Thursday, May 7, 2009

Sins of the flesh... They will get you in trouble. I don't think that the sins of the flesh are the reasons for peoples problems. I think the problems come from society, including the person or persons involved, reactions to the so-called sins of the flesh. We are human beings. Human beings sin. This is a major point of distinction in most religions. So, why when human beings sin are people so surprised. I refer to John Edwards extramarital affair. He and his wife Elizabeth were on Oprah today. Elizabeth was being interviewed about her latest book. The book was about the infamous affair of John Edwards. I believe Elizabeth wrote the book to get things in perspective. I think she wanted to have a public written record of her perspective on the subject. She has terminal cancer, thus her days are numbered. She is a remarkable woman in many ways. Her reaction to her husband's infidelity is par for the course. I think she is concerned about her children, thus the book. I do believe this is a private matter. The Edwards family will deal with it. However, we must remember that we are all human beings, capable of human frailties. We must be more concerned with our own human condition and less concerned with the human tragedies of others. 

Sunday, May 10, 2009

Happy Mother's Day! Today is a holiday that we all should celebrate. Each of us has a mother, biological or not. Today we honor those people who perform the role of mother. Think about it. Each of us has someone to recognize today. Hopefully we do more than think. We remember, reflect and express our affection.

Now to move on to the Washington Correspondents' Dinner. Not to detract from our celebration of Mother's Day, but last night's annual Washington event was over the top. It seemed to me to be Hollywood's night with the President. The news people seemed to be in attendance because of the name of the event, "Washington Correspondents' Dinner". The night had little to do with the media and everything to do with the left wing Hollywood crowd. The Oscars should have been held during the event - everyone was there. I think the administration needs to be a little careful here. The media can turn on an administration. However, President Obama's Hollywood celebrity connection seems to prohibit that from happening. The right wing conservatives have every right to cast doubts, throw stones and battle for existence. This is not change. It is more of the same although the names have been changed. Sooner or later the Democrats will fall from power and the other side will take over. Maybe the liberals should enjoy the limelight now and prepare for the darkness that will most definitely follow.

I do want to mention my impressions of the keynote speaker last night, Wanda Sykes. She was playing for her Hollywood liberal audience. She was extremely inappropriate at times. She compared Rush Limbaugh to the 20th terrorist and exploited his prescription drug problem. Similar attacks were cast on former Vice-President Cheney and other Bush administration personalities including the former President. In my opinion she wasn't being humorous. She was being nasty. I don't really fault her. The organizers of the event who hired Wanda Sykes for the job should have been aware of her nightclub, gutter mouth sense of humor. Was it planned that way? Probably, but that was unfortunate. It shows that Washington is all about politics, the nasty side of politics. That is a shame. I'm not a right wing supporter, but I do believe that mutual respect should be the cornerstone of the American political system. By the way, I thought that President Obama did an outstanding job. Except of course for his Rahn Emanuel Mother's Day joke. A little disrespectful to the Mother's Day holiday and vulgar in meaning.

Monday, May 11, 2009

Scandal on Miami Beach. Sounds like a tempting sex-ridden novel. The scandal involves kissing and hugging a woman on a south Florida beach. Of course the one doing the kissing and hugging was a Roman Catholic priest. The priest is confessing his human desire for the woman. He was released of his priestly duties and now he's talking. He really isn't saying much. He doesn't want to leave the priesthood; however, he says he loves the woman. He wanders why celibacy isn't optional. Not too much luck with that one. No, not with the current pope and church teachings. Why must priests be celibate? It all started in the first millennium of the church. At the time of Christ and continuing to around the 10th or 11th century priest had the option of being married or celibate. The change in practice became characteristic of the power control desires of the church. The church says celibacy gives the priest the freedom to serve God and the faithful exclusively. However, I believe the real reason stems from the Dark Ages sins of the church when control and power were the objective of the hierarchy. That control and quest for power remains with the church today. Priests should be free to marry, if they so desire. There are many personal problems suffered by priests stemming from that unfulfilled human need. The Catholic Church must relax it's quest for power and control if it has any chance of surviving. In the same vein, women should be given the right to become priests, gays should be ordained and any other human being should be permitted to serve God as a shepherd of souls. The hierarchy of the Catholic Church must examine it's objectives, realign it's priorities and respond to the needs of it's people. After all the church was established by Jesus Christ to serve the people, not to selfishly serve itself.

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Where in the world is May going. The more free time I have, the faster it goes. Go figure. When I worked a full time job, I seemed to have so much more time. Now that I have all the time in the world, I can't seem to find the time to do the things that I enjoy doing. Posting to this blog being one of those things. I do have good intentions. I go through my daily ritual and all kinds of interesting ideas come into my head. I think to myself that I will write about this or that or the other thing in my blog as soon as I get time. However, I usually run out of time. That's no excuse. Let's take a minute and I will discuss, ever so briefly, one of my observations.

While enjoying coffee and reading my newspaper at my favorite java joint I noticed that many of the patrons around me were on their laptops. All of a sudden I heard one of them say, "Is the network down?" One by one the other techies around me started to stir. Boy did they get vocal. Usually they never say a word, except for the necessary communications involving their computer projects or their meetings going on. Now they were looking around, quizzing other people about the network, running towards the food counter to ask the attendants, "Is the network down?" When did restaurants become computer terminals. And why don't these upwardly mobile 21st century worker bees perform their job tasks in offices? Or at least in a private, secure setting?  Some are so poorly skilled in client confidentiality that it scares me. Confidential information, especially client related, can be overheard and is visible to the uninterested patrons. I wonder what the clients would say if they knew that their confidential information was being discussed and publicly being exposed in the neighborhood cafe. Is this the workplace of the 21st century? If so, where the heck do I go to enjoy a soothing cup of coffee?

Thursday, May 21, 2009

What is up with conservative talk radio? It seems that they are all whining and complaining. Rush is Rush. He complains about everything Democrat. That's a given. Michael Savage is whining over some personal problem with England. And Glenn Beck, well he's just a big fat whining baby. Let's start with Beck. I've always thought that he was a little sweet in the sensitivity department. Now he's in a down and out girl war with the ladies of The View. He attacked some of them on his radio program a few weeks ago. When he guested recently on their show, they let him have it. All except of course the conservative lone lady, Elizabeth Hasselbeck. The subject isn't important. The point is when one attacks another, expect a retaliation. Beck just couldn't take it. He has no problem on his show attacking most liberals. He attacks best when the person is not face to face with him. He also makes fun of and makes light of the poorest among us. It seems to me that he thinks that he is superior to most people. That may be fine, but expect a retaliation. He can't face people face to face. Grow up Beck. Michael Savage has been squawking endlessly for the last two weeks about a slight from Britain. I don't know the whole story, but he was supposedly put on a do not admit list for travel to England. He has been spending the last couple of weeks on his radio talk show trying to prove he is educated, professional and successful. That's nice, but a little too defensive for my taste. The way to prove one's worth is by example, not words. Next Rush... What can I say? Rush is Rush - the most conceited, egocentric, irritating and nonprofessional person on conservative radio. So what's up with conservative radio? President Obama and the success of the Democrats - that's what.

Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Judge Sotomayor is nominated by President Obama to be the next Supreme Court Justice. I think a more moderate candidate could have been nominated. The conservative right is already attacking her judicial record and her outspoken rhetoric. The Democrats are no different from the Republicans in their ideological choices for the Supreme Court. They want justices who promote their platforms and appeal to the base of their respective parties. Judge Sotomayor was a poor choice. She not only provokes attack from the right, she has too much unflattering rhetoric in her judicial past. President Obama's choice satisfies the Democrat base, promotes diversity and will be approved, but at what price?

The California Supreme Court upholds the state's ban on same-sex marriage. The Court does declare the validity of the 18,000 same-sex marriages that have already taken place. Wrong. This is a civil rights issue. An election cannot and must not violate the civil rights of any person or group of persons - even gay persons. I used to be against same-sex marriage and supportive of civil unions. Now I am for both, with a marked preference for same-sex marriage. The more the issue is discussed, the more I think it becomes a civil rights issue. Sooner or later, gays and lesbians will be permitted to marry, just like their heterosexual counterparts. It is a civil rights issue. All people have the right to civil marriage. In short, to their own individual and unique pursuit of happiness.