Friday, July 30, 2004
Reporting for Duty
In keeping with the apparent central theme of his candidacy, Kerry referenced his service in Vietnam no fewer than nine times during his nomination acceptance speech last night -- and that's not counting the little "reporting for duty" salute he gave before he started speaking. Could have been a great drinking game. And if you included any time every other convention speaker mentioned Kerry's service, you'd have been in a weeklong incoherent drunken stupor.
This is odd/ironic/hypocritical for a whole host of reasons, not the least of which include:
1) The constant Vietnam praise comes from many of the same politicians and commentators who told us over and over and over again in 1992 that Clinton's draft dodging was in the past and "irrelevant," or even admirable.
2) Kerry is known more for protesting against the Vietnam war, and testifying for the "atrocities" he himself admits to participating in.
3) Only 2 of Kerry's 17 surviving Swift Boat commanders support Kerry's candidacy, while 11 others (including Republicans, Democrats, and Independents) consider him unfit for command.
Considering that these Swift Boat veterans' soon-to-be-released book is already #2 on amazon.com's sales charts, I have a feeling this last point may be more important to the election than people currently think. And since Kerry has spent the last six months relentlessly bragging about his Vietnam service, he won't be able to say "well, uh, that was thirty years ago!" if anything negative should surface.
(In fact, in the entire 45-minute acceptance speech, his entire twenty-year senate career was barely acknowledged, in a single short paragraph early on.)
So what else was in this address? Well, much like many of the other speeches this week, the Democrats 2004 plan seems to be trying to out-conservative the conservatives. Tons of talk on values, faith, quoting the bible, tough-guy rhetoric on the war, fiscal responsibility, middle class and small business tax cuts, etc. The last four days sounded more like a Republican convention than the G.O.P. did in 2000! (Read Kerry's 2004 convention address alongside Bush's 2000 convention address and tell me which one sounds more conservative and which one sounds more liberal.)
And yet, at least a little traditionally Democratic sentiment managed to seep through, with vague, general promises that government (not individuals) can solve any and every problem, Kerry continuing to see no conflict in positions such as promising higher wages for everyone, while simultaneously stopping jobs from going overseas.
Was it a great speech? The pundits seemed to think so. It was certainly the most animated I'd ever seen Kerry, though the well-rehearsed arm and hand gestures got a little grating after a while. In the end, I think Kerry did what he needed to do -- rally the Democratic base, while trying to attract independents and disaffected Republicans. With an election this close, however, next month's Republican convention, in terms of timing, is a huge advantage for Bush. The electorate has a pretty short attention span, and even if Kerry's numbers skyrocket in the next week (which they probably will), we can't forget that Dukakis was 15 points above Bush's father after the 1988 Democratic convention (and lost in a landslide), and Gore was 19 points above Bush himself after his convention in 2000, and essentially tied. And Kerry needs to be mindful of another factor -- every time he tries to sound more like a conservative, potential Nader-voters have another reason to believe that the two parties are the same, and vote for an alternative. At least Nader, though I disagree him on just about everything, remains steadfast in his convictions, doesn't change his mind every few minutes based on polls and focus groups, and has the integrity to stand up for his beliefs. If the race is close, Kerry's ninth-inning shift to the political center may push more people away than bring them on board.
(also posted on defeatjohnjohn.com)
In keeping with the apparent central theme of his candidacy, Kerry referenced his service in Vietnam no fewer than nine times during his nomination acceptance speech last night -- and that's not counting the little "reporting for duty" salute he gave before he started speaking. Could have been a great drinking game. And if you included any time every other convention speaker mentioned Kerry's service, you'd have been in a weeklong incoherent drunken stupor.
This is odd/ironic/hypocritical for a whole host of reasons, not the least of which include:
1) The constant Vietnam praise comes from many of the same politicians and commentators who told us over and over and over again in 1992 that Clinton's draft dodging was in the past and "irrelevant," or even admirable.
2) Kerry is known more for protesting against the Vietnam war, and testifying for the "atrocities" he himself admits to participating in.
3) Only 2 of Kerry's 17 surviving Swift Boat commanders support Kerry's candidacy, while 11 others (including Republicans, Democrats, and Independents) consider him unfit for command.
Considering that these Swift Boat veterans' soon-to-be-released book is already #2 on amazon.com's sales charts, I have a feeling this last point may be more important to the election than people currently think. And since Kerry has spent the last six months relentlessly bragging about his Vietnam service, he won't be able to say "well, uh, that was thirty years ago!" if anything negative should surface.
(In fact, in the entire 45-minute acceptance speech, his entire twenty-year senate career was barely acknowledged, in a single short paragraph early on.)
So what else was in this address? Well, much like many of the other speeches this week, the Democrats 2004 plan seems to be trying to out-conservative the conservatives. Tons of talk on values, faith, quoting the bible, tough-guy rhetoric on the war, fiscal responsibility, middle class and small business tax cuts, etc. The last four days sounded more like a Republican convention than the G.O.P. did in 2000! (Read Kerry's 2004 convention address alongside Bush's 2000 convention address and tell me which one sounds more conservative and which one sounds more liberal.)
And yet, at least a little traditionally Democratic sentiment managed to seep through, with vague, general promises that government (not individuals) can solve any and every problem, Kerry continuing to see no conflict in positions such as promising higher wages for everyone, while simultaneously stopping jobs from going overseas.
Was it a great speech? The pundits seemed to think so. It was certainly the most animated I'd ever seen Kerry, though the well-rehearsed arm and hand gestures got a little grating after a while. In the end, I think Kerry did what he needed to do -- rally the Democratic base, while trying to attract independents and disaffected Republicans. With an election this close, however, next month's Republican convention, in terms of timing, is a huge advantage for Bush. The electorate has a pretty short attention span, and even if Kerry's numbers skyrocket in the next week (which they probably will), we can't forget that Dukakis was 15 points above Bush's father after the 1988 Democratic convention (and lost in a landslide), and Gore was 19 points above Bush himself after his convention in 2000, and essentially tied. And Kerry needs to be mindful of another factor -- every time he tries to sound more like a conservative, potential Nader-voters have another reason to believe that the two parties are the same, and vote for an alternative. At least Nader, though I disagree him on just about everything, remains steadfast in his convictions, doesn't change his mind every few minutes based on polls and focus groups, and has the integrity to stand up for his beliefs. If the race is close, Kerry's ninth-inning shift to the political center may push more people away than bring them on board.
(also posted on defeatjohnjohn.com)
Thursday, July 29, 2004
Did I Mention I Was in Vietnam?
Perhaps one of the stranger things about the Democratic National Convention thus far has been the seeming lack of any sort of discussion, detail, or reflection of Kerry's 20-year career in the United States Senate. Surely voters would like to know more about the legislation the senator has sponsored or supported, debates over bills that history has judged in Kerry's favor, etc. I mean, this is a guy who has devoted his entire life to the Senate; indeed, it's the only career he's ever had. Yet if you listen to the convention speakers, Kerry was just a Vietnam war hero, and then -- *poof* -- fast-forward to present day.
Did Kerry really accomplish that little over the last two decades? Or is the DNC worried/ashamed at what he did accomplish? Even Kerry's own campaign website spends a great deal of time discussing his plans for the future, and whole sections chronicling his Vietnam past, but his entire Senatorial career is distilled into a single, vague sentence: "In the Senate, John Kerry fought to strengthen our economy, improve public education, make health care more affordable, and protect our environment." That's it.
It would be like Bush bragging up his National Guard experience ad nauseum, and then saying, as an afterthought, "oh yeah, and I was governor of Texas for a while and even President the last four years, but that's not important." Does it really make sense to base this election solely on the recent government record of one candidate while completely ignoring the other?
(also posted on defeatjohnjohn.com)
Perhaps one of the stranger things about the Democratic National Convention thus far has been the seeming lack of any sort of discussion, detail, or reflection of Kerry's 20-year career in the United States Senate. Surely voters would like to know more about the legislation the senator has sponsored or supported, debates over bills that history has judged in Kerry's favor, etc. I mean, this is a guy who has devoted his entire life to the Senate; indeed, it's the only career he's ever had. Yet if you listen to the convention speakers, Kerry was just a Vietnam war hero, and then -- *poof* -- fast-forward to present day.
Did Kerry really accomplish that little over the last two decades? Or is the DNC worried/ashamed at what he did accomplish? Even Kerry's own campaign website spends a great deal of time discussing his plans for the future, and whole sections chronicling his Vietnam past, but his entire Senatorial career is distilled into a single, vague sentence: "In the Senate, John Kerry fought to strengthen our economy, improve public education, make health care more affordable, and protect our environment." That's it.
It would be like Bush bragging up his National Guard experience ad nauseum, and then saying, as an afterthought, "oh yeah, and I was governor of Texas for a while and even President the last four years, but that's not important." Does it really make sense to base this election solely on the recent government record of one candidate while completely ignoring the other?
(also posted on defeatjohnjohn.com)
Wednesday, July 28, 2004
Site Improvements
Happy Day Three of the Democratic National Convention! But I'll get to that later.
We've made a couple changes to the site I'd like to bring to your attention.
1) The Archives are now organized by month (instead of that confusing week-based system)
2) All articles now have a fully functional "direct link to this article" button, which takes you to a separate html page for each posting. Now you can share your favorite ludicrosity posts to all your friends and family!
Please? :)
Happy Day Three of the Democratic National Convention! But I'll get to that later.
We've made a couple changes to the site I'd like to bring to your attention.
1) The Archives are now organized by month (instead of that confusing week-based system)
2) All articles now have a fully functional "direct link to this article" button, which takes you to a separate html page for each posting. Now you can share your favorite ludicrosity posts to all your friends and family!
Please? :)
Saturday, July 24, 2004
If. . .
If I could build the perfect president, what would she or he be like?
A World Presence that would intimidate our enemies. No maniacal terrorist or ruler would dare harm a hair on the head of an American for fear of the reprisals that would rain down for generations. We could travel to all parts of the world in safety.
A Humanitarian that would set the standards for all world leaders -- a hero that would make this planet a better place for all. The president would demonstrate the true value of all people -- each and every human being, worker or king. Just as every part of your body has a distinct and purposeful function, so does each member of this Earth. The president would clarify and support this credo. The president would value the dignity of every nation and clan and their customs, but demand that each nation afford its citizens the basic rights to life.
A Politician that would unite adversaries for a common cause but keep each distinctive, for a rich and textured assemblage of ideas. We need every brain, every heart, and every soul to solve our problems. We need such a mixture of beliefs and customs to choose from that every possible solution is available to us. And we need a leader that will recognize a solution when it is presented.
A Leader that will remember the laws of prosperity: People first . . . Money second . . . Things third. All American citizens need to share in the rights of citizenship including the rights to education, health, productive work, recreation and the arts and sciences so that we may all be uplifted to our greatest potentials. Americans share in the world’s most prosperous nation and deserve a leadership that will be the conservators of that wealth. And only after these two conditions are met, the leadership may indulge in frivolity. The American president should never favor the interests of self-proclaimed rulers of wealth over the interests of all citizens.
A Head of State would be an intelligent and effective communicator. The leader for America must be a quick thinker and a great statesman, capable of conveying our collective goals and needs to other nations as well as informing our citizenry of important events. A great orator is more than a great speaker, but one who imparts a depth of substance that is just as powerful read as heard.
A Person of Truth and honesty and fidelity to this nation would serve us best. As voters, we need to look at what our leaders do, not at what they say, and thereby judge their hearts. Many people would like the power and glory of the office: few are worth our votes.
A Role Model for this country exemplifying the best of ideals of all peoples that have come to this country via the Bering Straight, Ellis Island, or over our northern or southern borders -- all peoples in our diversities.
That is who will get my vote.
If I could build the perfect president, what would she or he be like?
A World Presence that would intimidate our enemies. No maniacal terrorist or ruler would dare harm a hair on the head of an American for fear of the reprisals that would rain down for generations. We could travel to all parts of the world in safety.
A Humanitarian that would set the standards for all world leaders -- a hero that would make this planet a better place for all. The president would demonstrate the true value of all people -- each and every human being, worker or king. Just as every part of your body has a distinct and purposeful function, so does each member of this Earth. The president would clarify and support this credo. The president would value the dignity of every nation and clan and their customs, but demand that each nation afford its citizens the basic rights to life.
A Politician that would unite adversaries for a common cause but keep each distinctive, for a rich and textured assemblage of ideas. We need every brain, every heart, and every soul to solve our problems. We need such a mixture of beliefs and customs to choose from that every possible solution is available to us. And we need a leader that will recognize a solution when it is presented.
A Leader that will remember the laws of prosperity: People first . . . Money second . . . Things third. All American citizens need to share in the rights of citizenship including the rights to education, health, productive work, recreation and the arts and sciences so that we may all be uplifted to our greatest potentials. Americans share in the world’s most prosperous nation and deserve a leadership that will be the conservators of that wealth. And only after these two conditions are met, the leadership may indulge in frivolity. The American president should never favor the interests of self-proclaimed rulers of wealth over the interests of all citizens.
A Head of State would be an intelligent and effective communicator. The leader for America must be a quick thinker and a great statesman, capable of conveying our collective goals and needs to other nations as well as informing our citizenry of important events. A great orator is more than a great speaker, but one who imparts a depth of substance that is just as powerful read as heard.
A Person of Truth and honesty and fidelity to this nation would serve us best. As voters, we need to look at what our leaders do, not at what they say, and thereby judge their hearts. Many people would like the power and glory of the office: few are worth our votes.
A Role Model for this country exemplifying the best of ideals of all peoples that have come to this country via the Bering Straight, Ellis Island, or over our northern or southern borders -- all peoples in our diversities.
That is who will get my vote.
Thursday, July 22, 2004
Shameless Solicitation
One woman will be diagnosed with breast cancer every three minutes. This year approximately 216,000 women will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer. One in eight women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in their lifetime.
These are scary statistics in and of themselves, but become more real when you know someone with breast cancer. All of the things that make us different don’t mean much when we are faced with a common enemy like cancer. I have had cancer in my family. I have had breast cancer in my family. It has struck those close to me. It has struck those close to my wife. It is very real to us.
Beginning on August 20 in the Detroit Area, my wife will be participating in the Breast Cancer 3-Day Walk. In three days, these dedicated participants will walk 60 miles in the hopes of raising funds for breast cancer research. I call on you, dear members of the Ludicrosity.com family, to help us raise funds for her walk. Please click the link below to make a donation in the name of April Missias (my wife) to The Susan G. Koman Breast Cancer Foundation. Any support you can give would be helpful. Thank you all!
April Missias’ Personal Website for the Breast Cancer 3-Day
One woman will be diagnosed with breast cancer every three minutes. This year approximately 216,000 women will be diagnosed with invasive breast cancer. One in eight women will be diagnosed with breast cancer in their lifetime.
These are scary statistics in and of themselves, but become more real when you know someone with breast cancer. All of the things that make us different don’t mean much when we are faced with a common enemy like cancer. I have had cancer in my family. I have had breast cancer in my family. It has struck those close to me. It has struck those close to my wife. It is very real to us.
Beginning on August 20 in the Detroit Area, my wife will be participating in the Breast Cancer 3-Day Walk. In three days, these dedicated participants will walk 60 miles in the hopes of raising funds for breast cancer research. I call on you, dear members of the Ludicrosity.com family, to help us raise funds for her walk. Please click the link below to make a donation in the name of April Missias (my wife) to The Susan G. Koman Breast Cancer Foundation. Any support you can give would be helpful. Thank you all!
April Missias’ Personal Website for the Breast Cancer 3-Day
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
Are We There Yet?
Continued apologies for the delays! Please don't un-bookmark us!
:)
JUST a little further.
Continued apologies for the delays! Please don't un-bookmark us!
:)
JUST a little further.
Monday, July 12, 2004
DEFEATJOHNJOHN!
As you may have noticed, I've been conspicuously absent from ludicrosity postings in the past few weeks. I assure you it isn't due to a lack of things to say! In fact, since Kerry anounced John Edwards as his Vice Presidential candidate, I've been working on a sister site to ludicrosity.com entitled DEFEATJOHNJOHN.com. Feel free to visit this area if you like (just make sure your speakers are turned on!) It isn't more than an intro page yet, but give me a few more days and it will be ready.
Any article written for ludicrosity that happens to be dealing with the upcoming election will be dual-posted to DEFEATJOHNJOHN.com (and vice versa.) However, the latter site will also house a discussion board, comics, t-shirts, and other fun anti-Kerry propaganda. :) (The opening animation/music to the teaser page should provide some clue as to the campy over-the-top nature of this project.) With any luck, we'll get some serious debate there over the next few months, and although stylistically some of DEFEATJOHNJOHN.com may be tongue-in-cheek, make no mistake: I strongly oppose Kerry's nomination for the Presidency and will be expressing my views accordingly.
As a special bonus for the loyal ludicrosity.com family, I am pleased to share with you the first "Kerry Khronicles" comic a week early. Enjoy the strip, and I look forward to debating with you all in the coming days.
As you may have noticed, I've been conspicuously absent from ludicrosity postings in the past few weeks. I assure you it isn't due to a lack of things to say! In fact, since Kerry anounced John Edwards as his Vice Presidential candidate, I've been working on a sister site to ludicrosity.com entitled DEFEATJOHNJOHN.com. Feel free to visit this area if you like (just make sure your speakers are turned on!) It isn't more than an intro page yet, but give me a few more days and it will be ready.
Any article written for ludicrosity that happens to be dealing with the upcoming election will be dual-posted to DEFEATJOHNJOHN.com (and vice versa.) However, the latter site will also house a discussion board, comics, t-shirts, and other fun anti-Kerry propaganda. :) (The opening animation/music to the teaser page should provide some clue as to the campy over-the-top nature of this project.) With any luck, we'll get some serious debate there over the next few months, and although stylistically some of DEFEATJOHNJOHN.com may be tongue-in-cheek, make no mistake: I strongly oppose Kerry's nomination for the Presidency and will be expressing my views accordingly.
As a special bonus for the loyal ludicrosity.com family, I am pleased to share with you the first "Kerry Khronicles" comic a week early. Enjoy the strip, and I look forward to debating with you all in the coming days.
Monday, July 05, 2004
My Sister Doesn't Want to See Fahrenheit 9/11
Well, Kay: I, too, did not want to give Michael Moore any more money, but I had to be a good sport, and Denise and Dad were planning to see 9/11 on Saturday, July 3rd. Besides, Dad was treating.
Actually, it was a fun movie. Very humorous. Unfortunately, some people think it is a documentary. I am such an advocate of truth in entertainment-disguised-as-news I can’t help demand truth in docu-drama-disguised-as-documentary.
Moore is intentionally misleading and inflammatory -- but then who would go see a boring movie at today’s prices?
Right from the first scene after the credits, he uses the "poor me I'm black" race card. He spends a lot of time focusing on black people who enlist as full time or reserve military in exchange for money and college and great benefits, as if all white people get to go to college for free or have great jobs with benefits handed to them!
The same is true of his "poor me I’m black" race card played for the Florida vote. Who says because they are black they would never have voted Republican? Not all black people think voting Democratic equals getting ahead by getting more welfare and free rides. Lots and lots of black people (actually all the ones I have ever known) believe in working for a living.
That is why I turned more Republican then Democratic in the first place -– when I realized how racist some Democrats can be. I can't help recalling (and agreeing with) the old stereotypes: Democrats sit on porch swings overlooking their plantation darkies and figure out ways to keep us on the plantation while they sponge off the fruits of our labors. The mentality exists even today: they try to scare us with threats to take away food stamps if we don’t vote for them. Intentionally or not, they help perpetuate a dependent class.
However, I think Michael Moore’s most outrageous scenes are the Bush and Cheney pictures next to Arab-dressed dignitaries. Our teachers spent a lot of time teaching logic (if P then Q) and about sets (overlapping circles). One of my assignments was to visit a John Birch Society Meeting back in the late 1960's. John Birch Society was like a well-dressed, more formal version of the Michigan Militia or KKK, I’m not sure which. At this meeting, the lecturer spent almost a full hour demonstrating how a man sitting next to a known Communist was also a Communist. The Man had been to Germany at the same time a Russian was in Germany, and the Man knew someone who knew someone. The speaker went on and on until the audience was willing to concede the Man must also be a Communist. Sitting on the other side of the known Communist was the then President LB Johnson. Never once does Moore admit that all national dignitaries have meetings with Arabs dressed in their robes. Even Clinton (Hilary and Bill). Even Kerry. Even Kennedy (John and Ted). Meeting with and having pictures taken with foreign leaders is the job and duty of all national, state, and even major municipal politicians.
It is sort of like: I have a paper bag with a dozen red round objects. Apples are red and round. Therefore, I have a bag of apples. Here. Give them to your favorite toddler.
And while we’re picturing dead babies, add sobbing mothers and smirking Bushes -- total and deliberate distortion! Superimposing a photo of someone laughing onto a picture of dead babies. That is cheap and insulting.
There are some good bits, like when he tries to get our elected officials to encourage their own children to enlist in the military and go over to Iraq to join the good fight.
All and all, it echoes my feelings on The Passion of the Christ. It is just a movie, and Michael's is no more a "documentary" than Mel's.
Well, Kay: I, too, did not want to give Michael Moore any more money, but I had to be a good sport, and Denise and Dad were planning to see 9/11 on Saturday, July 3rd. Besides, Dad was treating.
Actually, it was a fun movie. Very humorous. Unfortunately, some people think it is a documentary. I am such an advocate of truth in entertainment-disguised-as-news I can’t help demand truth in docu-drama-disguised-as-documentary.
Moore is intentionally misleading and inflammatory -- but then who would go see a boring movie at today’s prices?
Right from the first scene after the credits, he uses the "poor me I'm black" race card. He spends a lot of time focusing on black people who enlist as full time or reserve military in exchange for money and college and great benefits, as if all white people get to go to college for free or have great jobs with benefits handed to them!
The same is true of his "poor me I’m black" race card played for the Florida vote. Who says because they are black they would never have voted Republican? Not all black people think voting Democratic equals getting ahead by getting more welfare and free rides. Lots and lots of black people (actually all the ones I have ever known) believe in working for a living.
That is why I turned more Republican then Democratic in the first place -– when I realized how racist some Democrats can be. I can't help recalling (and agreeing with) the old stereotypes: Democrats sit on porch swings overlooking their plantation darkies and figure out ways to keep us on the plantation while they sponge off the fruits of our labors. The mentality exists even today: they try to scare us with threats to take away food stamps if we don’t vote for them. Intentionally or not, they help perpetuate a dependent class.
However, I think Michael Moore’s most outrageous scenes are the Bush and Cheney pictures next to Arab-dressed dignitaries. Our teachers spent a lot of time teaching logic (if P then Q) and about sets (overlapping circles). One of my assignments was to visit a John Birch Society Meeting back in the late 1960's. John Birch Society was like a well-dressed, more formal version of the Michigan Militia or KKK, I’m not sure which. At this meeting, the lecturer spent almost a full hour demonstrating how a man sitting next to a known Communist was also a Communist. The Man had been to Germany at the same time a Russian was in Germany, and the Man knew someone who knew someone. The speaker went on and on until the audience was willing to concede the Man must also be a Communist. Sitting on the other side of the known Communist was the then President LB Johnson. Never once does Moore admit that all national dignitaries have meetings with Arabs dressed in their robes. Even Clinton (Hilary and Bill). Even Kerry. Even Kennedy (John and Ted). Meeting with and having pictures taken with foreign leaders is the job and duty of all national, state, and even major municipal politicians.
It is sort of like: I have a paper bag with a dozen red round objects. Apples are red and round. Therefore, I have a bag of apples. Here. Give them to your favorite toddler.
And while we’re picturing dead babies, add sobbing mothers and smirking Bushes -- total and deliberate distortion! Superimposing a photo of someone laughing onto a picture of dead babies. That is cheap and insulting.
There are some good bits, like when he tries to get our elected officials to encourage their own children to enlist in the military and go over to Iraq to join the good fight.
All and all, it echoes my feelings on The Passion of the Christ. It is just a movie, and Michael's is no more a "documentary" than Mel's.
Thursday, July 01, 2004
Power and Control
I was driving up I-94 in my new Saturn Vue. I hadn't been sure about the Vue when I first got it, but when the sales rep took me out to the parking lot to take that required picture of new owner and vehicle, there was a huge double rainbow right overhead. It was a Sign.
So when looked down at the odometer and it was at 3330, it was also a Sign. Within three miles, it would be at 3333. Certainly that must mean something important. Excitedly anticipating this momentous occasion, I searched the horizon to see what would be my Sign. Would it be a mall? A cemetery? A factory? A school? My whole future, perhaps the future of mankind, rested on this Sign.
I must have slowed a bit. Other cars started whizzing past. I looked over at the other drivers, grinning like an idiot, to see if they were also as excited about this great Sign that was coming. They were, as most other people are in my world, apathetically ignorant of the important things in life.
3331... 3332... almost here. And then it came. 3333. I looked to the left. I looked to the right. It was a golf course. A golf course? A golf course! I don't play golf. I can't play golf -- ever. That shrew that ploughed into my first Saturn saw to that. I have too much metal in my leg. I can't do that little twisty turn you do when you swing the club. Golf means nothing to me. Absolutely nothing. That wasn't a Sign at all. It wasn't even a little sign. No premonition into what will come next in my life. It was just another car odometer turning to 3333.
And then I thought of poor CeeCee. She had prayed and prayed for a good man to come into her life. And when a man telephoned her the day after their first date and called her "Angel" she was certain her prince had come. She lived this whole last year in ecstacy. Well, rarely in distress, anyway. But she was determined to make this relationship work. After all, she had a Sign. Despite her spirituality and his nasty temper, her good nature, his mean-sidedness, her glowing, his cussing, her love of her children, his straining to tolerate the kids, she was sure God had made them a couple. Now she is devastated. She wasted a whole year on a lie. Well, actually, she had a great year filled with fun and love and hopes. But now she has had to come back to the devastating reality -- God did not talk to her, He did not give her a Sign, and this man is not going to marry her.
All this made me think of Deepak Chopra and his Seven Spiritual Laws of Success. Basically he says what every good mother and every good teacher has always said -- you can't learn with your mouth open. CeeCee and I can pray and beg and chant and sing. We can scream at God. We can whisper incantations. Fondle good luck charms and fetishes. Cut the Tarot cards, flip the black ball, toss a coin, read the wrinkles in our palms and ask the Ouija. But if we really want to know what God has to say to us, instead of some Sign that will tell us that God agrees with us or even worse, that God will obey us, we have to shut up and listen.
Learn to be very quiet. Don't think, don't hear, don't judge anything: just be. Learn to be quiet. Learn to be still. And when we get good at that, we can allow one glimpse of our hopes into the meditation. It is all we need do. God knows our hearts. We may want some control over our own lives. But the more we force and struggle and strain, the less effect we have.
Whether it comes from Eastern or Western religion, the truth is taught the same. Give freely from your heart and good things will come back to you. I guess that is the only control we're ever allowed.
I was driving up I-94 in my new Saturn Vue. I hadn't been sure about the Vue when I first got it, but when the sales rep took me out to the parking lot to take that required picture of new owner and vehicle, there was a huge double rainbow right overhead. It was a Sign.
So when looked down at the odometer and it was at 3330, it was also a Sign. Within three miles, it would be at 3333. Certainly that must mean something important. Excitedly anticipating this momentous occasion, I searched the horizon to see what would be my Sign. Would it be a mall? A cemetery? A factory? A school? My whole future, perhaps the future of mankind, rested on this Sign.
I must have slowed a bit. Other cars started whizzing past. I looked over at the other drivers, grinning like an idiot, to see if they were also as excited about this great Sign that was coming. They were, as most other people are in my world, apathetically ignorant of the important things in life.
3331... 3332... almost here. And then it came. 3333. I looked to the left. I looked to the right. It was a golf course. A golf course? A golf course! I don't play golf. I can't play golf -- ever. That shrew that ploughed into my first Saturn saw to that. I have too much metal in my leg. I can't do that little twisty turn you do when you swing the club. Golf means nothing to me. Absolutely nothing. That wasn't a Sign at all. It wasn't even a little sign. No premonition into what will come next in my life. It was just another car odometer turning to 3333.
And then I thought of poor CeeCee. She had prayed and prayed for a good man to come into her life. And when a man telephoned her the day after their first date and called her "Angel" she was certain her prince had come. She lived this whole last year in ecstacy. Well, rarely in distress, anyway. But she was determined to make this relationship work. After all, she had a Sign. Despite her spirituality and his nasty temper, her good nature, his mean-sidedness, her glowing, his cussing, her love of her children, his straining to tolerate the kids, she was sure God had made them a couple. Now she is devastated. She wasted a whole year on a lie. Well, actually, she had a great year filled with fun and love and hopes. But now she has had to come back to the devastating reality -- God did not talk to her, He did not give her a Sign, and this man is not going to marry her.
All this made me think of Deepak Chopra and his Seven Spiritual Laws of Success. Basically he says what every good mother and every good teacher has always said -- you can't learn with your mouth open. CeeCee and I can pray and beg and chant and sing. We can scream at God. We can whisper incantations. Fondle good luck charms and fetishes. Cut the Tarot cards, flip the black ball, toss a coin, read the wrinkles in our palms and ask the Ouija. But if we really want to know what God has to say to us, instead of some Sign that will tell us that God agrees with us or even worse, that God will obey us, we have to shut up and listen.
Learn to be very quiet. Don't think, don't hear, don't judge anything: just be. Learn to be quiet. Learn to be still. And when we get good at that, we can allow one glimpse of our hopes into the meditation. It is all we need do. God knows our hearts. We may want some control over our own lives. But the more we force and struggle and strain, the less effect we have.
Whether it comes from Eastern or Western religion, the truth is taught the same. Give freely from your heart and good things will come back to you. I guess that is the only control we're ever allowed.
