Of 80's Movies and Baseball.

I was a teenager in the 80's when a lot of great movies were made for teens.   It seemed like every summer John Hughes came out with some new teen-anthem movie.  We had Pretty in Pink, Ferris Bueller's Day Off and the now classic Breakfast Club.  Hughes wasn't the only filmmaker targeting teens; others were inspired by his success and tried their hand at grabbing the vast market that teenagers still represent.  One of my favorites, which wasn't as popular with most people, was Class.  For those of you that weren't there, Class stared Rob Lowe, Andrew McCarthy, and Jacqueline Bisset.

Rob and Andrew were paired up as roommates in an elite prep school - Rob as the wealthy school legacy; Andrew as the middle-class scholarship winner.  Class warfare in Latin Class - the double entendre on the film title.  The main arch of the story saw young Andrew picking up and bedding the unhappily married mother (Jacqueline Bisset) to Rob's character. 

The minor arch - the pressure pushing everyone forward, was a school-wide investigation into cheating.  The school's hired investigator calls in Rob and Andrew and a number of their classmates trying to weed out the suspected SAT cheater.  At one point, the investigator gives Andrew a walk on the investigation.  Telling Andrew, "You had a nearly perfect score on the SATs.  Normally, I'd suspect you right away, but with your grades…"  The irony revealed later of course is that Andrew did in fact cheat on his SATs.  It was a risk he was willing to take to earn that scholarship.

Fast forward 20 years and move the drama to the baseball diamond and change the characters to Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds.  Mark was juiced.  Jose said as much, and it was revealed later by Mark himself.  Barry was willing to risk his natural place in history and the record books to be the Single Season Homerun Leader - a feat he accomplished.  But many suspect he was juiced too.  It's not been proven beyond a doubt, but then this isn't a murder trial.  In fact, it's not a trial at all.

Oh to be sure, Barry was on trial recently; found guilty of lying; sentenced just this past week to two years probation and a few months house arrest.  The final chapter of that story may not be written yet as it's still undetermined if Barry will appeal his conviction or sentencing.  But there's enough circumstantial evidence that Barry was juiced to add another 30 pounds of muscle to his 48 year old body.  Which, by the way, is about the amount of muscle he added after the age of 38.  There's no way that happens in three months.  Not at 38.  Not at 28.  Not  without The Clear and The Cream - the two designer steroids linked to Barry by his trainer.

But the question that is looming now, ten years later: who gets in the Hall of Fame?  Ten years ago, many a sports writer - the keepers of the keys to the Hall - suggested that Barry would get a pass as he was a "Hall of Famer" before the supposed juicing.  Mark, they said, was not.  Barry then is like Andrew McCarthy's character - perfect grades, but cheated on the final.  But isn't cheating still wrong?  Cheating is cheating.  Had Andrew been caught in the movie, he wouldn't have gotten a free pass.  He'd have been kicked out.  Why do many sports writers feel that Barry's cheating is any less a bad thing than Marks, or Jose's or Sammy's?

Why would Barry be willing to risk his legacy, his sure pass to the Hall, for a single season record?  (To be fair, he also holds the career record which he accomplished after he was juiced.)  The same thing that made him want the record: ego.  Massive ego.  It's fueled is whole life.  How he notoriously was never a team player.  How he cheated his non-lawyer, barely English speaking, wife out of a pre-nup.  Barry thinks - and has always thought - that rules and laws are for mere mortals, not the baseball God he thinks he is.  He's a legacy, just like Rob's character was in Class, only Barry's claim was from his baseball father, Bobby Bonds, and his legendary baseball god-father - Willy Mays.

Barry grew up thinking he was better than everyone else partly because of the baseball royalty he hung out with as a kid and partly because he was better than most of the kids he played with.  And when someone else threatened to steal his limelight - someone who wasn't as deserving as the Godly Barry - well, he couldn't let that happen.  He had to juice to take back what was rightfully his: records and fame.

It took the courts eight years and many millions of dollars just to convict Barry of lying.  Unless Barry admits he took steroids, that ship of proof will have long sailed.  But the baseball writers don't need evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, they can see the ship loaded down, the water line high on the hull, and rightly guess that it's full of steroids.  Circumstantial evidence, when there's as much as there is in Barry's case, is more than enough to keep him out of the Hall.  Unless you think the SATs aren't important and cheating on them only a minor offence compared to one's legacy.  Some people have no Class.

God - Undecided Voter or Cosmic Prankster.

God - Undecided Voter or Cosmic Prankster.

Here's a new flash: God told Herman Cain to run for President.  If memory serves, God also told Michelle Bachman to run, and Rick Perry through his wife, and Mitt Romney.  So, God either has a cosmic sense of humor to have all these people campaign against each other, or He hasn't made up His mind who He's going to vote for. 

Oh, wait, there's a third option: all of these candidates are full of shit.  There is no God.  Herman Cain practically says as much.  He's a Christian.  A God fearing man.  Does the Lord's will.  Yet, after the Lord told him to run for President, he - Herman Cain - made the decision to run.  Huh?  If you believe in God and he tells you to run, what decision is there to make?

"Once he made the decision, Cain said, he did not look back."

http://news.yahoo.com/cain-says-god-persuaded-him-run-president-204548374.html

Cain was of course speaking "to a national meeting of young Republicans."  So perhaps we need to know one more thing: "Pandering - person who caters to or profits from the weaknesses or vices of others." (dictionary.com)

That sounds a lot like what these candidates are doing.  Catering to the vices of others.  In this case, the vice - or weakness - is illogical belief in a supreme being. 

Have You Seen Me?

I live in Ghana and sometimes travel to Nigeria and Niger.  I work out of an Internet café, drinking espresso and stealing computers, ipads, laptops, digital cameras, and even cash.  I'm a con-man, preying on lonely Americans - women and men!  They should know better but somehow still chat with me. 

I've pretended to be aid workers, soldier, businessmen, and hot Brazilian models.  Ha ha, that last one always make me laugh.  My friends can't believe that anyone would think I was gorgeous woman, but I've used that ploy a few times and it always gets me lots of cash.  American men are so stupid.

See the ear buds in this picture?  I used a credit card from a woman in Alabama - I don't even know where that is - because she thought I was a missionary spreading the word of Jesus.   I call myself Muslim, but I only really worship money.  I pretend to be a missionary a lot and people in the south of America love it and send me clothes, computers, and cash!  It's a trick I learned from Mr. Billy Graham and Mr. Pat Robertson.  I saw them on Television begging for money and American's send them thousands of US dollars.  I think, "I can be missionary too," and it worked.

I once told this woman in Detroit - in someplace called "Michigan" I think - that I loved her and that we were soul mates.  She wanted to meet me and we made plans - at least she thought we did.  My wife would kill me - literally, she's a good shot! - if I met some white woman for love.  I made a few excuses about stolen (this is the meaning of irony) wallet or having to bribe Ghanaian official (which I have to do to stay out of jail, but they are partner now) and she's so crazy for love that she offer to send me money to fly to her.  How can I refuse?

It's so easy fooling dumb American's I don't have to buy stolen credit cards anymore to pay for my lifestyle - including Mercedes car and DirectTV (see antenna on building I own?).  I still train my son's on stolen credit cards, just in case American's ever wise-up and stop just giving me money.  My nine year old is buying credit cards right now.  But my fifteen year old has already moved onto sending emails telling American's they have won lots of money.  That one used to be so easy too, but now only few thousand people send us their bank info and times are hard so we only get about $30,000 US dollars a week that way.

If I didn't have to bribe my government to stay out of jail, I would own this country in a few years.

Well, thanks for reading about me.  Remember, if you find me online and I say, "I love you," I mean it this time.  Ha ha.  Honest, we'll get married.  Soon.

Humane

I was in the pet store today buying food for my snakes. I didn't set out to own snakes as pets, it was my daughter's idea. At the time she was still talking about being a veterinarian, so I obliged her whims on pets. That's how we got the geckos, spiders, mice, snakes, and rats. The mice didn't last, weren't big enough as food for the snakes and too big for the spiders. The rats we had to get rid of because I travel too much and they require constant care and maintenance.

The snakes, spiders, and geckos are very low maintenance and really are good pets for apartment dwellers like myself. For the geckos and spiders, I throw in crickets every few days, fresh water and regularly clean the tanks. The snakes eat one rat about every 6 to 10 days. None of the pets I have bark, chew on shoes, scratch up furniture, dig up the garden, or pee on the carpet.

So, back at the pet store, the woman in checkout behind me asked why I was buying rats.

"Do you have a snake or something?"

"Yeah, we have four Ball Pythons," I replied. "But one of them we're just watching."

The woman looked concerned at the four rats in the cage, "Do you do anything before giving them to the snakes?"

"No, I just drop them in the tank and the snake does the rest."

"Eww," she says. "I bet if you go online you can find a more humane way to do it."

The cashier says, "I don't think they'll eat anything other than rats or mice."

"They have pre-killed frozen rats," I say. "But then you have to thaw them, make sure they're room temp before you can feed them."

"No," says the woman, "I mean for dealing with those rats. You could break their neck or something so it's not as traumatic for them."

I just nodded. I'm feeding them to snakes - their natural predators. It’s the circle of life. Nature doing what nature does. But I couldn't help but think what a funny word "humane" was. I think its root is "human - of or pertaining to people." I know "humane" has to deal more with compassion and the proper treatment of people and animals. It's a philosophy to not allow things to suffer needlessly.

Dictionary.com says: "characterized by tenderness, compassion, and sympathy for people and animals, especially for the suffering or distressed."

But I'm not sure that "humane" should trump "nature." I've never heard anyone advocate that we run about and put wild mice and rats to death humanely before feeding them to wild snakes. Or birds of prey, or feral cats, lynx, raccoons, and any other predator that feeds on rats and mice. That would be absurd and impossible.

It's interesting how much people try to put human qualities on animals. Oh, I definitely feel that there shouldn't be any needless suffering. Animals - and people too - shouldn't be made to suffer for the sake of extending life.

We put our condemned prisoners to death in any variety of ways. We hung them, shot them, guillotined them, shocked them, and now we poison them. Honestly, I have to say that I think the Guillotine was probably the fastest method, and so by definition the most humane. But it was terribly gruesome.

Yet, for someone with terminal cancer or AIDS we'll force them into an extended and painful end game for… well, I'm not exactly sure why we do that. They're going to die. It's going to be painful. They don't want to go through it, but we make them. What happened to "humane"? Worse, we pump them full of drugs and chemicals to extend their pain - make it last and drag out the process. Sounds "anti-humane" to me.

I know this has become a political movement and encompasses capital punishment, euthanasia, and abortion. One side is claiming to be "pro-life" - but only for abortion; the other claiming "pro-choice" but only for birthing. They take opposite sides on capital punishment where the Pro-Life camp wants to kill all prisoners and the "Choice" side thinks a lifetime in a cage is enough. Surprisingly, they flip again on euthanasia where the Pro-Life camps says, "keep them alive - extend their suffering" and the Pro-Choice camps says, "Let 'em die." 

I've tried to sound non-partisan but I think it's obvious that I lean Democratic. Although I agree with capital punishment. But that's a blog for another day. Right now, I have some snakes to feed. I'll let nature decide who lives, who dies.

My Neighbor is a Republican

I wrote this last summer. An LGBT friend of mine made me think of it on Monday.

My neighbor is a republican.  We've talked before about politics.  He's told me that he marched with blacks in the 60's for equality.  I don't know I wasn't there.  I wasn't born until the late 60's and by then the issue was -mostly- decided.  But I have to believe him when he said he marched.  I have no reason not to.

He asked me today about my thoughts on the current political fight in California between Brown and Whitman.  And so I told him:

"I'm not sure I like a career politician as governor."

"Yeah, I know what you mean."

"Really, has he done anything besides run for office?  Because even when you're in office your running.  There are polls to maintain, re-elections to think about, after term-limits choices to make.  He's never been anything but a mayor, or a governor, or an attorney general.  I think the only thing really that he's qualified to do us run a campaign."

"I agree.  That bugs me too."

"But at the same time," I said, "I'm not sure that Whitman is the right choice either.  "Could you," I pointed at him, "Have done a worse job running eBay in its hey-day?  What did it take to steer that ship in open, calm waters?  Not very much, I'll bet."

"Ha!  I never thought of it that way.  Now that you mention it…"

"It's not like she took a failing company and turned it around, right?"

"No."

"And," I continued, "She's done and said some things that bug me.  Like the voting issue."

"That's a big one for me to," he agreed.  "How can you defend not voting and then try to run for office?  How can she tell people to get out and vote if she won't?"

"Precisely!"  I said.

"But," he says, "That's just one issue.  What else bugs you about Meg?"  (Funny how when you're talking about anything with your neighbor everyone is on a first name basis.)

"Well," says I, "that whole gay marriage thing, for me, is an issue.  Not that I’m gay.  I have a daughter.  I love women.  Really.   Sometimes more than I should."

"I believe ya," he laughed. "But I don't believe in gay marriage.  I think that some of those people have a choice."

"To be gay?" I asked.  "Really, you think there are people who would choose that lifestyle and all the discrimination and persecution?  Wow."

"Yeah," he says, "I know there's a gene for most of them, but I really think some of those people could choose to be straight and not gay. "  Then he says, "What about the majority voting against it?"

"Did you vote for Proposition 8?" I ask.

"Uh, I voted against gay marriages.  That's my right."  This is where he starts to sound uncomfortable.

"Absolutely it's your right.  But it's also their right to get married.  The constitution says 'all men are created equal.'  How can the majority of a population vote away someone else's rights?"

"We didn't vote away their rights, they didn't have it in the first place."

"They did.  The California Supreme Court said that the state constitution allows for gay marriages.  Prop 8 was a vote to change the constitution and take away someone's rights."

"Well, I just don't believe that gay people should marry, that's all."

"How can you say that?  You said you marched for black equality.  How is this different?  How can you say that a part of the population is less equal than another part of the population?  This is no different than segregation and Jim Crow laws, only you can't tell a gay person by the color of their skin."

"It is different.  These people aren't black, this isn't a race issue." he says.  "This isn't about race or equality, it's not the same."

"Because some of them choose to be gay?"

"Yes!"

"Okay, let's take out 'gay' and make it 'Jew'.  Can you vote to say that a Jew can't marry another Jew?  Is that okay?"

"Well, that's religion.  It's not the same, like race isn't the same."

"But some people can choose to be Jewish, right?"  He nods.  "And some people choose to be Christian or not to be Christian, right."

"But those are religions.  That's about faith and belief.  You can't compare those to being gay."

"Fine," I reply. An idea pops into my head, "What about fat?  Everyone is trying to stamp out obesity.  Can we vote in California so that one fat person cannot marry another fat person?  After all, they choose to be fat, right?  Can we, as a people, vote to take away the rights of fat people?"

Softly he says, "That's not the same either."  The fight is leaving him, I think it's my logic, but I can't be sure.  It could just be debating that he doesn't like.

"Is it okay, in California or any other state, to vote away someone's rights?  Let's take 'gay' out, take 'black' out, take 'fat' out, take 'Jew' out… Can the majority vote that one group of people is less equal and therefore has less rights, than another group; or less than the majority?  Is that okay?"

"In some situations," he says, but he's still speaking softly and refuses to look at me now.  It's become a serious debate, one that he didn't plan to start.

But I keep up the attack, though neither of us is yelling or really agitated, "See, that's what I don't understand about you Republicans: how you can defend the Constitution of the United States and say you embrace it, but then say, 'not all people were created equal.'  Would you vote to remove that line from the U.S. Constitution?"

"No, of course not."  He's perked up some now, standing straighter and speaking up again.  "But I just don't believe in gay marriage.  I think this is different.  It's not a race issue or a religion issue; it's just different.  I can't explain it, I just know I have the right to vote however I want."

"I'm not trying to take away your vote or say you can't vote how you want.  Your choice.  But if you can't defend it, I'm going to try to talk you out of it."

"It's my vote."

"Yes it is.  When we were talking about Meg and Jerry, if I said I was going to vote for Brown because I liked his hair, would you try to talk me out of it?  My vote would cancel yours not on issues but simply because I like his hair?"

"Maybe, but it's your vote.  You can do what you want with it."

At this point, he turned and walked into his house indicating that he didn't want to debate politics or the merits of equality and gay marriage any more.  I turned and went back into my house too.  But it left me thinking.

The anti-gay movement is so fixated on their belief that gay marriage is wrong that it might as well be a religion.  They can't defend it when you hold it up to the state constitution let alone the U.S. Constitution.  They have no logic for why gay people should have fewer rights.  If you made it not about "marriage" but say, "driving" or "voting" - they can't and won't argue for not allowing gays to drive or vote (at least not yet).  That makes no sense; why would gay people not be allowed to drive?  But marriage… that's a completely different situation. 

The "Fat" argument just popped into my head during my debate with my neighbor, but in hindsight, I think it's the perfect comparison - if you believe that people choose to be gay, which I don't.  Fat people (speaking as a fat person myself) live an unhealthy lifestyle that can cause medical issues.  They are ridiculed and picked on and pointed at just like gay people.  They are the object of discrimination and persecution.  If two fat people pro-create, then there's a good chance their children will be fat and will learn unhealthy lifestyles.

One of the arguments against gay marriage is that gay couples will produce gay children (with help of course, or by adoption) simply by learning to be gay.  Can you not say the same about fat kids?  They learned to be fat from their fat parents.  To save that whole population - and the tax dollars associated with obesity - we should ban fat marriages.  Really, there are far more fat Americans than there are gay Americans, think of the good we could do America and the money we'd save on health care.  But, surprisingly, none of the Republicans that I know are advocating this position.  Maybe because there are more fat people now in America and they can vote and fat people are not likely to vote against themselves. Who would say, "I'm so fat, I shouldn't be allowed to marry!"  The fat boat has left the Republican party, and so they turn their hatred and fear to the gay population instead.

What I've never understood in that argument is this: if people choose to be gay and children learn to be gay from their parents, where did the first gay person come from?  How do you explain the gay children with two straight parents?  I beleive that Dick Cheney, Alan Keyes, and Randall Terry all have gay children?  Does that mean they're… naw, not Dick.  Not Alan.  Certainly not Randy. Of course, Reverend Haggard was loudly homophobic too, before he came out.

What’s Wrong with America

I love America, I really do.  I served in her military proudly for four years.  America allowed me to rise up from homelessness, gave me a foster home, and eventually a college education.  I think it’s the best country in the world.  I believe a lot of other people think so too, that’s why they send their sons and daughters here to be educated; why they come here to work; why they move their families here to start over.  It’s a great nation, but we’re slipping.  We could be better.  As I live and work and travel around this land, I notice certain things that make me wonder about the country we’re becoming.

First, American’s have become selfish.  “What have you done for me?”  It’s an attitude I see when people walk into a store and stop right in the middle of the doorway and don’t care that others trying to get into the store can’t get past them.  I see it walking down the street as I approach a large group walking the opposite direction and taking up the whole sidewalk and expect me to move into the street to avoid them.  I especially see it when I’m driving and someone makes a right turn from the left turn lane (yes, I’ve actually seen this twice!). For the record, this is why people stopped using turn signals: when you do, drivers around you will speed up to block you out of the lane you’re trying to move to.

American’s have become complacent. There was a time when we always wanted to build it bigger, better, faster, or stronger.  We wanted to be the best – salesman, actor, insurance agent, car maker, teacher, whatever.  Now, “that’ll do” seems to be our mantra.  “Good enough for government work” is the standard we live by now.  Really, government work?  Isn’t this the problem with the DMV? They get paid the same weather they help 2 people a day or 20.  What’s the incentive to work smarter, harder, or faster for the government employee?  And this is our benchmark?  Nobody has pride in their work anymore.

Which leads me to my last point, American’s have become lazy.  Yes, lazy.  We rely on the quasi-Patriotic slogan “Buy American” rather than make a quality product at a decent price.  This ties in both selfish and complacent aspects as workers and especially unions (yes, I said it) aren’t looking out for the consumer or the company, but only concerned with their piece of the pie.  American workers don’t want to put in the time and effort to make a decent product, so instead they’ll brow-beat their neighbors who buy quality (Japanese, Taiwanese, German) instead of American.  Don’t fault me for driving a Japanese car, fault the American worker for not making a car that can compete.

How can we improve?  We have to stop thinking about just ourselves.  We need to consider the people in line behind us, the woman waiting for the parking spot we’re leaving, the commuters in traffic around us, the people who will buy and use our products.  We need to embrace that pioneering spirit that made America great; that drove the generations before us to build American into the super-power it has become. We need to be civil to each other and allow and respect each others opinions. We can disagree and agree to disagree, and do both politely.  We need to take pride in a job well done and a product well built and when we do, the world will buy American.

Everyman

I am everyman, but I am no one

I am seen yet invisible

I look like you, him, them

but I am not like one of them

I am everyone everywhere,

good, bad, different

I am a thought, a whisper, an idea

I am a lifetime of conversation,

but no words can define me,

or papers capture me,

no ink will contain me

no books can bind me.

I am what you see but

if you see me, you will not know me

for to know me,

you must talk to me

you must listen with your heart

as I speak with mine.

I am pain and anger

love, hope and joy

brother to some, companion, friend

father to one – she is my life

my soul

my happiness

I am the gift and the debt

I am balance

in an unbalanced world

I am complexity in simplistic form

I am the great american novel

wrapped in a plain cover

this is who I am

yet it is not me

I am a man with no past

with hope for the future

a family to dream

Death can wait.

I Pledge Allegiance...

The original pledge:

I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

By 1924 "my Flag" had become "the flag of the United States of America."  In 1954 Congress added "under God" as a direct poli-religious statement to the Soviet Union.

Even religious minded people should have issue with "under God" because of the rest of the section - the context - in which it appears.  Specifically I want to consider "one nation, indivisible" and "one nation under God, indivisible."  What does it mean, "indivisible?"

Interestingly, Dictionary.com uses that part of the pledge in the definition as an example.
- "not divisible; not separable into parts; incapable of being divided: one nation indivisible."

Are the Baptists and the Catholics the same?  No, divided.  But, you can argue, both believe in God.  What about the Muslims and the Jews and the Catholics?  Again divided.  Yet again you can say they all believe in some form of God although, it would be three different Gods.  Agnostics are doubtful and Atheists, like me, don't believe in a God at all.  Atheists are divided from Muslims, Jews, and Christians, who may also be divided from each other.  So here's my question: how can we be "one nation under God, indivisible" if we are divided on God?

If you tell me that I don't have to say that part when we get to it, I can just skip over "under God" then where is the "liberty and justice" for Atheists?  Where is the "liberty and justice" for Muslims who know this refers to the Christian God?  For the Jews who are told they killed the God in the Pledge?  There's no "liberty" for them, for us, to stand there and listen to Christians talk about their God; pledge allegiance to Him.  There's no "justice" in telling us, "well, Bubba, just keep your heathen mouth shut when we get to that part."  Nor would there be justice for Christians if we used "Allah" instead of "God."

Is there justice for me to say, "You Christians can just skip over the part: 'one nation under the Flying Spaghetti Monster, indivisible...'?"  NO!  It isn't "just" and you wouldn't like being told that's your only option.  Every Christian in the country would be lined up in front of the US Supreme Court arguing that there's no justice in the option to keep quiet.  Your Christian liberty would be violated by making you stand there and listen to me pledge allegiance to Allah, Budda, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Here's my point: If you have "under God" in the pledge of Allegiance then you need to drop both "indivisible" and "with liberty and justice for all."  Because with God in there, we are divided and there's no liberty or justice for Jews, Muslims, and Atheists, not to mention a dozen or more other religions that might be represented in modern America.

The original purpose of the Pledge was fidelity to the Union of the United States of America.  It was written by Baptist Minister Francis Bellamy right after the Civil War.  I'm a veteran, a proud American, a patriot, and an atheist.  Is there no pledge for me to recite that shows my love of America without calling into question issues of divine belief?  Can I not pledge my patriotism with my fellow Americans - be they Christians, Muslims, Jews, Norse, Greeks, Romans, or FSMs?  Is there no pledge we can all recite together to show our love of America?  Yes there is: the original Pledge of Allegiance does just that.

Confederate Flags

Back in the 80's, in final days of the Cold War, I had a friend that was stationed in Germany.  As an Intelligence Officer, it was his duty to know the strengths and capabilities of the East German military.  How would they fight?  What assets do they have available?  How would they be deployed?  How fast could they move?  It was his job to know this; to think like they would think.  To remind him of his mission, he hung an East German flag in his barracks.

One day, during inspection, the First Sergeant told him that his flag was anti-American and he'd have to take it down.  Of course he had to comply, but he asked the First Sergeant to reconsider as it was part of his job to think like an East German.  Was the flag a symbol for East Germans?  Would they die for it?  Did it represent more than a colorful banner?  His arguments fell on deaf ears.  He asked his Platoon Leader, and eventually his Company Commander, but all gave the same answer: "It's anti-American, take it down."

Not one to be easily dissuaded - he was trained to think like his enemy - he tried a new tactic.  He approached his First Sergeant and asked, "Everything that's anti-American needs to be taken down?"

"Yes," was the emphatic reply.

"Okay then," says my friend, "Sergeant Smith across the hall has a Confederate Flag on his wall, that should come down too, right?"

"No, of course not.  Why would it?"

"Well," says my friend, "the Confederate Flag is the flag of people that fought and killed Americans in their efforts to quit the United States.  They were fighting against America in an effort to stop being Americans.  How much more anti-American can you get?"

Caught in the verbal trap, the First Sergeant knew that every American barracks building in Germany - perhaps every American barracks around the world - had a Confederate Flag displayed somewhere.  Removing them all was a fight he couldn't win and if he allowed that show of anti-Americanism, then he'd have to allow my friend to keep his East German flag.  My friend had won.

It feels like it's become an annual thing for someone somewhere fly their Confederate Flag proudly.  There was that public school employee in Oregon; the Georgia State Capital; now a woman in South Carolina (AP News, Sept 2011).  All of them using the same argument: "It's our heritage.  It's part of our family history and it means something to me."

It seems to me that too many people love to espouse anti-American beliefs against freedom and equality at the same time they hide behind those very freedoms.  Is this what has become of Southern Hospitality?  Bite the hand that protects you?  Accept the lemonade as you throw it in your host's face?  Stomp on the peach pie as you ask for another slice?

The Confederate Flag means something to a lot of people: it's a symbol of hatred, bigotry, discrimination, and racism. That flag is as much a symbol of terrorism as anything Bin Laden or the Taliban ever cooked up.  It's a symbol of some people's desire to continue the tenets of slavery.

For all of you that own that flag, by waiving it around, you're announcing to the world your beliefs that being a hate-mongering terrorist right to "heritage" trumps every other American's rights to live free and safe.  I beg you, American's, take down that flag!  For you Terrorists, keep flying it high so we know you for what you are.

Look, Ma. No Hands!

I'm coming into the blogging world late. Many of you would say that blogging is past its prime now and so I'm too late. Maybe. But I'm not blogging for you, I'm blogging for me.

I find in my old age (45) that I've become opinionated. I lay awake at night tossing and turning and writing in my head. I can't sleep; the only thing I find that works it to get up, fire on the 'puter and get all that stuff off my mind.

So, I'm starting this blog for my health. So I can sleep. So I can have happy dreams. I'll write down all my demons and nightmares and share them with you. Misery loves company.

Some of these are just my random thoughts.  Some will be stories from my past (my memoir in blog form) and some will be the ranting of a middle-aged lunatic.  I have a few that I've saved from days past.  I'll start with these and add more as I go.

I do hope you get something out of this too.  I think I've had a unique past.  A troubled childhood.  I hope that in my pain, you might find strength.  I wish you luck if you recognize something of your past in mine.