Saturday, November 25, 2006
In for a Dime...
(5)
But this is only my impression of what actually went on today at the Kaiser Pharmacy. There is no proof. Good thing for those lovely girls!
But the next time I make a personal order at that pharmacy I will begin with the words, 'I want to order some drugs...' It will go rapidly hyperbolic from there! What an idea!
Which brings us back to you: Do you ever order drugs from your pharmacy? If so are you above a little drug spoof? No? Then I would suggest to you that the next time you appear in the window of your favorite pharmacy you begin the conversation with, 'I vant to ordah deeze drugs.' You should be prepared with the pharmacological designation of LSD (Lysergic Acid Diethylamide Tartrate twenty five). You should specify tabs containing 100 micrograms. You should limit your order to 'twenty tabs.' You should smile as you finger a handful of 50 dollar bills...
If the druggist takes your order without a smile, then I would suggest that you also order an ounce of his very best Cannabis Sativa. In for a dime, in for a dollar.
But this is only my impression of what actually went on today at the Kaiser Pharmacy. There is no proof. Good thing for those lovely girls!
But the next time I make a personal order at that pharmacy I will begin with the words, 'I want to order some drugs...' It will go rapidly hyperbolic from there! What an idea!
Which brings us back to you: Do you ever order drugs from your pharmacy? If so are you above a little drug spoof? No? Then I would suggest to you that the next time you appear in the window of your favorite pharmacy you begin the conversation with, 'I vant to ordah deeze drugs.' You should be prepared with the pharmacological designation of LSD (Lysergic Acid Diethylamide Tartrate twenty five). You should specify tabs containing 100 micrograms. You should limit your order to 'twenty tabs.' You should smile as you finger a handful of 50 dollar bills...
If the druggist takes your order without a smile, then I would suggest that you also order an ounce of his very best Cannabis Sativa. In for a dime, in for a dollar.
Do This in Remembrance of Me
(4)
End of anti-Jewish rant.
I think I'll close tonight with a personal note. I recently visited the Kaiser Permanente pharmacy in order to renew a prescription for Warfarin (a blood thinner). I would have called it in, but I never use the telephone. So I drove over there (not too far) and got in line at the pharmacy. Soon it was my turn. I walked up to the window at the invitation of a young woman (good-looking young woman!) who seemed to be in expansive mood. I pulled out my Kaiser card and handed it to her and said something to her to the effect that I needed a refill. So far, so normal.
She was quite good-looking and my eyes wandered from her lovely face to her tits as she said something like, 'You are here to order drugs?' Her female friend in the next window giggled at that. I repeated my order of Warfarin as it slowly dawned on me that this glorious young female and her friend at the next window were having fun with an old man, sub rosa: the conversation was between her and her friend but included me too if I was hip enough. And I was. I am very hip!
But as this realization dawned on me in the background of my reason for being there I said, 'I will return on Monday to pick up the drugs.' I handed her my Kaiser card. She took it with a giggle as it slowly (I am very old) dawned on me that these two yum-yums were having fun with a hip old man (me). The young woman then became serious as she processed my order.
Meanwhile it finally dawned on me that these two lovely young girls were playing a game amongst themselves with me as co-player, and I said something like, 'I'd also like some Cocaine and some Marijuana.' They both giggled.
But that was lame. I would never do cocaine. Then I said, as she handed my card back to me, 'But if you have any LSD I would be really interested!' She acted astonished as she put her finger to her lips with 'Shhhh...'
What a glorious interaction! It was the highlight of my drab day. It amazes me that such small interactions with my fellow human beings produces such wondrous results!
End of anti-Jewish rant.
I think I'll close tonight with a personal note. I recently visited the Kaiser Permanente pharmacy in order to renew a prescription for Warfarin (a blood thinner). I would have called it in, but I never use the telephone. So I drove over there (not too far) and got in line at the pharmacy. Soon it was my turn. I walked up to the window at the invitation of a young woman (good-looking young woman!) who seemed to be in expansive mood. I pulled out my Kaiser card and handed it to her and said something to her to the effect that I needed a refill. So far, so normal.
She was quite good-looking and my eyes wandered from her lovely face to her tits as she said something like, 'You are here to order drugs?' Her female friend in the next window giggled at that. I repeated my order of Warfarin as it slowly dawned on me that this glorious young female and her friend at the next window were having fun with an old man, sub rosa: the conversation was between her and her friend but included me too if I was hip enough. And I was. I am very hip!
But as this realization dawned on me in the background of my reason for being there I said, 'I will return on Monday to pick up the drugs.' I handed her my Kaiser card. She took it with a giggle as it slowly (I am very old) dawned on me that these two yum-yums were having fun with a hip old man (me). The young woman then became serious as she processed my order.
Meanwhile it finally dawned on me that these two lovely young girls were playing a game amongst themselves with me as co-player, and I said something like, 'I'd also like some Cocaine and some Marijuana.' They both giggled.
But that was lame. I would never do cocaine. Then I said, as she handed my card back to me, 'But if you have any LSD I would be really interested!' She acted astonished as she put her finger to her lips with 'Shhhh...'
What a glorious interaction! It was the highlight of my drab day. It amazes me that such small interactions with my fellow human beings produces such wondrous results!
Friday, November 24, 2006
Feeding the Monster
(3)
You do!
You feed The Monster with your prayers. You feed The Monster with your fears. You feed The Monster with your credulity. You feed The Monster with your existential lack of courage. And The Monster feasts on your being. Your being! Some things can't be ignored, and The Monster is one of those things. You need to confront The Monster. How to do that?
Begin by looking around you. See the stark reality. Suppress those emotions which have always buttressed your stupid old beliefs. Recognize that sometimes emotions do not belong inside of logical considerations. Emotions are essentially quick primitive ways of avoiding sudden death. Logic takes longer. Logic needs dispassion. There is no emotional logic. There is no reasoning from emotion. Reasoning is extra-emotional. Remember: emotion avoids enemies and reveals friends immediately. Immediately! But reason later corrects emotion on the condition that you have been so fortunate as to survive your initial emotion.
Reason constructs Science. Science is a long-term idea which leads to technology, another long term idea. Over centuries Science constructs Technology while emotion - a short term idea - leads to spats which draw the attentions of frivolous folks who eventually die (and not a moment too soon). You see this all the time on tv.
Meanwhile the long-term aspect of human brain function - reason - buttresses Science and casts doubt on the religions which are our most dubious cultural heritage.
You do!
You feed The Monster with your prayers. You feed The Monster with your fears. You feed The Monster with your credulity. You feed The Monster with your existential lack of courage. And The Monster feasts on your being. Your being! Some things can't be ignored, and The Monster is one of those things. You need to confront The Monster. How to do that?
Begin by looking around you. See the stark reality. Suppress those emotions which have always buttressed your stupid old beliefs. Recognize that sometimes emotions do not belong inside of logical considerations. Emotions are essentially quick primitive ways of avoiding sudden death. Logic takes longer. Logic needs dispassion. There is no emotional logic. There is no reasoning from emotion. Reasoning is extra-emotional. Remember: emotion avoids enemies and reveals friends immediately. Immediately! But reason later corrects emotion on the condition that you have been so fortunate as to survive your initial emotion.
Reason constructs Science. Science is a long-term idea which leads to technology, another long term idea. Over centuries Science constructs Technology while emotion - a short term idea - leads to spats which draw the attentions of frivolous folks who eventually die (and not a moment too soon). You see this all the time on tv.
Meanwhile the long-term aspect of human brain function - reason - buttresses Science and casts doubt on the religions which are our most dubious cultural heritage.
The Monster Above
(2)
The obsessed Jew Gerash has long been involved in 'buying poor performance' from folks who do business with me. It is a modus operandi of long standing, and new glasses have always been a favorite theme in this regard. The most outrageous example of this predeliction was back in the '90s when I attempted to acquire new glasses from Sears at Southglenn. The focus in this case was on the Jewish Optometrist (I had yet to realize that I should avoid Jews) who attended me. This pathetic piece of Jewish Dogshit misread my results and the glasses were totally unacceptable. Attempts to correct the matter were rejected by said Dog Shit, a little Jew who had his business at the Southglenn Sears store. I ended up paying another optometrist to do the measurements. Furthermore, for several years after that incident with the Jew optometrist at Sears I would meet the sucker in the maul as I did my daily walk. I must have passed the Jewish sonofabitch at least a hundred times as I walked the maul near Sears. He would stare at me as we walked by each other. (It was always thus: we met each other. We never overtook each other. This form of 'confrontation' would become a template for all other encounters with Gerashian agents. We would always meet head-on.)
I eventually got the clear impression that this pathetic little Jew was meeting me in response to a (paid) request from somebody who knew where I was at the time. I am now certain I was right about that. I could go on and on regarding this subject but the taps and booms from above during the time I have been typing tell me that I am only feeding the monster lurking above me.
Do you also have a monster lurking above you? Do you feed it with your prayers? I think you do.
The obsessed Jew Gerash has long been involved in 'buying poor performance' from folks who do business with me. It is a modus operandi of long standing, and new glasses have always been a favorite theme in this regard. The most outrageous example of this predeliction was back in the '90s when I attempted to acquire new glasses from Sears at Southglenn. The focus in this case was on the Jewish Optometrist (I had yet to realize that I should avoid Jews) who attended me. This pathetic piece of Jewish Dogshit misread my results and the glasses were totally unacceptable. Attempts to correct the matter were rejected by said Dog Shit, a little Jew who had his business at the Southglenn Sears store. I ended up paying another optometrist to do the measurements. Furthermore, for several years after that incident with the Jew optometrist at Sears I would meet the sucker in the maul as I did my daily walk. I must have passed the Jewish sonofabitch at least a hundred times as I walked the maul near Sears. He would stare at me as we walked by each other. (It was always thus: we met each other. We never overtook each other. This form of 'confrontation' would become a template for all other encounters with Gerashian agents. We would always meet head-on.)
I eventually got the clear impression that this pathetic little Jew was meeting me in response to a (paid) request from somebody who knew where I was at the time. I am now certain I was right about that. I could go on and on regarding this subject but the taps and booms from above during the time I have been typing tell me that I am only feeding the monster lurking above me.
Do you also have a monster lurking above you? Do you feed it with your prayers? I think you do.
Unfinished Business
(1)
I'm here from Enough... And in answer to the objection that, by simply writing about the obsessed stalker and his machinations I enable the stalker to experience the emotional rewards of 'participation,' I concur, but some things can't be ignored.
Here is more on The Book of Job.
Zaptxt looks interesting. What do you get when you type in, 'VOOT?'
Rereading the subjects from last week the only one which really connects is the one on 'glasses.' Here's the story: I recently got my eyes examined. This was more for routine health reasons than for 'vision-problem' reasons. But since I might be soon leaving Denver I decided to have a back-up set of glasses made based on the most recent measurments. Bad idea.
The examination appeared to be routine, but when the resulting glasses arrived they were not acceptable because they were not as good as my current glasses. Furthermore they produced a weird feeling in my eyes. I got the impression that one of my eyes was 'having to work' in order to focus in synch with the other eye: one of the lenses was ever-so-slightly out of focus. Both the 'computer' glasses and the 'distance' glasses had this same defect. The doctor who examined me and the technician who attended me suggested that this unacceptable situation would correct itself 'in hours or days.' Bullshit. I know enough about the visual system to reject this explanation. True, my visual system would probably adjust to the new glasses, maybe. But that would leave my old (backup) glasses incompatible. Not acceptable. They should both be interchangable.
I had the measurments redone (at a cost of 20 dollars). The new values were somewhat different, but the doctor, a Ms Juba (stomp) ( Hi there doc! yes, I promised you I would not use your name but this is war and you have unfortunately become involved. Give my regards to Anna Kosyleon, and don't forget to provide her with the blog addresses!) suggested that the new values were within the range of probable error. At the end of the second examination Dr Juba asked me to compare the new prescription to my current glasses. The result was that my current glasses were preferable.
This raises the question of where Gerashian money got involved: (1) Doctor Juba? (2) The Kaiser optics department? (3.) The manufacturer? All the world wants to know. Not me. I only want a good set of backup glasses.
I'm here from Enough... And in answer to the objection that, by simply writing about the obsessed stalker and his machinations I enable the stalker to experience the emotional rewards of 'participation,' I concur, but some things can't be ignored.
Here is more on The Book of Job.
Zaptxt looks interesting. What do you get when you type in, 'VOOT?'
Rereading the subjects from last week the only one which really connects is the one on 'glasses.' Here's the story: I recently got my eyes examined. This was more for routine health reasons than for 'vision-problem' reasons. But since I might be soon leaving Denver I decided to have a back-up set of glasses made based on the most recent measurments. Bad idea.
The examination appeared to be routine, but when the resulting glasses arrived they were not acceptable because they were not as good as my current glasses. Furthermore they produced a weird feeling in my eyes. I got the impression that one of my eyes was 'having to work' in order to focus in synch with the other eye: one of the lenses was ever-so-slightly out of focus. Both the 'computer' glasses and the 'distance' glasses had this same defect. The doctor who examined me and the technician who attended me suggested that this unacceptable situation would correct itself 'in hours or days.' Bullshit. I know enough about the visual system to reject this explanation. True, my visual system would probably adjust to the new glasses, maybe. But that would leave my old (backup) glasses incompatible. Not acceptable. They should both be interchangable.
I had the measurments redone (at a cost of 20 dollars). The new values were somewhat different, but the doctor, a Ms Juba (stomp) ( Hi there doc! yes, I promised you I would not use your name but this is war and you have unfortunately become involved. Give my regards to Anna Kosyleon, and don't forget to provide her with the blog addresses!) suggested that the new values were within the range of probable error. At the end of the second examination Dr Juba asked me to compare the new prescription to my current glasses. The result was that my current glasses were preferable.
This raises the question of where Gerashian money got involved: (1) Doctor Juba? (2) The Kaiser optics department? (3.) The manufacturer? All the world wants to know. Not me. I only want a good set of backup glasses.
Labels: eye care, Kaiser Permanente, stalker
Friday, November 17, 2006
You the Jury
(5)
Which brings us to the question of whether these two trees ever really existed. Did they? Or were they actually mythical. Did their fruit fall on fallow ground or were they delusions? Were they Illusions? Were they Myths? Were they Pre-Scientific confabulations? The answer is, 'Yes.'
Otherwise you the jury would be forced to convict God of Crimes Against Humanity. You would have to conclude that God created those special trees specifically for the purpose of tempting an innocent couple to 'sin,' and that having accomplished that goal, the god allowed those two trees to die forever because they were of no further use to anybody.
Such an outcome would have had the effect of erasing the evidence of God's evil intentions toward His hapless creations. And in consideration of that you (jurors) would be honor-bound to consider the question of a Celestial cover-up, which seems to follow from those facts.
Did you get that? No? Then read it again.
I am feeling so guilty about Non Serviam. Go there if you dare.
Which brings us to the question of whether these two trees ever really existed. Did they? Or were they actually mythical. Did their fruit fall on fallow ground or were they delusions? Were they Illusions? Were they Myths? Were they Pre-Scientific confabulations? The answer is, 'Yes.'
Otherwise you the jury would be forced to convict God of Crimes Against Humanity. You would have to conclude that God created those special trees specifically for the purpose of tempting an innocent couple to 'sin,' and that having accomplished that goal, the god allowed those two trees to die forever because they were of no further use to anybody.
Such an outcome would have had the effect of erasing the evidence of God's evil intentions toward His hapless creations. And in consideration of that you (jurors) would be honor-bound to consider the question of a Celestial cover-up, which seems to follow from those facts.
Did you get that? No? Then read it again.
I am feeling so guilty about Non Serviam. Go there if you dare.
Ancient and Modern Trees
(4)
Ok, I'm back. I like the idea of putting the dumb-ass Jewish god on trial for crimes against Humanity, otherwise I would be playing chess now, or playing C-III.
(Speaking of 'playing' I recently fired up FSX again, and flew the 737 into Atlanta during the recent bad weather. This sort of thing would be a piece of cake with FS 2004. But with FSX (FS 2006) the flight ended in disaster as the autopilot went berserk and the ILS failed to lock on. The result was a firey crash when I flew the sucker into invisible terrain during the approach.)
I love the idea of putting the stupid Jewish god on trial. And after 3000 years it is about time that somebody came up with the idea. I have no doubt at all that a human jury would convict the Bastard after hearing all the evidence. Then what?! I'll leave that for next week, but first we must convict. Have you ever read Genesis? If not, read it. Then proceed...
You will notice, in Genesis, that there are two fruit-bearing trees: The Tree of Life and The tree of Knowlege (of Good and Evil). These were not apple trees. The fruit of these trees imparted the gifts of life and knowlege. Nowadays fruit trees produce tasty treats containing lots of vitamin C (among other good stuff). These valuable trees feed Humanity. They are descendants of ancient trees dating back many millions of years, and they have been highly modified by human beings in the last several thousand years to produce the most exquisite fruit.
But The Tree of Life and The Tree of Knowlege did not survive. There are no such trees nowadays. Those trees died out, and their fruits died with them.
Ok, I'm back. I like the idea of putting the dumb-ass Jewish god on trial for crimes against Humanity, otherwise I would be playing chess now, or playing C-III.
(Speaking of 'playing' I recently fired up FSX again, and flew the 737 into Atlanta during the recent bad weather. This sort of thing would be a piece of cake with FS 2004. But with FSX (FS 2006) the flight ended in disaster as the autopilot went berserk and the ILS failed to lock on. The result was a firey crash when I flew the sucker into invisible terrain during the approach.)
I love the idea of putting the stupid Jewish god on trial. And after 3000 years it is about time that somebody came up with the idea. I have no doubt at all that a human jury would convict the Bastard after hearing all the evidence. Then what?! I'll leave that for next week, but first we must convict. Have you ever read Genesis? If not, read it. Then proceed...
You will notice, in Genesis, that there are two fruit-bearing trees: The Tree of Life and The tree of Knowlege (of Good and Evil). These were not apple trees. The fruit of these trees imparted the gifts of life and knowlege. Nowadays fruit trees produce tasty treats containing lots of vitamin C (among other good stuff). These valuable trees feed Humanity. They are descendants of ancient trees dating back many millions of years, and they have been highly modified by human beings in the last several thousand years to produce the most exquisite fruit.
But The Tree of Life and The Tree of Knowlege did not survive. There are no such trees nowadays. Those trees died out, and their fruits died with them.
Labels: FS-X, Tree of Knowlege, Tree of Life
Sometimes a Tie is Just a Tie
(3)
So I went into the LR and abandoned 3.2 beer in favor of some whiskey. Then I sat down on the couch and played the tivo version of NBC Nightly news.
So I went into the LR and abandoned 3.2 beer in favor of some whiskey. Then I sat down on the couch and played the tivo version of NBC Nightly news.
I snapped this photo just as Brian Williams said, 'Sometimes a tie is just a tie.' I knew that.
The whiskey has improved my mood a bit, but I doubt that I will continue in the usual vein. Is it sleep deprivation? Something else? I don't know. Will I return tonight? I don't know.
What will I do now? Maybe I'll go to Comcast and kick ass on the chessboard. I've been kicking a lot of ass there recently... Want to get your sorry Jewish ass kicked by a half-Irishman? Then join me there. Eheh. I have no doubt whatsoever that I have kicked a lot of sorry Jewish ass there recently.
Losing Interest
(2)
While Matt was in Israel he did an interview with Olmert, who was about to fly to America to visit Bush. I was struck by Olmert's answer to a question by Matt concerning the reason for his visit (being gassed here, RLG. By the way, SCRF (skin-crawling RF) stopped about an hour and a half ago. It is now about 1907L). Olmert said something like, 'I am not coming to the US to ask America to save Israel.' Soon after that a photograph of Hitler appeared, followed by a photograph of Ahmedinejad (of Iran). This was followed by a shot of a middle-east map which emphasized the tiny nation of Israel, surrounded by Arab/Muslim lands. I got the impression that I was being 'propagandized. I think that most folks would not have noticed that (propaganda) aspect of the interview.
Concerning the note 'Forbidden Fruit,' I have a recent (last Sunday) copy of 'Cornerstone' on tivo, where the idiot John Hagee explains to the faithful the Garden of Eden myth (Hagee would object to the word, 'myth' of course and insist that the story was factual, having come directly from the mouth of God)... Hmm. I am not into this at all tonight. Guess I'll stop now.
While Matt was in Israel he did an interview with Olmert, who was about to fly to America to visit Bush. I was struck by Olmert's answer to a question by Matt concerning the reason for his visit (being gassed here, RLG. By the way, SCRF (skin-crawling RF) stopped about an hour and a half ago. It is now about 1907L). Olmert said something like, 'I am not coming to the US to ask America to save Israel.' Soon after that a photograph of Hitler appeared, followed by a photograph of Ahmedinejad (of Iran). This was followed by a shot of a middle-east map which emphasized the tiny nation of Israel, surrounded by Arab/Muslim lands. I got the impression that I was being 'propagandized. I think that most folks would not have noticed that (propaganda) aspect of the interview.
Concerning the note 'Forbidden Fruit,' I have a recent (last Sunday) copy of 'Cornerstone' on tivo, where the idiot John Hagee explains to the faithful the Garden of Eden myth (Hagee would object to the word, 'myth' of course and insist that the story was factual, having come directly from the mouth of God)... Hmm. I am not into this at all tonight. Guess I'll stop now.
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Naughty Video in Lieu of Sermon
(1)
Be advised that this Naughty video shows a girl wearing nylon panties.
This video is More funny than naughty. Have you ever been 'thong-flashed?' If so then enjoy this ultimate version of same. Think 'suspender thong.'
Jesus did this little trick. Or so they say. If the video is indeed genuine, then the mixture must be extremely thick, with a shallow layer of water on top.
Notes for tonight:
----------
Olmert meets with Bush
Forbidden Fruit
Communicating with the dead?!
Purpura
Flight Simulator X
Bush in Vietnam
Glasses
Non Serviam
Napalm
Domestic violence
----------
Probably won't get to all of them...
Be advised that this Naughty video shows a girl wearing nylon panties.
This video is More funny than naughty. Have you ever been 'thong-flashed?' If so then enjoy this ultimate version of same. Think 'suspender thong.'
Jesus did this little trick. Or so they say. If the video is indeed genuine, then the mixture must be extremely thick, with a shallow layer of water on top.
Notes for tonight:
----------
Olmert meets with Bush
Forbidden Fruit
Communicating with the dead?!
Purpura
Flight Simulator X
Bush in Vietnam
Glasses
Non Serviam
Napalm
Domestic violence
----------
Probably won't get to all of them...
Labels: panties
Friday, November 10, 2006
Hocus Fucking Pocus
(3)
Today had a hilarious piece on the 'Holy Land' this morning. What a hoot! Matt Lauer hosted part of the show, as usual, but from Jerusalem. To be fair to Matt I don't think he quite realized how unintentionally funny his exposition was to folks like me. But I could be wrong. In fact I probably am wrong. Matt is one sharp dude, on a par with Fast Al Roker.
Today had previously named the subject, 'It,' and the audience was invited to guess what the subject of 'It' actually was. I guessed it immediately, of course: religion. I found 'The Holy Land' to be quite funny. The reason is, of course, that 'The Holy Land' is not at all that fucking 'holy.' On the contrary, that land is cursed. It should be called, 'The Accursed Land,' the land bequeathed to The Jews by their stupid god, WHTZSFCKNGNM' (pronounced, whatzisfuckingname).
That's what it should be called. But it is called 'The Holy Land' instead, because it is the land where the world's two dominant religions compete for power.
This brings us to, 'The Idea of the Holy.' I bought that book many years ago in downtown Denver at a used book sale. I loved the title! I (boom) thought I had stumbled on (boom) a revelation (boom). I read it eagerly. But it turned out to be cra(stomp)p. Metaphysical crap, having nothing whatsoever to do with psychedelic drugs.
That book is gone now, inhabiting the genre of 'Raymond's Crappy Books.' My guess is that it currently resides in The Gerash Library along with Jewish Power, and The Psychology of the Chess Player.
Today had a hilarious piece on the 'Holy Land' this morning. What a hoot! Matt Lauer hosted part of the show, as usual, but from Jerusalem. To be fair to Matt I don't think he quite realized how unintentionally funny his exposition was to folks like me. But I could be wrong. In fact I probably am wrong. Matt is one sharp dude, on a par with Fast Al Roker.
Today had previously named the subject, 'It,' and the audience was invited to guess what the subject of 'It' actually was. I guessed it immediately, of course: religion. I found 'The Holy Land' to be quite funny. The reason is, of course, that 'The Holy Land' is not at all that fucking 'holy.' On the contrary, that land is cursed. It should be called, 'The Accursed Land,' the land bequeathed to The Jews by their stupid god, WHTZSFCKNGNM' (pronounced, whatzisfuckingname).
That's what it should be called. But it is called 'The Holy Land' instead, because it is the land where the world's two dominant religions compete for power.
This brings us to, 'The Idea of the Holy.' I bought that book many years ago in downtown Denver at a used book sale. I loved the title! I (boom) thought I had stumbled on (boom) a revelation (boom). I read it eagerly. But it turned out to be cra(stomp)p. Metaphysical crap, having nothing whatsoever to do with psychedelic drugs.
That book is gone now, inhabiting the genre of 'Raymond's Crappy Books.' My guess is that it currently resides in The Gerash Library along with Jewish Power, and The Psychology of the Chess Player.
Labels: Israel
Sermon in Lieu of Attendance
(2)
I was pleasantly surprised by this week's sermon warning from the Arapahoe Road Baptist Church. Wow. What a subject. But what could it mean? Is it some sort of Rorschact inkblot test? How do you create a sermon out of that?
No doubt the sign generated huge curiosity 'mongst the faithful. No doubt many will attend tomorrow's sermon with 'bated breath. 'What can it mean?! This is exciting! Is Jesus just around the corner?!' Is Jesus in your rear view mirror?
There is no doubt that such a subject is open to a multitude of possible sermonistic interpretations, and that the sermonizer will come up with a religiously acceptable version. But where does that leave me? Sheeit. I have to do a sermon on this? Ok... I associate rear view mirrors with the idea of being followed. Who is behind me? Am I being followed? If so should I give a turn signal? (By the way, this edition of Friday Night Drunk is being brought to you by Mozart: Piano Concerto #21.)
These considerations having been stated I will launch into my Sermon in Lieu of Attendance:
----------
'Rear view mirror' refers to modern technology. Do you have a rear view mirror? Thank Technology. Technology needs Science. Thank Science. Science needs fearless curiosity. Thank fearless curiosity.
But it doesn't end there: Science needs logic. Science needs integrity. Illogical science doesn't work. Scam science doesn't work. You can't create a vaccine out of pipe dreams.
----------
End of sermon.
Labels: psychology, religion, science, technology
Monday, November 06, 2006
Crimes Against Humanity
(1)
The Goon Bible Project is a fun view of the story of Job. I remember hearing at least two sermons on the subject of Job way back in my teenage Catholic days. I was not impressed. It seemed to me that God (now known as WHTZSFCKNGNM) actually conspired with His arch enemy, Satan, to punish Job for being such a great fan of God! It was an Almighty Ego trip. It turned my stomach then and it turns my stomach now. Funny that I don't remember the fate of Job's children. Did Satan really kill them? If so, then those priests must have glossed over that unfortunate aspect of the story. Yuck. What a Prick.
An Atheist's lament is a fine article by Sam Harris (The End of Faith) lamenting the unfortunate juxtaposition of ancient religion and a modern world. Nothing good can come of it.
As I was reflecting on these two links a few days ago I came up with the idea of putting God on trial for Crimes Against Humanity. Such a trial would resemble the trial of Saddam Hussein. Much of the evidence for the prosecution of such a trial would come from the very old and odious Word of God Hisself (The VOOT). Is this not a delicious idea?
I envision such a trial beginning in Genesis with The Creation. The prosecution would show that God created two totally innocent new beings, then set them up for a catastrophic fall which they had absolutely no chance of avoiding. The game was rigged against them from the start. And when those unfortunate victims of God did indeed fall (sin against God by eating the Forbidden Fruit), God did not limit His vengance to them alone, but included all their future children in the bargain. How grotesque!
I predict that such a trial will find God 'guilty as charged.' I furthermore predict that such a trial will make Saddam Hussein appear saintly by comparison. Go get 'im, boys!
The Goon Bible Project is a fun view of the story of Job. I remember hearing at least two sermons on the subject of Job way back in my teenage Catholic days. I was not impressed. It seemed to me that God (now known as WHTZSFCKNGNM) actually conspired with His arch enemy, Satan, to punish Job for being such a great fan of God! It was an Almighty Ego trip. It turned my stomach then and it turns my stomach now. Funny that I don't remember the fate of Job's children. Did Satan really kill them? If so, then those priests must have glossed over that unfortunate aspect of the story. Yuck. What a Prick.
An Atheist's lament is a fine article by Sam Harris (The End of Faith) lamenting the unfortunate juxtaposition of ancient religion and a modern world. Nothing good can come of it.
As I was reflecting on these two links a few days ago I came up with the idea of putting God on trial for Crimes Against Humanity. Such a trial would resemble the trial of Saddam Hussein. Much of the evidence for the prosecution of such a trial would come from the very old and odious Word of God Hisself (The VOOT). Is this not a delicious idea?
I envision such a trial beginning in Genesis with The Creation. The prosecution would show that God created two totally innocent new beings, then set them up for a catastrophic fall which they had absolutely no chance of avoiding. The game was rigged against them from the start. And when those unfortunate victims of God did indeed fall (sin against God by eating the Forbidden Fruit), God did not limit His vengance to them alone, but included all their future children in the bargain. How grotesque!
I predict that such a trial will find God 'guilty as charged.' I furthermore predict that such a trial will make Saddam Hussein appear saintly by comparison. Go get 'im, boys!
Labels: Atheism, fear of God, Saddam Hussein
Saturday, November 04, 2006
Abject Reality
(5)
Speaking of 'embarrassed preachers' it looks like Haggard is kaput in the normal everyday sense of 'reputation' and 'ego.' Haggard is finished in that sense. So is his marriage. So are his children. Everything associated with Haggard's former 'reputation' has gone 'poof.' Haggard and family have been thrust into the realm of abject reality. This is a good thing.
His wife will be forced to deal with her actual human problems; his children will be forced to deal with their actual human problems. Haggard will likewise be forced to deal. It will be a severe change from their former fantasy life. This is good!
No god will pretend to intervene in this glorious new life. Will SHe? We all hope not. We think not. In fact, we all know that god will stay the fuck out of it. Meanwhile the Haggards will go through the processes of adjustment to abject reality. Let us wish them well.
There is nothing more desirable than abject reality. Nothing!
Speaking of 'embarrassed preachers' it looks like Haggard is kaput in the normal everyday sense of 'reputation' and 'ego.' Haggard is finished in that sense. So is his marriage. So are his children. Everything associated with Haggard's former 'reputation' has gone 'poof.' Haggard and family have been thrust into the realm of abject reality. This is a good thing.
His wife will be forced to deal with her actual human problems; his children will be forced to deal with their actual human problems. Haggard will likewise be forced to deal. It will be a severe change from their former fantasy life. This is good!
No god will pretend to intervene in this glorious new life. Will SHe? We all hope not. We think not. In fact, we all know that god will stay the fuck out of it. Meanwhile the Haggards will go through the processes of adjustment to abject reality. Let us wish them well.
There is nothing more desirable than abject reality. Nothing!
Labels: Ted Haggard
So Naughty
(4)
I took this photo today. I saw it yesterday. In fact I always note the message on this particular sign, for some reason. I suppose I like the idea that the preacher is willing to warn you in advance of what the sermon will be. 'Fair warning! Use caution!'
But recently I have been paying attention to this sign for the purpose of inaugurating a new theme: Sermon in Lieu of Attendance. I borrowed the idea from my favorite Charleston yum-yum, who posts church photographs 'in lieu of attendance.' I love that. So naughty.
I took this photo today. I saw it yesterday. In fact I always note the message on this particular sign, for some reason. I suppose I like the idea that the preacher is willing to warn you in advance of what the sermon will be. 'Fair warning! Use caution!'
But recently I have been paying attention to this sign for the purpose of inaugurating a new theme: Sermon in Lieu of Attendance. I borrowed the idea from my favorite Charleston yum-yum, who posts church photographs 'in lieu of attendance.' I love that. So naughty.
I will exposite this week's 'sermon in lieu of attendance' in the next post.
I should mention that, in order not to put pressure on the hapless composer of this weekly missive, I will seek out other possible sources of inspiration in the future. I say this not because I would be afraid to do 'sermons' based on subjects determined by 'the other.' Not at all: I am afraid of nothing.
But I don't want to embarrass an innocent preacher.
Labels: religion
Sudoku Freak
(3)
Here is Kootch doing her favorite thing. She seems to be near the end of the book. And in fact, she asked me to buy her a new one if I found myself is such an environment.
Here is Kootch doing her favorite thing. She seems to be near the end of the book. And in fact, she asked me to buy her a new one if I found myself is such an environment.
Tonight when I entered her room she was reading a Japanese book and the Sudoku book in the photo was in the trash can, all done.
Kootch often does Sudoku while 'watching' both English and Japanese tv programs.
The table she is using is a coffee table, and she is 'sitting' at it in Japanese style.
What am I? What are You?
(2)
Primitive religious beliefs can be dangerous in a modern world. Modern science and ancient superstitions are a volatile mix. In the interests of preventing an eventual catastrophic explosion in this regard some scientists and philosophers are becoming activists. They propose an end to the teaching of ancient superstitions in the form of 'religion.'
The crusade against religion (Wired) explores the question, 'Where do you stand with God?' It seems to me that this is a timely essay. It furthermore seems to me that I can no longer avoid the central issue. I have been called to declare myself. What am I? I have jokingly called my 'religious convictions' everything from 'Agnostic' to 'Pink Pantheist.' But these are little jokes. What am I really?
Firstly, I think that the question, 'Where do you stand with God' is a loaded question. I do not stand with God. Nor do I stand against God. I don't know God. Never met the sucker. So how can I declare a position in the matter?
I am certainly an Atheist regarding the Jewish god, WHTZSNM (pronounced, whatzisname), but I am willing to allow for the possibility that our glorious universe is the product of some unknown 'god' who is responsible for its existence. That would make me a 'Provisional Deist,' I suppose. I can not believe that such an unknown god would need to be 'worshipped' in the sense that the Jewish god needs it. The Jewish god's need for worship seems to me like an unhealthy addiction. An ego problem. A psychological disease. Nor can I believe that the creator of the universe had issues with bad behavior to the extent that he (she-it) would come up with the category, 'sin against god.' The idea seems ludicrous to me.
So count me as a Provisional Deist. 'Atheist' seems to be too anti-logical.
By the way, the Wired article had three glorious links which might interest you: The punk Rocker, the Illusionists, and the Scribe.
Primitive religious beliefs can be dangerous in a modern world. Modern science and ancient superstitions are a volatile mix. In the interests of preventing an eventual catastrophic explosion in this regard some scientists and philosophers are becoming activists. They propose an end to the teaching of ancient superstitions in the form of 'religion.'
The crusade against religion (Wired) explores the question, 'Where do you stand with God?' It seems to me that this is a timely essay. It furthermore seems to me that I can no longer avoid the central issue. I have been called to declare myself. What am I? I have jokingly called my 'religious convictions' everything from 'Agnostic' to 'Pink Pantheist.' But these are little jokes. What am I really?
Firstly, I think that the question, 'Where do you stand with God' is a loaded question. I do not stand with God. Nor do I stand against God. I don't know God. Never met the sucker. So how can I declare a position in the matter?
I am certainly an Atheist regarding the Jewish god, WHTZSNM (pronounced, whatzisname), but I am willing to allow for the possibility that our glorious universe is the product of some unknown 'god' who is responsible for its existence. That would make me a 'Provisional Deist,' I suppose. I can not believe that such an unknown god would need to be 'worshipped' in the sense that the Jewish god needs it. The Jewish god's need for worship seems to me like an unhealthy addiction. An ego problem. A psychological disease. Nor can I believe that the creator of the universe had issues with bad behavior to the extent that he (she-it) would come up with the category, 'sin against god.' The idea seems ludicrous to me.
So count me as a Provisional Deist. 'Atheist' seems to be too anti-logical.
By the way, the Wired article had three glorious links which might interest you: The punk Rocker, the Illusionists, and the Scribe.
Pet Celebration Day
(1)
The preceeding post was written in the totally sober state, of course, and the reason is that Saturday (today) was the day for flu shots at Kaiser. (Kootch got hers early, and I got mine late, after 11:00.) That sober post was competent but not much fun. Had it been more fun I would have written more. I am having fun now, so I am writing again. Looks like tomorrow my body will have to cope with the effects of both the flu shot and the hangover. Oh joy.
Speaking of which, the funniest thing on tv all week was a blurb on the Jimmy Kimmel show. The occasion was that the beloved Bob Barker announced his retirement this week from The Price is Right. As everyone who watches the show knows, Barker is an 'animal rights activist.' Most animals would not agree, of course, and that is what made the Kimmel creation so funny. Kimmell chose dogs for his depiction of nation-wide pet celebrations in response to Barker's announcement. I suppose the reason is obvious: dogs are much hornier. Picture this if you can: multiple video shots of dogs, 'humping' to the tune of Beethoven's Ode to Joy. And how they humped! Some dogs humped other dogs, of course, but some dogs, apparently lacking appropriate dog pardners, humped stuffed animals. It was quite a celebration, and the music was wonderful.
I hereby propose that the date of Barker's announcement be remembered nationally as Pet Celebration Day.
The preceeding post was written in the totally sober state, of course, and the reason is that Saturday (today) was the day for flu shots at Kaiser. (Kootch got hers early, and I got mine late, after 11:00.) That sober post was competent but not much fun. Had it been more fun I would have written more. I am having fun now, so I am writing again. Looks like tomorrow my body will have to cope with the effects of both the flu shot and the hangover. Oh joy.
Speaking of which, the funniest thing on tv all week was a blurb on the Jimmy Kimmel show. The occasion was that the beloved Bob Barker announced his retirement this week from The Price is Right. As everyone who watches the show knows, Barker is an 'animal rights activist.' Most animals would not agree, of course, and that is what made the Kimmel creation so funny. Kimmell chose dogs for his depiction of nation-wide pet celebrations in response to Barker's announcement. I suppose the reason is obvious: dogs are much hornier. Picture this if you can: multiple video shots of dogs, 'humping' to the tune of Beethoven's Ode to Joy. And how they humped! Some dogs humped other dogs, of course, but some dogs, apparently lacking appropriate dog pardners, humped stuffed animals. It was quite a celebration, and the music was wonderful.
I hereby propose that the date of Barker's announcement be remembered nationally as Pet Celebration Day.
Friday, November 03, 2006
I'll be Back
(1)
Oooo, naughty! I think I was a bit too hard on the folks at Microsoft. (I just attempted to upload a screen shot of the 737 cockpit but it failed. Oh well.)
What I meant by the criticism is that the working cockpit is too close to real-looking. The result is that the various 'controls' are too small, making them difficult to read and to use. This sort of cockpit is more functional (user-friendly) when it is created 'in caricature' with oversized control switches and oversized readouts.
I also found very little continuity in the keyboard commands. Knowing the commands for the most recent version does not help you very much with the new version.
The first flight was a near disaster: the airplane was badly out of trim for takeoff (wanting to dive) and had to be flown to a safe altitude before the autopilot could be engaged. Efforts to manually retrim the airplane failed, although the trim wheel seemed to be functional. Totally disgusted by the experience, I left the damned thing hanging in the air at three or four thousand feet AGL, where it hangs today...
Microsoft seems to have reinvented the wheel here in the shape of an ellipse. What the design team needs is a philosophy: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Improve it.
No booze tonight therefore no writing. May be back Saturday or Sunday night.
Oooo, naughty! I think I was a bit too hard on the folks at Microsoft. (I just attempted to upload a screen shot of the 737 cockpit but it failed. Oh well.)
What I meant by the criticism is that the working cockpit is too close to real-looking. The result is that the various 'controls' are too small, making them difficult to read and to use. This sort of cockpit is more functional (user-friendly) when it is created 'in caricature' with oversized control switches and oversized readouts.
I also found very little continuity in the keyboard commands. Knowing the commands for the most recent version does not help you very much with the new version.
The first flight was a near disaster: the airplane was badly out of trim for takeoff (wanting to dive) and had to be flown to a safe altitude before the autopilot could be engaged. Efforts to manually retrim the airplane failed, although the trim wheel seemed to be functional. Totally disgusted by the experience, I left the damned thing hanging in the air at three or four thousand feet AGL, where it hangs today...
Microsoft seems to have reinvented the wheel here in the shape of an ellipse. What the design team needs is a philosophy: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Improve it.
No booze tonight therefore no writing. May be back Saturday or Sunday night.
