If there’s a Rock and Roll Heaven….

Not only do they have a helluva band, I was there yesterday!

I mentioned that a small group of family was heading out on Friday on a road trip to Cleveland, where we'd pay a visit to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Me, Shane, and Matt rode over together (thanks for driving, Shane!), and my sisters Diana and Sue (this was Sue's birthday), Di's husband Tom, and my niece Jana (Sue's daughter) rode in another car. When we saw their vehicle pass us, then encountered them a couple more times on the highway, I of course had to make the joke, "Looks like we got ourselves a convoy." Shane, Matt, and I are children of the seventies...what can I say?

No problem on the drive over, and we all made great time...almost exactly four hours to get there. We met up at a restaurant I found online, just about a quarter of a mile from the Hall. Nothing fancy, but plenty of decent food and quiet enough that we could all talk without shouting. At one point, there was a lively discussion about this year's nominees for induction. I said Alice Cooper needs to be in, also the J. Geils Band...Diana said "And Donna Summer." I said, "What? That's not rock and roll. That's disco." I'll cop to listening and dancing to some of that shit once in a while now (I still think "I Will Survive" by Gloria Gaynor is a great song), but I really don't think you can consider Donna Summer "rock and roll." I believe it was Matt who said that it has electric guitar in it, so it qualifies. We were all laughing by this point! Again, children of the '70s...I still remember the whole "disco sucks" sentiment then, when it was a battle between punk and disco. I'll take punk any day.

After lunch, we made our way over to the Hall. I was so excited by this time that I could hardly contain myself. The building is a beautiful piece of architecture, designed by I. M. Pei. (He's the guy who did the pyramid at the Louvre.) But I was there for the rock stuff, man!

View Full Album

I'm afraid that photos and videos are not allowed in the exhibit areas, so was able to take some only in the vestibule. They did have some fun stuff there. One of the first things we looked at was a display case of various guitars...and the first one we saw was from the B-52s' Ricky Wilson. Shane, Matt, and I got verklempt. Ricky died of AIDS some years ago, and is still missed. In the same case was Johnny Cash's guitar. Then there was a Ted Nugent guitar, which we did not exclaim over, and in fact, completely ignored. I did not take a picture in protest. Kind of silly, I know. But I parted ways with Ted when he praised Sarah Palin's "herculean work ethic." I guess he missed that whole part where she fucking quit. Herculean work ethic, my ass. Well, she's good at shoveling shit, so I guess you could describe that as Herculean, since that was one of his tasks. Hmph.

I had to get a picture of Shane in front of Joan Jett's Jaguar, because Shane's car is a VW Jetta, which he named Joan. Get it? Joan Jetta? I just love that. I also got pictures of us in front of the CBGB marquee. That was the club that was probably identified with the punk/new wave movement more than any other, at least in the States. Artists like Blondie, the Police, the Ramones, Talking Heads, and the Sex Pistols all played there. It was the mecca of punk. I got pictures of the ZZ Top Eliminator car, and my favorite picture from the day is me, Matt, and Shane doing the ZZ Top finger point in front of the car. Shane wondered how many people per day do that shot! I don't care if we didn't think of it first...it makes me grin every time I see it!

View Full Album

When we headed into the exhibit hall, we kind of split into the groups we had in the two cars. Not surprising, because we're sort of different eras when it comes to music. I actually wandered off by myself for a while, but hooked up with Shane and Matt again pretty quickly.

Here are some of the highlights for me:

• I thought the Jim Morrison section was fantastic. My friend Tony in Cleveland told me to be sure to look for Morrison's report cards, and I found them. What an incredibly bright young man! Anyone who thinks he was just a dumb rock star is very mistaken. I also enjoyed the correspondence between Morrison's father, a Navy admiral, and the chief of police in Miami concerning Morrison's arrest for indecent exposure. Shane, Matt, and I found it interesting and rather touching that although the elder Morrison didn't support Jim's rock career, and they became estranged, the Admiral told the chief of police that Jim was basically a good kid and did not intend to cause trouble. It was some interesting insight into was what obviously a difficult family relationship.
• I had meant to bring an Ian Hunter CD with me so that we could play "Cleveland Rocks" in the car, but I forgot. So it made me smile to see Ian Hunter's piano on display, the one on which he composed that song! Apparently it's the unofficial theme song of Cleveland.
• I loved the stage costumes, and they had a ton of them. Everyone from the Who to Bowie to Queen to P-Funk (as you can imagine, the P-Funk clothing was quite entertaining) to Stevie Nicks. Seeing her flowing dresses and platform boots prompted Matt to give a dead-on impersonation of her stomping on a treadmill in the video of "Stand Back." (Go to the 1:49 mark to see that, if you don't remember it.) I think I snorted with laughter when he did that! I remember seeing pictures and video of so many of my favorite artists wearing those very same clothes.
• We watched a 12-minute video about...video! When MTV began, it was truly the golden age of music videos, and for anyone my age, I know that it had to shape our listening habits. Shane said he has about 20 videotapes full of videos...I think we need to make sure those get transferred to DVD, because can you imagine how much fun those would be to watch? Anyway, the three of us sat there and watched the video, a rapid fire montage of images throughout the years. We called out the artists names as we recognized them, and it was fun to see how many we remembered! We came by that area again later, and there was no one else there, so we acted out some of the video clips, including..."Vogue." Yes. Oh man, I was cracking up, and I snorted again!
• I was interested to see the original cover of the Beatles' "Yesterday and Today," the one that is referred to as the butcher cover. In this shot, you can see the smiling lads are surrounded by dismembered dolls and pieces of meat. I think I recall reading about that before, but didn't remember much about it. Very edgy for its time, and after complaints, the cover was yanked and replaced. The original cover is one of the most highly-prized pieces of Beatles memorabilia.

• One of the temporary exhibits was about Bruce Springsteen. I've never been that much into Bruce. Calm down, calm down...I like him just fine and think he's an amazing artist. But for whatever reason, I just never became a rabid fan. What I thought was neat was seeing how many scrapbooks he kept. There were several there that he himself had created. I could just imagine a young Bruce cutting out articles about himself, and pasting them into his scrapbooks. I thought it was a charming, personal aspect to one of the biggest stars ever in rock music.
• My personal favorite was the Rolling Stones section. They were playing Stones footage on a few monitors, so the music was there as I looked at the displays. I loved seeing the stage outfits from several of their tours, including Mick's football outfit, and his American/British flag cape, which he is wearing in this short video that shows just how fucking awesome Keith Richards is...still one of my favorite video clips! (By the way, congratulations to Keef for having the #1 nonfiction book in the country...beating that little girl Glenn Beck who is at #2. That makes me happy...which makes me think of the Stones song "Happy," sung by Keith. But I digress.) They also had lighting fixtures from the Steel Wheels tour, which was really cool for me because that's the tour that Shane and I saw them on, in Indianapolis in 1989!

It was a fantastic experience for me, and I feel like I only scratched the surface. We didn't have time to read everything in depth, so I just tried to hit the things that were nearest and dearest to me. I was a little disappointed that there wasn't more punk memorabilia, but I think they rotate things out, and I know they have temporary exhibits. I also didn't see a lot of Kinks memorabilia, although they did have one of Dave Davies' guitars. They are inductees now, but still not as well known as they should be. An amazing band.

After a stop in ye olde gift shoppe (check out my new 45 rpm mousepad...how awesome is that?), we said our goodbyes to family and headed out into a cold, rainy day. We eventually left the rain behind, and had an enjoyable ride back that included lots of fun talk and discussion. It was a bummer to get back close to home and find snow on the ground. I had to brush about two inches off of my car, and although most of the highway was fine, when I got to my exit, it was a sheet of ice. I had slowed way down because there were cop cars there, and that was because there were a few cars that had slid off. It was scary slick. Of course, this week, it's supposed to get up close to 70°. Go figure.

Anyway, it was an amazing place, and I'm so glad that I got to see it with Shane. We've been music buddies for decades now, and it was wonderful to share that with him. If you've been there, share your favorite parts. If you haven't, and you love rock and roll as much as I do, plan a trip. I guarantee that you will love it as much as I did!

Rock on, citizens.

Aftermath

Well, I suppose I should write briefly about yesterday's election, although I really do need a break, and I'm looking forward to taking a few days off of worrying about all this. I really am so glad it's over.

Of course, I wasn't happy with the outcome, although it wasn't unexpected. What slays me about it is that they asked people in exit polls if they think the Republicans will do a better job with being in charge in the House, and the majority said no. Hahaha! I just don't get the disconnect there. "Yeah, I'm going to vote for them, but I don't expect them to do anything!" Huh?

Anyway, we've got a Republican-controlled Congress now, and I suppose that will mean it will be even harder to get anything done. I am disappointed that President Obama continues to believe that there is some sort of middle ground to be found with the GOP. I think they've made it very clear that they do not want to work with the Democrats on anything, and merely want the President to fail. Screw the country. It's disgusting. The few GOP members who are willing to work with the Democrats are getting pushed increasingly to the right by the teabaggers, making it even harder to accomplish anything. Some of us have been laughing about how they've been in charge of the House for going on 24 hours now, and they have yet to fix anything! We're waiting!

But seriously...they expected President Obama to fix the big huge mess they made in two years. I plan on applying the same pressure on them. Where's the plan? (And we plan on checking your math.) Where are the jobs? Why do we still have a deficit? Why are we still in Afghanistan? How are you going to fix our broken health care system? I want an answer, and I want it RIGHT NOW. Heh.

Having said all that, I was happy about a couple of things, and I see a silver lining in a couple of others. First and foremost, my congressman, Joe Donnelly, defeated the evil Walorski. Narrowly, but he defeated her. It would have made me sick to my stomach if she were my Representative. Disaster was averted.

Also, the most bat-shittiest crazies of the teabaggers were losers, except for Rand Paul. Really, Kentucky? Really?! Wow. But at least O'Donnell lost in Delaware, and even more importantly, Sharron Angle lost in Nevada. O'Donnell is stupid-crazy; Angle is evil-crazy. Neither should be anywhere near Washington.

I was also disappointed that Alan Grayson lost in Florida. He was one of the fiercest progressives we had, and I hated to see him ousted. However, a friend pointed out that this might be an opportunity for greater things for him; I would love to see him as DNC chairman, driving the Democratic agenda and igniting the base for 2012.

I guess my feeling is that although we may have lost this particular battle, the war is far from over. I'm resigned to giving them their two years to make a difference in jobs and the economy. I'll be curious to see what exactly their plan is for turning things around in that short of a time, and to see how their tax cuts are going to result in a flood of new jobs. I would actually welcome that, because I care about my country and my fellow citizens. But I think you'll understand when I say that I'm highly skeptical that that will happen.

On a happier and non-political note, I'll be heading out Friday with Cousin Shane and Matt, and we'll meet up with my sisters and my brother-in-law in Cleveland for an outing at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. It's my sister Sue's birthday, so it's a fun little road trip to celebrate that. Despite our love of all things rock and roll, neither Shane nor I have ever been to the Hall of Fame! *gasp* I KNOW! Diana will be focusing on Beatles stuff, I'm not sure what Sue will focus on (she's not really a rock chick, but I know she's looking forward to it), and I know that Shane and Matt and I will be all about the punk rock...and you don't stop! I might have to take an Ian Hunter CD so we can blast "Cleveland Rocks" on the way. If I had more time, I'd put together a compilation disc of some HoF members. I'll get some pictures, although I know you can't take pictures in the Hall itself. Should be a good time!

Finally, in all the excitement of the election, my blogiversary totally escaped my mind! It was four years of blogging on October 24. I'm not updating as often as I used to, but I'm okay with that. I've worked on making more substantive entries of late (I'm probably due for an Infection Connection entry soon), and I can't do that every day. I appreciate everyone who is still reading, despite my infrequent updates and even more infrequent comments elsewhere; I enjoy you all, but have been working on limiting my online time in order to enjoy other things as well. Thanks for hanging with me, and I hope I'll write enough things in the coming year that will keep you interested!

Cheers!

A coda with a curse

BWAHAHAHA! Happy Halloween, you little maniacs!

I'm not all into Halloween, although I always love scary movies. Being out in the boondocks, there are never any trick-or-treaters here, so it's pretty much just another night. However, I'm looking forward to watching the premiere of AMC's "The Walking Dead," which looks like a dandy series about the zombie apocalypse. Actually, by the time I post this, I will have watched it, so I can give a quickie review.

I've been more occupied lately with the upcoming election. Despite my intense interest in politics, I have to admit that even I have battle fatigue. The ads are constant, and the amount of postal flyers is staggering. Thank science for caller ID, because the calls are also coming fast and furious. I read somewhere that I believe it is $4 billion dollars that has been poured into this campaign, from both sides. That's obscene. All I could think of is how much good $4 billion dollars could do for people around the world, and people right here, who are hurting and even dying. I would love to see true campaign reform in which election time is quartered, and funds are limited to a certain amount. While I enjoy the run-up to the election, it gets pretty old by the time the actual day rolls around--even for me! In fact, I watched the second debate between Donnelly, Walorski, and Vogel and took notes in anticipation of writing about it a little bit here. I don't even feel like it. My mind is more than made up, and I don't feel like rehashing the same old stuff. Walorski is a dick. I don't usually call women that, but...it works here!

I have really enjoyed the lively debates on Facebook, though. Most of my friends there are of like mind, but every so often, you get a friend of a friend who does not agree and is ready to rumble. It's really entertaining. I'm always dismayed to see people who are so turned off by politics that they refuse to vote. "I hate the negative ads, so I'm not voting for anyone who uses them." "They're all crooks, so I'm not voting for anyone." Personally, I think it's a cop-out, and an excuse to not do your homework and learn more about your choices. I'm constantly amazed by people who think that somewhere, somehow, some way, they will find a candidate that agrees 100% with them. That they will find this prince or princess among humankind, the person that is a perfect reflection of their own political views. That person does not exist. It is up to us to find a candidate that we support because we agree with most of their views and most of their plans of what they want to do when in office.

I remember being amused some time ago when someone sent me a story about how President Obama is against gay marriage. They were like, "Have you seen this?! What do you think of this?" like I was going to withdraw my support because of this one issue. I said that it might surprise you to know that I don't agree with everything he does. However, I think he is the best person for the job right now. I also wish he did have more plans for stricter gun control laws, although that is not even a glimmer in his eye on his agenda, despite the hysteria you hear from some folks who seem to believe that Obama is going to personally come to their house and wrest the guns from their grasp. Not happening, folks.

Anyway, there are several things that Congressman Donnelly espouses that I don't agree with. He's a blue dog Democrat, for pete's sake, and I wish he were much more liberal. However, he's done a lot of good around here, especially with trying to bring jobs and stimulus money to his district, and his work on behalf of veterans. He is very visible, spends a lot of time in the district talking with people, and is amazingly accessible--always responding whenever I've sent a letter to him. He's a decent guy, and I think he proves the maxim "They're all crooks" wrong.

I honestly don't understand how anyone could give up one of our greatest freedoms and greatest privileges as U.S. citizens: the ability to vote for those who will represent us in our legislative branch of government. People fight and die for this privilege, and our ancestors did so when trying to establish our independence. I take it as a grave and amazing responsibility, and I don't mind telling you that I usually get a little choked up when I go vote. That is one of the reasons I take umbrage at those people who like to say that because I have certain political stances that I am not a patriot, or even that I hate America. You know what? Fuck you and the tired old nag you rode in on.

So please be involved, be informed, and no matter which way you go, right or left, please vote. It's important, and it's an honor.

Okay, the premiere of "The Walking Dead" is over. YES! I loved it! It's a gorefest, so if you don't care for that, don't bother watching. Graphic zombie killshots. I know I'll be watching again next week. I was really impressed, but I shouldn't be too surprised with a fine director like Frank Darabont. (You might have heard of a couple of his movies. "The Green Mile," and what was that one about the guy in prison...oh yeah, "The Shawshank Redemption." haha) Wow. I was glued to the TV, and usually I'm up and about doing other things. Not with this one!

It's kind of a typical story, in which a guy is hospitalized, in and out of consciousness due to a gunshot wound, and wakes up to find that everything changed while he was out. After a pretty quick learning curve, he gets an idea of what he's going to have to do to survive. And he must survive, because his wife and son are missing, and he has no idea if they are alive or dead...or undead. What always works in apocalypse tales is the relationships that are forged, often reluctantly. There is always a jerk that you just know is going to screw things up for everyone, and that you really kind of want to get eaten. There are people trying to find others, trying to either form a new society or just to get help in trying to survive. It's not a new story, but this one already promises some interesting relationships.

One thing that I always get a kick out of with apocalypse movies or shows like this: someone always wants to go to the city where there are said to be "people in charge" who are "working on a cure." It's often the CDC, but sometimes it's a fictional facility, like the one in Stovington, Vermont that Harold Lauder is so anxious to get to in The Stand. The sense of despair is palpable when they find that no one is in control.

By the way, the zombies in "The Walking Dead" are the worst kind...they're fast. It seems like when there are only a couple, they just sort of shuffle along slowly, but get them in a group and they seem to speed up. Yikes! The last thing you want when confronted by a zombie mob is a sense of competition amongst them!

Two undead thumbs up!

Here is my coda, and I will probably curse in it, thus my title. (Kudos to anyone who knows the origin of the phrase!)

Don't you just love it when someone who has treated you shabbily for some time, or has had little to no contact with you, suddenly gets a hold of you and asks for money? They seem to think they can say whatever they want about you, do whatever they want to purposefully hurt you, and then for some bizarre reason, they think you'll happily fork over some dough when they demand it. It's laughable, it really is. What's even funnier is when the person is the type who hates government entitlements, despises those who "demand handouts," and ridicules anyone who they think is unwilling to work for the money they get. I guess handouts are okay when you're the one asking for them! Everyone else is a bunch of goddamn slackers!

There seems to be a serious disconnect from reality in these people, or a complete lack of comprehension of cause and effect. You don't get to call someone names and say shitty things about them for years, then turn around and play nice when you want money. You know what I call someone like that? A manipulative, money-grubbing jerk, and someone who obviously has no idea of how to deal with people in a reasonable way. I suppose sometimes they can't help themselves; they just don't have the ability to understand that their actions have consequences, and they're so wrapped up in their own little world of deception and bitterness (Malice in Wonderland) that they can't control their own behavior. That doesn't make it any better, it doesn't make me sympathetic, and it certainly doesn't make me any less resistant to such manipulation.

We all make choices in our lives. If your choice was to purposefully treat others shabbily, time and time again, it's going to come back to bite you on the ass. Guaranteed. Go lie in that bed you've made.

That’s entertainment

Tonight I listened to a live stream on a Rochester, Indiana radio station of a debate between the candidates vying for the 2nd Congressional seat. This might not be of much interest to the vast majority of my friends here, although I do plan on speaking about the bigger picture. If you don't want to read about any of this, I am totally cool with that.

The candidates are the incumbent Democrat, Joe Donnelly, who is one of the "blue dogs." I'm not thrilled with the blue dog bullshit, but all in all, Joe has been a concerned and responsive Congressman. I don't agree with all of his positions, but I like him overall, and he is a Democrat voice in the Hoosier sea of red. The Libertarian candidate is Mark Vogel, a pharmacy student at Purdue. The Republican candidate is Jackie Walorski, a teabagger darlin' endorsed by Sarah Palin. (I tried to find a picture of all three of them, but to no avail. Vogel doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell, so I don't think a picture is necessary.)

I've made no bones about my utter loathing of Walorski, so I won't even pretend to be objective on this. However, I did take notes on the debate, and will write a few words here. My pal Milwaukee Dan #1 messaged me, said that he was taking notes, and that he was such a geek...I said I took notes, too, so I guess we're political geeks together! He then coined the term "Politigeek," and I think it's obvious that I qualify.

Here are several of the topics and the candidates' takes on them.

• Drug legalization: None of them were advocates, but all of them brought up meth and heroin. I cracked up. No one is advocating the legalization of meth and heroin. Come on! The question is obviously about the legalization of marijuana, but each of them sidestepped it and brought up freakin' meth. It was ludicrous.
• Abortion: Once again, Walorski tried to say that the health care bill allows for federal funds for abortion. Obama signed an executive order attached to the bill saying that federal funds would not be used for abortion, and that is the only reason that Donnelly, a pro-life, devout Catholic, voted for it. It's true that such an executive order can be easily changed, but to say that Donnelly voted for federal funds for abortion is completely wrong. At one point during Walorski's criticism of Donnelly, the crowd began to boo. In one of the most interesting moments of the debate, Donnelly took charge and said that no matter what the opinions here, everyone needs to remain respectful and respect the debate forum and all those involved. I thought that showed real leadership and real class.
• The United Nations: Both Walorski and Vogel said they want the United States out of the UN. Donnelly said that there is nothing wrong with sitting down and talking with people; Walorski said something about how inviting Ahmedinijad here, on U.S. soil, to speak at the UN is somehow legitimizing Iran's policies. On the contrary, I think that hearing Ahmedinijad talk about how there are no homosexuals in Iran simply showed how idiotic that regime is. The sort of isolationism espoused by Walorski, Vogel, and others really bothers me. We're all connected now, folks, like it or not. We have to try to deal with nations that we don't like, and simply ignoring them does not work. We can't just pick up our ball and go home.
• Privatization of Social Security: Walorski has said in the past that she was for it. There is tape of her saying it. Now she says no, she doesn't want that. The tapes don't lie. She also said that the new budget starts in January; the fiscal year starts in October. That was a dumb mistake.
• Stem cell research: Vogel and Walorski an emphatic "no," with little elaboration. Donnelly a "no" on embryonic stem cell research. I don't agree with him on that, but he did go on to say that he is for other stem cell research, including that on skin cells that can be converted to stem cells. I applaud his knowledge of recent research that has converted epidermal cells to stem cells. I can't remember if it was this topic in which Walorski mentioned how she tried to shut down Planned Parenthood in Indiana, but she was obviously very proud of that. Ugh.
• 14th Amendment: Walorski and Vogel did the expected anti-immigrant thing. Donnelly is anti-amnesty (another thing I disagree with him on) but said that he absolutely does not support any change in the Constitution.
• "Ground Zero Mosque": Amusing that someone asked this question. All candidates were pretty much in agreement that this was a property/state issue. Those of us in Indiana shouldn't really have a say in what those in New York decide about their own issues, anymore than those in New York should have a say in ours. However, the Libertarian candidate got off on a tangent about how the "federal government has attacked Christianity." Big load of horseshit. I don't think anyone is asking the federal government to step in and say that a Christian church shouldn't be built somewhere! More kudos to Donnelly for mentioning the Catholic convent that went up on the grounds of Auschwitz; he used it as an example of how something was moved because it was inappropriate, although it didn't happen for quite some time after some protested the convent there. Religious symbols weren't removed for 15 years after the establishment of the Carmelite convent. Still, I was impressed that he knew about it.
• Afghanistan: Walorski went off on a major tangent about spending, taxes, blah blah blah, then got burned by Vogel when it was his turn to respond: "Just want to make sure this question is about Afghanistan?" He got laughter and applause for that.
• Jobs: This was mentioned several times throughout the evening, because one county in this district, Elkhart, got hit really hard with unemployment. It was up to about 20% for a while. Donnelly has helped to bring jobs to the area with some big contracts for electric vehicles. He also got part of the stimulus money to the area, and helped to save a few thousand jobs in Kokomo, which is a huge vehicle manufacturing area. When he mentioned that, a huge cheer went up from the crowd, so I can only assume that there were some Kokomo people in the house.
• Education: Both Vogel and Walorski have called for the elimination of the Department of Education. Donnelly talked about the increase in Pell grants, the lowering of school loan interest rates, and the expanded GI bill, all of which he supported. When Walorski's rebuttal came, she said, "Okay, Joe, tell the truth---" and he immediately interrupted her and said, "I already did," and he got plenty of applause for that.

I have one more point here that I am choosing to set apart from those above. This happened early in the debate, with a question about global warming. Donnelly said that he is against cap and trade, and I don't feel that I can really speak to that until I learn more about it, and I know that I will need to. However, Walorski's answer summed up her philosophy, as well as the teabaggers', perfectly. She said that when it comes to global warming, she doesn't listen to the "liberal elitists." She goes around the area and talks to Hoosier farmers, and she thinks they know best what is happening with climate change, and she trusts THEM.

That's right. She trusts Hoosier farmers over climatologists to inform her about global warming.

For me, that was a Sarah Palin Fruit Fly moment. The fact that Walorski would reject science, scientists, and scientific findings and trust in what Hoosier farmers have to say is just...I'm sorry...I'm laughing. It is beyond ludicrous. I've known a few Hoosier farmers in my lifetime. I've known some smart ones. But while they might know about when to plant, if the soil is too wet to plant, and about what the weather has been like for the past couple of decades while they've been farming, that doesn't mean that they are experts on global warming. Holy shit, I could not believe my ears when she said that! I really shouldn't be surprised, though. This seems to dovetail nicely with the sentiment among some that opinions count for more than intelligence and knowledge. "I don't care about your fancy book learnin' and your goldurn scientific statistics! I'm a Hoosier farmer, by gum, and I know what I see!" Give me a fucking break. And Walorski can suck it for her troglodyte attitude that personal observation counts for more than scientific observation.

Okay! That is my take on the debate. There is another one (televised!) between these three candidates on Wednesday night, and I'll be watching it. I probably won't go in depth like I did with this one, but maybe there will be something new and interesting, and I'll comment on that.

I know that this race doesn't mean much to most of my readers, but it is a big deal around here. I would like to use this as an illustration as to why it is important to take an interest, and why it is important to be informed and vote! Especially when it comes to national elections. The winner of the race in my district will be going to Washington and making decisions for our entire country. I guarantee that I will do my part to make sure that Walorski won't be making decisions for all of you. I wouldn't wish her on my worst enemy, let alone my friends!

VOTE!

Exceptionally exceptional exceptionalism

You hear a lot these days from the teabaggers about what a remarkable place America is.

I don't dispute that; it is a remarkable place, in ways both good and bad. The same country that produced Thomas Jefferson also embraced slavery for several decades; the country that enacted ground-breaking civil rights laws a few decades ago still discriminates against a significant portion of its citizenry; it is a country of breathtaking beauty and one of urban decay; ours is one of the most prosperous countries in the world, and we still have people starving and going without medical care; the same country that gave us Barack Obama (and if you still think he's not an American citizen, please just go away...you bore me) also gave us Sarah Palin.

Yeah, it's a mixed bag all right.

I love my country. I am proud of our accomplishments, but realize that there is still much to be done. I don't believe we're perfect, and we have made mistakes. I believe it is important to take responsibility for that, and to apologize to those we have wronged. We are a young nation, and we are a work in progress.

So I resent the hell out of it when people like the aforementioned Sarah Palin say that I'm not patriotic because I find fault with some of the things that we've done, or dare to declare that perhaps we are fighting a war we shouldn't be. I may love my country, but that doesn't mean that I'm willing to goosestep in agreement with everything we do, or adopt that ultra-nationalistic jingoism of "my country right or wrong." What I find amusing is that what is truly most exceptional about America is what teabaggin' idiots like Palin, O'Donnell, and others would do away with first.

When Jefferson, Adams, and other framers of the Constitution began working on it, they were still witnessing the effects of religion upon governments. They had recently won independence from a country that had established a state religion. It was called the Church of England, for pete's sake. In a remarkable act of courage, rebellion, innovation, and vision, they broke from centuries of tradition and expressly forbade that our government would ever be capable of promoting any religion above another, forcing people to believe a certain way, or taking away their freedom to worship--or not worship--as they chose.

What an amazing and precious thing they gave us in their foresight to prohibit such a thing. All one has to do is look around the world at countries that operate as theocracies and see what is happening in their countries. Stonings for adultery; hangings for homosexuality; prison for those dissidents who would question the status quo and go against the state-sanctioned religion. Every time someone like Palin talks about how our Constitution and our laws are based on the ten commandments, or a Paladino talks about children being brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is a valid option, or Christine O'Donnell shows her unbelievable ignorance of this most basic tenet of our freedoms, they disrespect the framers of our Constitution and show their ignorance of just how amazing that document is.

We've seen some pretty astounding things in the past few months, but I think O'Donnell's ignorance of the First Amendment takes the cake. Naturally, her campaign is trying to spin it that she was saying expressly that the phrase "separation of church and state" is not in the First Amendment. I wish Chris Coons, her opponent (and the front runner, thank science), had been more forceful in saying that no, it is not, but the sentiment is there, it has been proven over and over again in the writings of Jefferson and others, and it has been upheld and strengthened throughout repeated court rulings. Her complete lack of comprehension of the deepest meaning of the First Amendment and its importance to our freedoms as individuals is absolutely mind-boggling to me. Anyone who wants us to get back to our "Christian roots" is also ignorant of the framers' intent and beliefs. I would remind them that if they get their wish and Christianity is declared a state-sanctioned religion, kids are led in prayer in school, Bible study classes are on the curriculum at every school in the country, and their religion is the law of the land...it can just as easily be taken away and replaced with a different religion at some point. Perhaps one day we'll have our first Jewish President, and he or she will declare that Judaism is the primary religion in the country, and it must be taught in our schools. I wonder how much they would like that? Or maybe one day, we'll have a Muslim President. (Let me state again that if you still think Obama is a Muslim, just go away. Seriously.)

For all their talk of protecting our freedoms and our liberty and the Constitution, they are certainly quick to subvert that document, and they seem eager to take away one of our most fundamental freedoms of all: that of religion. Apparently as long as it is done in the name of their own personal religion, they think it is just dandy. Jefferson and others did their best to protect us and our country from such demagogues. We need to make sure that we carry on their vision and not let our country or our freedoms be usurped by these people.

For Palin, O'Donnell, and all the others that just can't seem to wrap their simple little brains around the concept of it all, I have the same questions that they ask of anyone who wonders about our motives and our actions when we question things in our country: Why do you hate our founding fathers? Why do you hate America? YOU do not get to decide who is a patriot and who isn't. YOU do not get to tell me that I hate my country, or hate our troops. YOU do not get to dictate morality based on your religious beliefs. Your actions and ignorance show what I think is a deep-seated disrespect for the fundamental rights laid out centuries ago by those men who were the sort of deep thinkers and philosophers that you seem to ridicule as elitists today.

This is MY America, too. And you can't have it.

Books instead of kooks

My plan was to write about Christine O'Donnell and her bizarre comments concerning the First Amendment, but I wrote plenty on Facebook today, and I find that I'm feeling just way too mellow to write anymore about the perky little idiot tonight. I can only handle so much ignorance in a day, and it seems that I have reached my limit.

Instead, I'm going to write about books and e-readers. I'm fortunate to be friends on Facebook with one of my favorite authors, F. Paul Wilson. He writes the Repairman Jack novels (I just got the penultimate one!), one of my favorite characters in modern fiction, as well as many other excellent horror/science fiction novels. Today, he posted that his latest book, a collaboration with three other authors, was available for download. Draculas is on Amazon for a measly $2.99! You can't beat that with a stick—or a crucifix! I popped on over to Amazon, used one-click ordering, and badabing, badaboom, I've got the book.

I don't have an actual Kindle (yet!), but Amazon offers free Kindle downloads for PC and Mac. (Just go to the Kindle store, and look for 'free reading apps.') I honestly can't recall if I've written about it here before, so if I have, please pardon my redundancy. Until I can get an actual Kindle, this is a pretty nifty option, and you can sync your Kindle editions so that you have your books on all of them. There are millions of free books available, some through Amazon, others through Project Gutenberg and other digital book sites. It really is amazing what you can find on there, and I've already got a bunch waiting for me.

As amazing as the e-reader technology is, can it depose printed books? Most of the avid readers that I know love our hard copies...but most of us are also embracing the ease and convenience of the e-reader. After posting the link to the Kindle edition of his book, Mr. Wilson commented that the extras available with the Kindle version would never see the light of day in what he called "p-books." (I'm assuming that means printed books.) There are tons of extras included, like the emails that the four authors exchanged when discussing, planning, and writing the book. This is an amazing thing; I liken it to the evolution from VHS tapes to DVDs. The deleted scenes, alternate scenes, outtakes--all of those are easily accessible on DVD. Including large quantities of notes, discussions, and correspondence concerning a book would never happen with a traditionally published book. This really changes the game, and readers are the big winners here.

There has been much speculation about what would happen to printed books, bookstores, and especially libraries, with the advent of e-readers. As someone who reads a lot of online content but still treasures holding a book in her hands (as you can probably guess from the bookshelves pictured here), I foresee a peaceful coexistence. If I'm sitting up at the table, it's easy to read online. If I want to relax on the couch or in bed while I read, I don't take the laptop; I have a book to hold in my hands...and eventually let drop as I doze off trying to read just one...more...paragraph. (To be honest, I always try to place my bookmark and set the book aside before I doze off. I don't want to harm the book.)

I read a really interesting article the other day about how libraries are coping with e-readers. Many thought that it spelled the demise of the public library. [climbing on soapbox] We must not let this happen. Libraries serve many functions beyond lending books. They provide access to computers for those who don't have them at home, they offer meeting rooms for community groups, they conduct reading groups for kids to encourage them to read.

They are one of our most precious treasures, and we must preserve them. (And oh yeah...they're a government program!) [climbing down from soapbox] Anyway, some libraries are purchasing and loaning out e-readers! I think this is a fantastic embrace of the technology, and a way to stay current. Libraries must go along with current trends and advances in technology if they want to remain viable, and I applaud them for doing so. (By the way, I remember using card catalogs. Does anyone else?)

It's a brave new world, people, and I welcome our e-book providing overlords. It will never take the place of what Mr. Wilson calls p-books, at least not for me, but it's a fine addition to my reading experience. I look forward to finding many classics and essays that I normally wouldn't have read. When it comes to reading, it’s not like the Highlander. There can be more than one.

Separation anxiety

A recent big story in my area was about a local school district, Fairfield, that was sued by the ACLU for offering a Bible study class on school time. A local news station asked a question on their Facebook page: "Should religion be offered in public schools?" The comments came fast and furious, and I was happy to see that the majority of my fellow Hoosiers said that no, such things should stay out of public schools and left to parents and churches. Of course, there were the usual scripture-quoters, and a troll who seems to either hate me or have a fascination with me was doing his best to engage me, by saying things like "Beth won't be happy until all schools teach are socialism, evolution, and the misinterpretation of the Constitution." (I'm surprised he didn't spell it 'evilution.') You should all be proud of me for not taking the bait and completely ignoring him! It's not often I can show such restraint, but I'm not wasting my time on that guy any longer.

I mentioned the question on my own page, and it also generated a good discussion. WSBT worded the question poorly, because you could interpret that a couple of ways. I took it in the context of the story about the Fairfield district; this was an actual Bible study class given by someone coming in from a local Christian church, and it was done during school time. The child whose mother generated the lawsuit was given no educational instruction at all during this time. This is unconstitutional based on the First Amendment, which states that the government cannot promote any religion over another. The Supreme Court has upheld the spirit of separation of church and state in stating that religious instruction cannot happen in public schools during school hours. Of course, various groups can offer such study groups after school hours, and can do so in taxpayer-funded facilities like public schools.

It can also be taken as whether or not any studies of religion should take place in public schools. This is different from religious instruction; a comparative religion course, for example, would include many different world religions, and teach about the effect of religion on cultures; a course in religious literature would look at various religious texts. This could be beneficial to any child, by teaching them that there are many faiths and many ways of worshiping. It could do a lot to reduce the rampant xenophobia we're seeing lately, and go a long ways towards reducing intolerance.

However, in rural areas like mine, I see a massive can of worms being opened. Which religions would be included, and which wouldn't? Would there be discussion of atheism and agnosticism? Of course, those aren't religions (although some seem to think that they are...they are completely misunderstanding not only the concept, but also the meanings of the words), but shouldn't any discussion of religion and religious practices include the fact that there is a significant portion of the world's populace that practices no religion whatsoever? This is not to say that such a comparative religion class shouldn't be attempted in high school or even grade school. Of course, students in Bible Belt areas would probably be receiving a significantly different curriculum than those in larger cities and more multi-cultural areas. Could teachers manage to keep their personal views out of the discussion? Who would check these curricula to make sure that one religion wasn't being favored over another? Some people said that religious classes (and I assume they mean religious instruction, rather than a study of diverse religions) should be optional in public schools. Why should my tax dollars go towards religious instruction of any child when I believe such a matter is unconstitutional--and so does the Supreme Court?

One thing that I've noticed, and it has been borne out by the recent Pew Forum survey about religion, is that there are many people who believe that the Supreme Court sided with the godless heathens in saying that there can be no mention of religion or the Christian God at all in public schools. Less than one third of Americans polled knew that it's okay to read from the Bible as an example of literature; such an action is not religious instruction. A teacher stating that the only way to heaven is by accepting Christ as your personal savior is another matter entirely. I remember my Dad asking me if I thought it was okay that prayer isn't allowed in schools. I said, "That's actually not the case. Any kid can pray on their own time. But a teacher can't lead the class in prayer." He couldn't understand how I thought that was okay. I said, "Dad, not every person in this country is Christian. There are other religions. There are people who aren't religious at all."

People can scream all they want about religion being taken out of our schools. What has been taken out of our schools is religious instruction and indoctrination. Here is an example of why that is a good thing. The woman quoted is a parent of a child at the Fairfield school in question:

Last year they were told that Halloween is the devil’s birthday, and that is not right.

The kids learn things, such as the meaning of the snake symbol on ambulances. It comes from when Moses lifted up the serpent to help heal the Israelites. I didn’t know that.

You didn't know that because it isn't true. It came from the rod of Asclepius, the Greek god of medicine. The Bible may have used similar stories (it seems to be big on serpents), but many are the same myths and memes that have been handed down throughout centuries and throughout civilizations. Things like the virgin birth. And Halloween is the devil's birthday? THAT is what these people were telling these kids? How much idiotic information did they pass along in three decades, and how much damage did they do? (At least this woman understood that it was false information, and I hope she told her child so.)

For anyone who says, "Oh, it's really harmless," I would ask you this: do you think it's harmless to purposefully pass along misinformation to kids? Letting them believe in Santa for a while is one thing; teaching them false facts about mythical creatures in school when they should be learning facts is something else entirely!

Anyway, it was a very interesting discussion, and made me think about a lot of things. One of the things that the troll who is fascinated by me mentioned a couple of times was that all of us commenting on the thread were completely misunderstanding the separation of church and state thing. Not only does it not appear in the Constitution, it was actually intended to protect religion from the government, not the other way around.

This shows a real misunderstanding on a couple of levels. It’s true that the exact phrase “separation of church and state” does not appear in the Constitution, but the wording is pretty clear in its “freedom of religion” phrasing, and even a cursory reading of various papers and letters from Jefferson, Adams, et al, shows that their intent was very much to keep both the government out of religion and religion out of the government. They saw the connection between the Church of England and the monarchy; they knew that just as those in charge of a government should not dictate how people should worship, neither should any sort or sect of religion dictate how government policy is made and government affairs are conducted.

If you didn't read the linked article, the Fairfield school board voted 5-0 to discontinue the Bible study; they were greeted with boos from many of those attending the school board meeting. Apparently some attendees, when speaking before the board, began to say derogatory things about the woman who contacted the ACLU to file a lawsuit. I applaud the school board for their appropriate vote, and I applaud the woman for having the courage to say that what was happening was not right. I would hope that the attendees who booed the decision will take a little time to step outside their rather narrow world to read the Constitution as well as the Supreme Court decisions that resulted in their own school board’s unanimous decision. No one is stopping anyone from teaching their kids any sort of religious instruction. They can indoctrinate them to their hearts' content. But do it at home. Do it in your church. Do it after hours in our schools, even. Just don't do it in our schools during time that should be used for proper education.

Remember...you gotta keep 'em separated. (Thanks for the inspiration, Darren!)

The Offspring - Come Out And Play