ground work to make things happen, getting the details right. So in our pitch to the Controllers, we had to ask them if they were willing to take the leadership role in planning a party.

The Controllers weren't so good in selling to us, though. Sheyne (the lady who drove the Oregon carpool to the retreat) made the pitch, which was a simple, "We would like you to come up with a theme for the party." The facilitator of the exercise said that Controllers were the most difficult of the four personality types, because it was hard for them to not want to control the situation. She asked if they did a good job selling their plan. I said no and offered suggestions. Basically, what works for me is when a person who wants me to do something shows that they know me well and plays to that. Best friend Nathan, who I suspect would be borderline Controlling and Promoting, knows exactly what to say to me to get me to laugh, as well as to do something he wants. Basically, he plays to my talents, such as writing. If a Controller thinks I'm a great writer and wants me to write a flyer or invite to a party, then saying to me that they believe that I'm a great writer and can do a great job at the task they want to assign me, then of course that's going to go over much better than just ordering me to do something, especially if its something that does not utilize my aptitude or talents. And as I learned in my Job from Hell, the more a control freak tries to control me, the more rebellious I become. Not just rebellious, but belligerent, disobedient, snarky, and even downright insulting. It should not shock anyone that Controlling types and me don't get along very well. I don't like to lead, but I'm not much of a follower, either. I've undermined at least three leaders' credibility in Basic Training as a young man because they abused their authority.

As I learned later from Sheyne when we talked about this exercise, her group couldn't even decide how to get us Supporters on board. They couldn't agree among themselves and the others in her group even schemed on ways to manipulate us into doing their bidding. See? This is why I don't like Controlling types very much. I love undermining their authority just to teach them a lesson in humility. People with "control issues" really need to look within and try to understand their compulsion to control other people. If God does not even control people, why should they think they have the right?

It was a thought-provoking exercise for sure.

For the afternoon session, we learned about Robert's Rules (the standard for Parliamentary Procedures, which I've never really liked). This is how World Conference resolutions get introduced and voted on. Strict majority vote. The church is considering switching to Common Consent, which I prefer. This allows for more in depth voting because its on a five point scale, using the colours of the traffic light (and two more). Basically, the vote would be colour-coded: Green means Full Support, Blue means Some Support with reservations, Yellow means Generally Support with a lot of reservations, Orange means Cannot Support because of the reservations, and Red means No Support. For a resolution to pass, 80% have to vote Green through Yellow. If less than that number, then the dialogue continues as people's reservations are brought up and addressed.

The sample topic to practice this procedure was the death penalty. We were given a resolution which contained absolute language, along the lines of "The Community of Christ values the worth of all persons and therefore resolves that the death penalty shall be banned everywhere and under all circumstances. My vote was borderline Orange / Yellow. Under the church's Common Consent was another definition for the colour codes, in which Yellow indicates "Probably God's will" and Orange indicates "Probably not God's will." I raised my objection to the outright ban on the death penalty because of serial and mass murder / war crimes. I personally cannot support an outright ban on the death penalty for that reason (a person who abuses power and has caused untold number of death should get the ultimate punishment). I was in favour of a ban on what I called "crimes of passion" where people had committed murder in the heat of the moment. I brought up the example of Otis, a minister in our church in the Southeastern Mission Center. He had killed someone and served in prison. Because of our church's outreach, he fell into our community and when he was paroled, he became baptized and ordained a minister. He's a great guy with a powerful testimony, proof that one can be redeemed even after doing the ultimate crime that took away another person's life. My question is, can a mass murderer / war criminal be redeemed? Was anyone really upset that Saddam Hussein was given the death penalty? Or the Nazis after the Nuremberg Trials?

It was an emotional exercise for a few people. It was nice to know that we are for the most part a peace church and against the death penalty. I did explain that my vote was changed from Orange to Yellow because of the language in which we have "Probably God's Will" or "Probably not God's Will." I explained that I don't believe God wants us to kill anyone so the resolution was likely to reflect the will of God, but I mentioned that we don't live in a perfect world and I believe that it is up to us to determine the best way to deal with the rare individuals who have contributed to mass murder or war crimes.

After that intensive exercise, we had a two hour free period. I went walking the grounds, down to the Puget Sound, and then walked the Labyrinth. I wanted to meditate in the center of the Labyrinth for a half hour, but after ten minutes or so, I felt cold so I decided to go back to my cabin to read a book. At 6:30, our harvest party began, where we had to wear our costumes. I dressed in my coolest looking jacket (the Austrian one), a gray fedora, black slacks, white shirt and black tie. In my hand is a cool looking blank book that has on the cover sparkly material to reflect light everywhere (it looks ethereal! I plan to start writing in that journal in December). Some people guessed my costume but most did not. I was a Case Officer with the Adjustment Bureau, which is just as well because that is my favourite movie of the year. And dressing as such allowed me to recommend the movie to people who hadn't seen it or heard about it and to discuss it with those who did see it.

Other costumes included: Robin from the Batman comics, Dorothy from The Wizard of Oz, a lady in a 1950s outfit (poodle skirt), Sarah Palin (Karolyn kept saying to people, "Aren't I the scariest one here?"), a shark, a diver, a matador and his flamenco dancer fiancee, a flapper, Clark Kent in the process of ripping off his shirt to reveal his Superman suit beneath, a guy with a creepy clown doll, and the best costume winner: a newlywed couple dressed as halves of an Oreo cookie. The judges said that they liked the Sarah Palin costume, but they don't vote Republican so she lost! The picture above was taken before people took their costumes off. I'm guessing that the photo will appear in the church's magazine at some point.

Sheyne (the Oregon carpool driver) was the one who dressed as a shark. She asked me what her destiny was. I opened the book and said, "Shark fin soup!" She did not like that response!

The fun activity of Saturday night was playing Bunco, which I had never played before. It was seriously fun! Basically, it involves throwing dice, moving seats, and switching partners. Think of it as a dice game version of square dancing! You have to throw three of the same number to get Bunco, or you get a point each time you threw a dice of the same number as the round you were on. I sucked for the most part, but at one point, when we were on round three, I threw a lot of threes. Never had three of the same number that matched the number of the round, though. But I enjoyed the moving around (if you win, your team moves up and the losing team stays behind to switch partners with the team that moved up).

For the Saturday evening communion worship service, we had the most awesome communion ever! We walked out to the Labyrinth (it was dark and cold, though). A few tiki torches lit the path. The communion servers headed into the Labyrinth first, then we each followed, slowly at regular intervals. When we all walked on the winding path, it actually looked cool. Everyone was a different part of the Labyrinth circle. At the center, we partook of communion, then stood in a circle and sang "We Are One in the Spirit." I had worried about being cold since I had gotten cold earlier, but amazing enough, the fellowship with others seemed to warm the atmosphere around us. This is the most unique communion service I've ever participated in. Awesome, simply awesome.

After that, we played the late-night "What If?" game, which had some pretty cool laughs, as usual. Some were truly bad and we all felt awful that we found them funny, but such is the nature of the game.

The Sunday afternoon drive back home did not seem to take long. It was a fast weekend and another awesome retreat. Why do they seem to happen so quickly? At this retreat, I made a couple new friends, including a guy who knows three of my best friend Nathan's brothers. That's the nature of our church. We are small enough to feel like one big family. I love it!

Music Video Monday: Bollywood

2011-10-17T01:19:00.000-07:00

Last week, I was watching quite a few Bollywood musical songs on YouTube and came across this medley of Bollywood songs. What stands out for me, besides the high energy dance rhythms is the explosion of colours and the way they dance. The women are gorgeous, especially in their saris. In fact, I'm a sucker for any woman who wears a sari, including cultured white ladies who love wearing foreign style clothing.

This medley really energized me. The songs are addictive and mesmerizing. Can't take my eyes off of it. I don't know what it is about Bollywood / Bhangra music, but I simply cannot get enough. In Portland, one Saturday each month is a Jai Ho / Bollywood dance party. I've been meaning to go for a year or two now. The problem is that it ends after the public transit stops for the night, and the dance doesn't begin until 10 p.m. I can't find anyone (with a car) who might be interested in going. My taste in things seem to be so rare, as it has always been difficult finding people who are interested in the kinds of things I'm interested in. Especially when it comes to music!

In fact, two people I recently gave CDs I burned for them of a diverse range of music had both told me that they only listened to half of it. One told me that he was only able to listen to half of it because the music was just too "strange" for his taste. Really? In the Navy and college, while there were people who thought my music was strange, there were a few who got hooked on it. I guess that's when you learn who you really connect with. I read an article a couple months ago in which the writer claimed that the strongest friendship bonds were found in people who shared similar taste in music. About a decade ago, on a date with a lady, I was stunned to see how cagey she was when I asked her what kind of music she liked. I did not understand why that question would cause someone to clam up and hesitate revealing what bands or CDs she liked. What's the big deal?

I know this, though, among everyone I've ever met and gotten to know, I have not found anyone who liked as broad a range of music as me. This isn't a brag or an indication that I think I'm better than anyone. Just that it surprises me that I could like such a broad range of music and relate to other people that way, but the response I get from most people is that my taste in music is "weird." I'll tell you what, though. I bet there are more people on earth who love Bollywood / Bhangra music more than who love country music.

This medley of Bollywood songs appeals to the internationalist in me. I wish more people would share my sense of adventure when it comes to music. Maybe its just me, but music has always been my "drug" of choice. I really do get energized by music. Perhaps music gets me to that feeling place, where I don't have to think. I just absorb the energy of the music and allow myself to glide along to wherever the rhythms take me. Though I like a wide range, I still draw the line at heavy metal or what I consider "angry rock" (not just white supremacist bands, which interestingly enough, tends to be hardcore screeching and yelling). Music all have energies attached to them and even though I have no idea what they are singing, the Bollywood songs in this medley definitely put me in a very happy place. It can't be bad, can it? The music is just too positively energizing to be bad for you.

Back to Samish

2011-10-14T00:49:00.000-07:00

Today, I'm leaving work early to make the trek up to Samish Island (near Bow) for the highlight of my year! Ever since I moved to the Pacific Northwest in 2006, I have attended the Young Adult Retreat, even though I aged out in 2007 and even though I have said in the past couple years that I would not attend that year's. As the date gets closer, though, I feel a pull. There's simply something magical about that place. I feel it the moment I arrive. I love it. So beautiful and serene. I've probably seen about a dozen church campgrounds and there is no comparison. Samish Island is far and away the best one I've been to. As for the magical qualities...well, at the 2007 Young Adult Retreat, Christine went walking in the woods with Erik and something happened, because as I learned two years later, its the date of that retreat that Erik considers their official anniversary. Of course, things might have been different had I went on the walk with Christine like she asked me to. But I'm not going to lament that decision this year. I already did that mourning process last year. I walked the path where the magic happened, and all I felt was loneliness.

This year, I'm in a much better place. I'm a lot happier because I'm in a job that I love and I'm generally satisfied with my life. Sure, life could be a whole lot better with a Lady Love (which I expected to have by now), but I'm not complaining. I'm feeling nothing but love and gratitude, so this retreat, I'm just going to enjoy myself. What made this one a must attend is a new thing that hasn't been done in any of the previous retreats I've attended. We're having a costume party on Saturday night. I can't wait. It has been a few years since I've worn a costume for anything.

Last year, the retreat was in September and I had called in sick on Friday morning so that I could catch the train to Tacoma to meet Sean, the YAPS leader who organizes the retreat. I felt guilty as I rode the train, because it left the station at the same time as I was supposed to be at work. A week later, on the following Friday, I was let go from work and the rest is history. Anyhow, last year, I met a young church member, James who had battled brain cancer and had an amazing testimony. Well, sadly, the cancer had returned and he passed away this past spring or summer. He was an amazing kid and loved to play drums (or just practice his drumsticks in the air).

Interestingly, the message of last year's retreat was about "getting out of the boat." The guest minister asked us what it would take to get us completely out of the boat. Apparently, I needed to be pushed, and I was a week later. Its amazing how much one's reality can change in a year's time or less. So, I look forward to new memories to add to the Young Adult Retreat. This is my 6th one and likely my final one, because I turn 40 at the end of the year. As our church president had said a few years ago, at some point I have to face the facts that I'm MIDDLE AGED and not a young adult anymore! But these retreats are so much fun for me. I look forward to spending some time alone, too, in contemplation.
I'll be staying in the old cabins again. They have new cabins, which I've used the past couple of years, but they are TOO nice. I keep thinking I'm in a motel, so I will be reverting to the old cabin again. I like them. Its a reminder of simplicity.

Last year, the Labyrinth was a new edition to the campground. I walked it in contemplation about getting out of my nightmare work scenario and into a job that suits me better. Well, mission accomplished! This year, if its not raining, I will be walking the Labyrinth in contemplation of my search for a Lady to share the rest of my life with. That's a noble goal to focus on.

See you on Monday (no posts until then)!