My gig tonight was a Maundy Thursday service.
Sing the songs of the death of the Savior.
Pray for forgiveness.
Be quiet as you leave.
Here is something I share with you as a You Tube video. Be well!
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Conversations
@John Cowan:
13.4 and women don't get along with each other well enough to be 51.4. Hence, the Democratic Party.
Friend Obama, does a great service, Dr. John. He introduces a conversation. Conversations are the soul of the Web. If our technology is a greater good, this is where it is more easily sensed.
Whatever the greater scary of economics and war, what America wants is to feel good about itself again. What change we make we make because we need that.
The conversation of race is a conversation the people choose. It is a conversation that may indeed be a healing force in our country.
Whatever we speculate, it is a conversation that the young want or a very important demographic drops away from Friend Obama.
Conversation is their birthright.
13.4 and women don't get along with each other well enough to be 51.4. Hence, the Democratic Party.
Friend Obama, does a great service, Dr. John. He introduces a conversation. Conversations are the soul of the Web. If our technology is a greater good, this is where it is more easily sensed.
Whatever the greater scary of economics and war, what America wants is to feel good about itself again. What change we make we make because we need that.
The conversation of race is a conversation the people choose. It is a conversation that may indeed be a healing force in our country.
Whatever we speculate, it is a conversation that the young want or a very important demographic drops away from Friend Obama.
Conversation is their birthright.
It Was A Good Speech
>>Will his speech help or hurt his chances of becoming President?
It won’t change the fact that he waited too late and made too many contradictory statements. Obama lacks discernment and the ability to make the right decisions even on topics to which he has given considerable thought. When it got to the crunch, he chose to protect his candidacy instead of the values he espoused. He is not ready for the toughest job in the world. He may be someday, but his time is not yet come.
>>And is our nation in a racial stalemate?
No. If it were, Obama's candidacy could not have come as far as it has. He is the proof of change if not the agent of change. Have we come far enough? The fact as stated by him that statements such as those made by Wright are typical of the black church experience in America proves we have not. We have a lot of anger and hate yet to lay down.
However, the sad fact is if he does lose this nomination, it will be the statements of his pastor and his own refusal to confront him many years ago that beat him. Trying to spin that any other way is exactly the kind of response that keeps us from making that progress so many desire so earnestly.
It won’t change the fact that he waited too late and made too many contradictory statements. Obama lacks discernment and the ability to make the right decisions even on topics to which he has given considerable thought. When it got to the crunch, he chose to protect his candidacy instead of the values he espoused. He is not ready for the toughest job in the world. He may be someday, but his time is not yet come.
>>And is our nation in a racial stalemate?
No. If it were, Obama's candidacy could not have come as far as it has. He is the proof of change if not the agent of change. Have we come far enough? The fact as stated by him that statements such as those made by Wright are typical of the black church experience in America proves we have not. We have a lot of anger and hate yet to lay down.
However, the sad fact is if he does lose this nomination, it will be the statements of his pastor and his own refusal to confront him many years ago that beat him. Trying to spin that any other way is exactly the kind of response that keeps us from making that progress so many desire so earnestly.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Bridge Over Troubled Water
Senator Obama gives his speech tomorrow. I hope it is a good one.
Race divides America.
Gender divides America.
Wealth divides America.
War divides America.
America is a land divided.
Are we a family divided, too?
Lord, let us find a way from the hate that divides us.
Show us the bridge across these troubled waters
In this saddest of weeks for the followers of Jesus
Show us mercy and a way into the Promised Land
Undivided by hate
United by your purpose
Living together in hope of His Return
Lead us
Love us
Keep us
Forever in your hands.
Amen
Race divides America.
Gender divides America.
Wealth divides America.
War divides America.
America is a land divided.
Are we a family divided, too?
Lord, let us find a way from the hate that divides us.
Show us the bridge across these troubled waters
In this saddest of weeks for the followers of Jesus
Show us mercy and a way into the Promised Land
Undivided by hate
United by your purpose
Living together in hope of His Return
Lead us
Love us
Keep us
Forever in your hands.
Amen
Friday, March 14, 2008
Lay It Down
That moment between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on the Senate floor yesterday counts for something. I do hope earnestly that supporters on both sides pay attention.
The Obamites make much of what Obama says, and repeat over and over that words matter. If words really matter, then will Obama take responsibility for belonging to a church for so many years and espousing the words and works of a man who is clearly a black racist, his minister? Where I live, if a minister says things like that, we fire him or go to another church. Obama full well knows what his base believes. It isn't just what a man says that he is judged by, but also who he listens to attentively.
Is this really the campaign you want to run? Can the black community in America get past those remarks? Can the rest of us ignore them? If we keep ratcheting this up, only bad will come of it.
For the kids in the campaign, step back and ask yourselves if you want to be the ones to set back race relations in this country fifty years. For the adults of my generation, try to remember when we promised each other that despite what our parents said or did, the horrible disease of racism stopped in our generation.
Do it for your children. An election isn't worth this.
The Obamites make much of what Obama says, and repeat over and over that words matter. If words really matter, then will Obama take responsibility for belonging to a church for so many years and espousing the words and works of a man who is clearly a black racist, his minister? Where I live, if a minister says things like that, we fire him or go to another church. Obama full well knows what his base believes. It isn't just what a man says that he is judged by, but also who he listens to attentively.
Is this really the campaign you want to run? Can the black community in America get past those remarks? Can the rest of us ignore them? If we keep ratcheting this up, only bad will come of it.
For the kids in the campaign, step back and ask yourselves if you want to be the ones to set back race relations in this country fifty years. For the adults of my generation, try to remember when we promised each other that despite what our parents said or did, the horrible disease of racism stopped in our generation.
Do it for your children. An election isn't worth this.
"Lay down lay down
Lay it on down
Let your white bird smile up
At the ones who stand and frown."
- Melanie Safka -
Thursday, March 06, 2008
The Devil and Obama Webster
Jack Cafferty asks at CNN.Com if Obama should go negative.
Not if he wants to win. He needs to get his supporters to quit being shrill.
Explain this, Jack: if he claims that his rival believes his followers are delusional, what does it mean when he claims her support is all blue-collar and undereducated, or in short form, stupid?
Obama is running out of speeches fast. If he continues to repeat himself, he begins to sound like a caged parrot. If he squawks too loudly and shrilly, he is a cooked goose. That is the fatal flaw of populism: it is based on the popularity of an idea, not the execution of a plan.
Maybe common sense is prevailing at last. People who understand that their government is actually NOT a vast right wing closed conspiracy, but a representative democracy (say Republic) in need of competent executive leadership are voting for Hillary Clinton. They understand that we don't have to overturn the government; we need to fix the mess left by the current administration. This isn't 'old school' thinking; it is common sense patriotism. It is belief we have a good system; we need better leaders.
She governs best who governs least, isn't that the conservative mantra, Jack? We want a change of leadership, not a swift boat to hell.
Not if he wants to win. He needs to get his supporters to quit being shrill.
Explain this, Jack: if he claims that his rival believes his followers are delusional, what does it mean when he claims her support is all blue-collar and undereducated, or in short form, stupid?
Obama is running out of speeches fast. If he continues to repeat himself, he begins to sound like a caged parrot. If he squawks too loudly and shrilly, he is a cooked goose. That is the fatal flaw of populism: it is based on the popularity of an idea, not the execution of a plan.
Maybe common sense is prevailing at last. People who understand that their government is actually NOT a vast right wing closed conspiracy, but a representative democracy (say Republic) in need of competent executive leadership are voting for Hillary Clinton. They understand that we don't have to overturn the government; we need to fix the mess left by the current administration. This isn't 'old school' thinking; it is common sense patriotism. It is belief we have a good system; we need better leaders.
She governs best who governs least, isn't that the conservative mantra, Jack? We want a change of leadership, not a swift boat to hell.
Technologists With Obamamania
Declan McCullagh writes an article at C-Net on the topic "In a technological upset, Obama bests Clinton". Someone writes in that Obama has a grand plan of opening up the corrupt closed insider system in Washington DC to the people.
Sounds good. Answer these questions before we start spending the money:
How many hours of C-Span do you watch a week?
How many letters do you write to your Congressman?
When your local council has meetings, do you attend?
Do you read the local political news and review the published bills?
There is an abundance of information and opportunities. There are few users or takers. The US government is not a large closed conspiracy (Bush I and II being exceptional). It is a large bureaucratic form of representative democracy (say Republic).
What you need to understand is WE ELECTED BUSH TWICE WITH ALL THE INFORMATION WE NEEDED IN FRONT OF US.
What Obama is saying sounds good, but that is it. Neither he nor those programs will change the culture or the goals of our government. Once elected, all those neat sounding ideas vanish into budgets and hearings and costs and taxes and finally into a low dull snore.
Technologists like the sound because they can sell more technology and they can *feel* empowered but this won't change Washington in the least. Competent persistent knowledgeable executive leadership can. When you vote, you are not voting for machinery but a machine. Be very very sure the machine you are voting for has your best interests at heart because once in, they have the power for four years, and the agenda they set determines the cultural changes possible within the limits of that power (and the limits are considerable).
The most telling aspect of Obamamania is that it sells hope but is driven by deep seated paranoia. That is why the shrillness in that camp when debating. It isn't that they are delusional but that they believe everyone else is stupid (citing the blue collar vote for Hillary Clinton). Technology cannot fix the government. In fact nothing can. The system we have is the one we passed legally, is in the Constitution, and is not in need of radical overhaul.
It is in need of competent executive leadership.
Sounds good. Answer these questions before we start spending the money:
There is an abundance of information and opportunities. There are few users or takers. The US government is not a large closed conspiracy (Bush I and II being exceptional). It is a large bureaucratic form of representative democracy (say Republic).
What you need to understand is WE ELECTED BUSH TWICE WITH ALL THE INFORMATION WE NEEDED IN FRONT OF US.
What Obama is saying sounds good, but that is it. Neither he nor those programs will change the culture or the goals of our government. Once elected, all those neat sounding ideas vanish into budgets and hearings and costs and taxes and finally into a low dull snore.
Technologists like the sound because they can sell more technology and they can *feel* empowered but this won't change Washington in the least. Competent persistent knowledgeable executive leadership can. When you vote, you are not voting for machinery but a machine. Be very very sure the machine you are voting for has your best interests at heart because once in, they have the power for four years, and the agenda they set determines the cultural changes possible within the limits of that power (and the limits are considerable).
The most telling aspect of Obamamania is that it sells hope but is driven by deep seated paranoia. That is why the shrillness in that camp when debating. It isn't that they are delusional but that they believe everyone else is stupid (citing the blue collar vote for Hillary Clinton). Technology cannot fix the government. In fact nothing can. The system we have is the one we passed legally, is in the Constitution, and is not in need of radical overhaul.
It is in need of competent executive leadership.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
The Hand On The Tiller
What is behind that face?"
In his own words, anything you care to put there. Caveat emptor.
"... overturn the machine"
Do that without a new one ready to roll and you walk home. Caveat vendor.
I don't take the bloggers that seriously. The Nixon generation didn't take us that seriously. It is easy to campaign and put enough spin there, and you can win. But to govern, you have to have the people in place who have the knowledge because no single man, woman or President will change a government of laws. For Larry Lessig, the answer has always been, ignore the laws and do what feels best for you. As a result of that, I can go to YouTube and find one of my songs taken without permission or acknowledgement and used in a video. There is another web site selling that song, also without permission and without sharing the profits.
Boy howdy, what a deal for me.
However you slice it, that's theft, and worse, theft of goods that I have shared graciously when asked and credited. But Lessig and now Obama keep promoting an idea among the young that whatever they want they can take without any preconditions because They Are The Internet Generation. In fact, they are a mob organizing for a generational war.
It will fail but with a price. Perhaps they are a generation that history and power should by-pass because they have failed to learn the lessons of history, and have not earned the power.
Security is a boat in a storm where the captain keeps a light hand on the tiller. The tiller is technology. You need it but it is just stuff. The hand requires experience. You can't steal that.
In his own words, anything you care to put there. Caveat emptor.
"... overturn the machine"
Do that without a new one ready to roll and you walk home. Caveat vendor.
I don't take the bloggers that seriously. The Nixon generation didn't take us that seriously. It is easy to campaign and put enough spin there, and you can win. But to govern, you have to have the people in place who have the knowledge because no single man, woman or President will change a government of laws. For Larry Lessig, the answer has always been, ignore the laws and do what feels best for you. As a result of that, I can go to YouTube and find one of my songs taken without permission or acknowledgement and used in a video. There is another web site selling that song, also without permission and without sharing the profits.
Boy howdy, what a deal for me.
However you slice it, that's theft, and worse, theft of goods that I have shared graciously when asked and credited. But Lessig and now Obama keep promoting an idea among the young that whatever they want they can take without any preconditions because They Are The Internet Generation. In fact, they are a mob organizing for a generational war.
It will fail but with a price. Perhaps they are a generation that history and power should by-pass because they have failed to learn the lessons of history, and have not earned the power.
Security is a boat in a storm where the captain keeps a light hand on the tiller. The tiller is technology. You need it but it is just stuff. The hand requires experience. You can't steal that.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Barack H. Obama: What's In A Name?
The latest distraction is whether or not Obama's critics are baiting by using Obama's middle name, Hussein.
Get real. Some words DON'T matter.
The name isn't important. The problem Obama is having is he is late to realizing when something is important. With Rezko, he gives the money to charity but only after the press notices. With Farrakhan and his minister, he denounces and rejects but only after the press notices. With Al Qaeda in Iraq, surely he noticed? With the chair of the sub-committee, he should have held hearings but said nothing until the press noticed. He knows there is a puppet government in Russia but doesn't know any details until the press notices and Clinton explains it to him.
What this buttresses is the charges that he is long on rhetoric and short on real experience because all of these are the kinds of details a leader absolutely must be aware of at all times. It's no good to be in California when a hurricane roars into New Orleans as Bush was.
Why will moderate Democrats vote for McCain? At the age of a lot of us, we've been watching "movements' all of our lives. Most failed to deliver so we are very cynical about that and not just a little creeped out by Obamamania. We know by experience this kind of thing doesn't deliver. We don't want 'a dream'. We want a plan. We know Obama may someday be a good leader but these gaffes in judgement are too frequent and too noticeable.
At voting time, we vote for real change, and we do what Obama says we should do: we cross the party lines to get leadership and a practical approach to government based on our perception of the person best qualified to lead. If the Democratic Party has decided it is more important to make a statement than it is to lead effectively, then the Democratic Party has abandoned us to its feel-good politics which we know don't work when the choices are hard and unpopular but ultimately the right choices.
I'm a Democrat and I support Hillary Clinton, but if I have to choose between party loyalty and loyalty to the country, I choose the country. Had the Republican Party done that, the last eight years would not have happened. I didn't make that mistake last time and I won't this time. It isn't that Obama is the same thing as Bush; it is that a choice for Obama is a choice for the same kind of thing: feel good over experience.
It comes down to doing the right thing and if we lose doing that, we lose doing it right. If we win, we won for the right reasons.
Get real. Some words DON'T matter.
The name isn't important. The problem Obama is having is he is late to realizing when something is important. With Rezko, he gives the money to charity but only after the press notices. With Farrakhan and his minister, he denounces and rejects but only after the press notices. With Al Qaeda in Iraq, surely he noticed? With the chair of the sub-committee, he should have held hearings but said nothing until the press noticed. He knows there is a puppet government in Russia but doesn't know any details until the press notices and Clinton explains it to him.
What this buttresses is the charges that he is long on rhetoric and short on real experience because all of these are the kinds of details a leader absolutely must be aware of at all times. It's no good to be in California when a hurricane roars into New Orleans as Bush was.
Why will moderate Democrats vote for McCain? At the age of a lot of us, we've been watching "movements' all of our lives. Most failed to deliver so we are very cynical about that and not just a little creeped out by Obamamania. We know by experience this kind of thing doesn't deliver. We don't want 'a dream'. We want a plan. We know Obama may someday be a good leader but these gaffes in judgement are too frequent and too noticeable.
At voting time, we vote for real change, and we do what Obama says we should do: we cross the party lines to get leadership and a practical approach to government based on our perception of the person best qualified to lead. If the Democratic Party has decided it is more important to make a statement than it is to lead effectively, then the Democratic Party has abandoned us to its feel-good politics which we know don't work when the choices are hard and unpopular but ultimately the right choices.
I'm a Democrat and I support Hillary Clinton, but if I have to choose between party loyalty and loyalty to the country, I choose the country. Had the Republican Party done that, the last eight years would not have happened. I didn't make that mistake last time and I won't this time. It isn't that Obama is the same thing as Bush; it is that a choice for Obama is a choice for the same kind of thing: feel good over experience.
It comes down to doing the right thing and if we lose doing that, we lose doing it right. If we win, we won for the right reasons.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Last Night's Debate: The F Word
Looking at the CNN political ticker, the Farrakhan question caught fire as I thought it might.
In the South, if a minister espouses a position a person of conscience can’t abide, the person works with the church to get a new minister or goes to another church. Bifurcating churches are a reason the landscape and real estate market here is flooded with church buildings. This is the danger because those looking the Trinity pages now understand that it is a bigger deal than Louis F., that this is Obama's base and it is a separatist base. So now the moderate Democrats have more in common with McCain given an Obama v.s. McCain bid. Meanwhile, the separatists get pushed to the front of the debate and unless Obama clearly puts some distance between him and them really fast, at the end of this, we still get a Republican president and set back race relations in America fifty years.
On the other hand, the loser of last night's debate was Tim Russert. Mean little man.
In the South, if a minister espouses a position a person of conscience can’t abide, the person works with the church to get a new minister or goes to another church. Bifurcating churches are a reason the landscape and real estate market here is flooded with church buildings. This is the danger because those looking the Trinity pages now understand that it is a bigger deal than Louis F., that this is Obama's base and it is a separatist base. So now the moderate Democrats have more in common with McCain given an Obama v.s. McCain bid. Meanwhile, the separatists get pushed to the front of the debate and unless Obama clearly puts some distance between him and them really fast, at the end of this, we still get a Republican president and set back race relations in America fifty years.
On the other hand, the loser of last night's debate was Tim Russert. Mean little man.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
For John Cowan: Which Words Matter?
So to be for Hillary is to be against the JPL, John? In other words, Obama is all inclusive and somehow her opponent is all divisive?
Ok. Here is the web page for Senator Obama's church in Illinois. Read it.
http://www.tucc.org/about.htm
I've seen this sort of stuff in the papers the guys who stand in suits on the corner sell here. Not new news. For people who don't live in heavily mixed neighborhoods, the words may be a bit of a surprise. So here are the typical positions taken by those who encounter this stuff.
Pro:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_11_124/ai_n19328537
Anti:
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/barack-obamas-church-ultra-left-and-afrocentric
The problem about the hard positions is it is tough to sort the words that matter from the words that don't, which means effectively, no one knows what Obama is about if that is his professed beliefs as a member of Trinity. It may be that that church is his political base and the means to get elected. Ok, politics as usual, but it means that only some words matter to him and his political base. Or it means his congregation has been duped by his membership. Not possible?
Then it means he believes all of that.
So John, which words matter?
Pro or anti, the message that church is espousing is political dynamite. This is what the Republicans will go after him with because they can get this message to their base without having to go through the Big Media outlets, and when it does, it will go through without traceability. That is how Obama will be Swift boated, except not with third party assertions, but with his own. Get ready for it.
It seems to me that for too many this is about some kind of Great Get Even. Some want to get even with the rich, some to get even with the Baby Boomers, some to get even with whoever. But that is exactly how the right elected Bush twice.
I won't vote for that. I vote for real change, a change of leadership that actually is inclusive and actually has a real plan to get our economy out of the dumps and our troops out of the desert. Not a cause, a movement, or a "people's liberation". If we need liberation, it is from those self-serving whining delusions that somehow a grand conspiracy got us in this trouble.
We did it to ourselves. Twice. What does it say if we do it a third time and call that liberation? Which words matter?
Ok. Here is the web page for Senator Obama's church in Illinois. Read it.
http://www.tucc.org/about.htm
I've seen this sort of stuff in the papers the guys who stand in suits on the corner sell here. Not new news. For people who don't live in heavily mixed neighborhoods, the words may be a bit of a surprise. So here are the typical positions taken by those who encounter this stuff.
Pro:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1058/is_11_124/ai_n19328537
Anti:
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/barack-obamas-church-ultra-left-and-afrocentric
The problem about the hard positions is it is tough to sort the words that matter from the words that don't, which means effectively, no one knows what Obama is about if that is his professed beliefs as a member of Trinity. It may be that that church is his political base and the means to get elected. Ok, politics as usual, but it means that only some words matter to him and his political base. Or it means his congregation has been duped by his membership. Not possible?
Then it means he believes all of that.
So John, which words matter?
Pro or anti, the message that church is espousing is political dynamite. This is what the Republicans will go after him with because they can get this message to their base without having to go through the Big Media outlets, and when it does, it will go through without traceability. That is how Obama will be Swift boated, except not with third party assertions, but with his own. Get ready for it.
It seems to me that for too many this is about some kind of Great Get Even. Some want to get even with the rich, some to get even with the Baby Boomers, some to get even with whoever. But that is exactly how the right elected Bush twice.
I won't vote for that. I vote for real change, a change of leadership that actually is inclusive and actually has a real plan to get our economy out of the dumps and our troops out of the desert. Not a cause, a movement, or a "people's liberation". If we need liberation, it is from those self-serving whining delusions that somehow a grand conspiracy got us in this trouble.
We did it to ourselves. Twice. What does it say if we do it a third time and call that liberation? Which words matter?
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Bewitched: Dakini
In the alley by the third to last shadow of the mid-day stood the door to the Dakini, a house of idle chatter, conspiracy, and oh, magic of the most secret kind, the secrets of children who play in the mortal world while yet protected by that most ancient spell called innocence. Light shielded by shadow, in a room shaped by incantation, hidden among the busyness of the mortals, two girls played as little witches will, making up forever evers from recitations of dreams, practiced sighs and wrinkled noses.
Twin proprietors of the pleasures of the patrons of the Dakini, they practiced feminine arts of wit, and guile, satisfying their indulgent desires so sweet, no mortal man could resist them nor tell the dark from the light haired. Nor cared any to take one when with the other, or ever knew that both were satisfied. Even as the girls competed for the most high and delicious adventures of their immortal imaginations, they remained without question, cousins, devoted to each other’s hearts, each other’s needs, and each other’s failings. Neither would ever fall to sorcery or treachery in the mortal world while the other remained with her.
Mortals believe that magic is spells. Spells are a mask that bends the surface of an illusion inscribed by light on the magical eye. The face that names the names is hidden behind the veil of appearances summoned from the heart as signs tumbling in clusters of sparkling light. Calling these names, she can fly fearlessly among the dark stars that consume beings such as she. Their dark penetrating hums become the land marks by which a witches craft is discovered. Each act of magic inscribes a map of the light devouring spaces.
“He is waiting”, said the light-haired witch laconically with a resigned sigh as she counted the coins in the box for her turn. To the young man seated behind them, they were serving maids preparing for evening work. To each other, they were luminous goddesses preparing for an evening of amusement.
“Then let him”, her dark hair cousin coyly said, drawling in her deliberateness. “See how he taps his fingers on the case he carries. If he is the tiniest bit impatient to ask his question, let the answer be even less forthcoming.” Her face drew into the small curve, narrow at both ends but with fully pouted purple lips. “Anyway, he isn’t here to see me, now is he?”
Her laconic cousin saw the hint of jealousy betraying her disregard when a tiny spark escaped as if launched from the arched curve of her dark mascara. “Signs of attachments, or do the signs hold no currency for you, Samantha?”
“If signs were currency, Serena, you would be wealthier than your Mother,” the other replied with uplifted eyes smiling.
Bending over her as Samantha counted, she retorted “If your Mother’s currency were better clothed, you would be my Sister, Cousin.” the dark haired girl laughed with a pitched giggle.
“He is still waiting” she reminded.
The light haired serving girl glanced at her unmade face in the mirror hung on the wall behind the lid of the counting box as she closed it. Identical to her Cousin, her unadorned dress and face distinguished her as she moved among her customers. Polite and unassuming, she minded her magic with care and did not tease the men. They saw in her plainness any woman they desired but did not see the true face of Endora’s daughter.
Her eyes fixed on the boy sitting there. “Is magic enough?” she asked herself nervously moving her lip.
Serena’s dress clung like blood to every curve of her body, spread thickly in a few places, but thinly to the edges of these. Sam wore the plain robes of a servant girl hiding all that would cause a man’s eyes to linger, using her magic to keep their eyes fixed on her bewitching smile, crinkling nose and luminous green eyes, as if in her plainness, her intimate secret would be safe.
The young witch did not wish to be unattractive; she wished to attract only one. Like the boy drumming his fingers, she could count time until the moment of attraction, but until that one moment, she could play safely, instructing the willing and letting her Cousin steal the will of the others as she pleased. She knew that once she loved, she would always love. Her Cousin was perspicacious. That currency was her immortal heart.
Her fear silent, her heart needy, she asked his desire of the Dakini.
He raised his eyes and looked upon her true face.
A door opened and closed letting him see the immortal behind it for just a single thought. The light dissolved into a million suns plummeting toward him, blinding him, scattering him then swallowing the shards. He died wordlessly, his eyes still reflecting the luminous face he had seen. He vanished from the little girl’s magic.
As her Cousin laughed cruelly but without malice, she heard her Mother’s sad words whispered in her ear,
“To truly love a mortal is to lose one’s magic forever and ever again.”
Twin proprietors of the pleasures of the patrons of the Dakini, they practiced feminine arts of wit, and guile, satisfying their indulgent desires so sweet, no mortal man could resist them nor tell the dark from the light haired. Nor cared any to take one when with the other, or ever knew that both were satisfied. Even as the girls competed for the most high and delicious adventures of their immortal imaginations, they remained without question, cousins, devoted to each other’s hearts, each other’s needs, and each other’s failings. Neither would ever fall to sorcery or treachery in the mortal world while the other remained with her.
Mortals believe that magic is spells. Spells are a mask that bends the surface of an illusion inscribed by light on the magical eye. The face that names the names is hidden behind the veil of appearances summoned from the heart as signs tumbling in clusters of sparkling light. Calling these names, she can fly fearlessly among the dark stars that consume beings such as she. Their dark penetrating hums become the land marks by which a witches craft is discovered. Each act of magic inscribes a map of the light devouring spaces.
“He is waiting”, said the light-haired witch laconically with a resigned sigh as she counted the coins in the box for her turn. To the young man seated behind them, they were serving maids preparing for evening work. To each other, they were luminous goddesses preparing for an evening of amusement.
“Then let him”, her dark hair cousin coyly said, drawling in her deliberateness. “See how he taps his fingers on the case he carries. If he is the tiniest bit impatient to ask his question, let the answer be even less forthcoming.” Her face drew into the small curve, narrow at both ends but with fully pouted purple lips. “Anyway, he isn’t here to see me, now is he?”
Her laconic cousin saw the hint of jealousy betraying her disregard when a tiny spark escaped as if launched from the arched curve of her dark mascara. “Signs of attachments, or do the signs hold no currency for you, Samantha?”
“If signs were currency, Serena, you would be wealthier than your Mother,” the other replied with uplifted eyes smiling.
Bending over her as Samantha counted, she retorted “If your Mother’s currency were better clothed, you would be my Sister, Cousin.” the dark haired girl laughed with a pitched giggle.
“He is still waiting” she reminded.
The light haired serving girl glanced at her unmade face in the mirror hung on the wall behind the lid of the counting box as she closed it. Identical to her Cousin, her unadorned dress and face distinguished her as she moved among her customers. Polite and unassuming, she minded her magic with care and did not tease the men. They saw in her plainness any woman they desired but did not see the true face of Endora’s daughter.
Her eyes fixed on the boy sitting there. “Is magic enough?” she asked herself nervously moving her lip.
Serena’s dress clung like blood to every curve of her body, spread thickly in a few places, but thinly to the edges of these. Sam wore the plain robes of a servant girl hiding all that would cause a man’s eyes to linger, using her magic to keep their eyes fixed on her bewitching smile, crinkling nose and luminous green eyes, as if in her plainness, her intimate secret would be safe.
The young witch did not wish to be unattractive; she wished to attract only one. Like the boy drumming his fingers, she could count time until the moment of attraction, but until that one moment, she could play safely, instructing the willing and letting her Cousin steal the will of the others as she pleased. She knew that once she loved, she would always love. Her Cousin was perspicacious. That currency was her immortal heart.
Her fear silent, her heart needy, she asked his desire of the Dakini.
He raised his eyes and looked upon her true face.
A door opened and closed letting him see the immortal behind it for just a single thought. The light dissolved into a million suns plummeting toward him, blinding him, scattering him then swallowing the shards. He died wordlessly, his eyes still reflecting the luminous face he had seen. He vanished from the little girl’s magic.
As her Cousin laughed cruelly but without malice, she heard her Mother’s sad words whispered in her ear,
“To truly love a mortal is to lose one’s magic forever and ever again.”
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Lessig, Obama and Hillary
I'm debating my web mate, David Petersen, about the announcement that Larry Lessig is considering a run for Congress. Inevitably, this becomes about the Presidential race. David says it is about The Movement, the People. Like Obama, he talks about a wave of change that will sweep over Washington and change government.
My problem is I've heard it all before. It feels good. It resonates in the media.
Does it work?
Populist appeals are very workable in campaigns. George Wallace was an example. George W. Bush is an example. An 'empower the people' speech is always thrilling, but it conveys the idea that they are not empowered already, that they do not participate already, that they are not heard.
We elected George W. Bush not once but twice.
The people did speak. They always do.
This is not about an election where one candidate speaks for the people and the other does not. It is not about populism or a movement. It is about governing the country well and for the best benefit of the people so governed. Yes, the will of the people to participate is strong and vital, but the needs of governance are the means and audacity to fight for what is right and to know exactly how to take that fight to Washington in a way that will succeed.
Populists elected Carter. Populists elected Wallace. Populists want to elect Obama, to send populist figures to Washington such as Lessig. Populism can elect a President.
But the buck stops at the Oval Office. It is a real job not a movement. It takes a skilled fighter and one who's heart is as strong as the head. It takes a lifetime of commitment. It takes leadership, but David, leaders are not reflectors. Ultimately we elect our leaders to make decisions that may not be popular. We do not elect them to reflect our will but to govern us and to provide by the power we entrust to them, the protection of the opportunities of liberty and justice.
I've seen what Hillary Clinton can do. I like it. For me, that's what this is about: the only choice I have is to pick the candidate I believe can do the best job and that I trust to do it.
I've seen how hard she fights for her family and her country. I've seen what a woman can do when everything she values is threatened. She prevails. She preserves. She advances.
I trust her.
... And she's sexier.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/video/134.aspx
My problem is I've heard it all before. It feels good. It resonates in the media.
Does it work?
Populist appeals are very workable in campaigns. George Wallace was an example. George W. Bush is an example. An 'empower the people' speech is always thrilling, but it conveys the idea that they are not empowered already, that they do not participate already, that they are not heard.
We elected George W. Bush not once but twice.
The people did speak. They always do.
This is not about an election where one candidate speaks for the people and the other does not. It is not about populism or a movement. It is about governing the country well and for the best benefit of the people so governed. Yes, the will of the people to participate is strong and vital, but the needs of governance are the means and audacity to fight for what is right and to know exactly how to take that fight to Washington in a way that will succeed.
Populists elected Carter. Populists elected Wallace. Populists want to elect Obama, to send populist figures to Washington such as Lessig. Populism can elect a President.
But the buck stops at the Oval Office. It is a real job not a movement. It takes a skilled fighter and one who's heart is as strong as the head. It takes a lifetime of commitment. It takes leadership, but David, leaders are not reflectors. Ultimately we elect our leaders to make decisions that may not be popular. We do not elect them to reflect our will but to govern us and to provide by the power we entrust to them, the protection of the opportunities of liberty and justice.
I've seen what Hillary Clinton can do. I like it. For me, that's what this is about: the only choice I have is to pick the candidate I believe can do the best job and that I trust to do it.
I've seen how hard she fights for her family and her country. I've seen what a woman can do when everything she values is threatened. She prevails. She preserves. She advances.
I trust her.
... And she's sexier.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/video/134.aspx
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Epiphany
Baby mine oh
Sweetly smiling
In my arms so close tonight
Promise made to Eve in Eden
Cries so little
Cries so low
Reconcile my heart to sorrow
To the end of days
Wise men tell of kingdom's glory
Pierce your side for wine and water
Love,
My Love,
Your hand
Needing mine
At the dawn
Though God's heart in me is breaking
I will bear you on.
len bullard - 02/20/08
PS: The music for this is
HERE!
Once Again, The Geeks Are Clueless
The Republicans are making sure the money goes where it does them the most good. Smart. Unscrupulous but smart.
The Democrats are about to put John McCain in the White House. What no pundit thought possible, once again, we will do for the sake of spiting ourselves. The harsh bit is if one takes race off the table as every good liberal should, Obama is just a freshman Senator without any credentials beyond presentability. Given that, if we want to make some kind of statement, the big change would be gender. It appears that America is more biased about gender and fearful of women in charge.
The $40 million of our money spent by the Republicans to destroy the Clintons worked, and now for their effort, we will give them another four years, or we will elect another Jimmy Carter who while admirable, was too inexperienced to undo the mess left by Nixon. After that, we get another 12 years of Republicans just as we did with Reagan/Bush. You have to admit, it is a brilliant strategy. The Democrats take the fall for Bush Jr's criminal rule, and the same party that made that possible get another decade to loot.
John Cleese was right. The Queen needs to revoke our independence except for "Kansas which she does not fancy." At least the Brits understood that Ironpants Maggie was no threat and had the nescessaries to govern.
The Democrats are about to put John McCain in the White House. What no pundit thought possible, once again, we will do for the sake of spiting ourselves. The harsh bit is if one takes race off the table as every good liberal should, Obama is just a freshman Senator without any credentials beyond presentability. Given that, if we want to make some kind of statement, the big change would be gender. It appears that America is more biased about gender and fearful of women in charge.
The $40 million of our money spent by the Republicans to destroy the Clintons worked, and now for their effort, we will give them another four years, or we will elect another Jimmy Carter who while admirable, was too inexperienced to undo the mess left by Nixon. After that, we get another 12 years of Republicans just as we did with Reagan/Bush. You have to admit, it is a brilliant strategy. The Democrats take the fall for Bush Jr's criminal rule, and the same party that made that possible get another decade to loot.
John Cleese was right. The Queen needs to revoke our independence except for "Kansas which she does not fancy." At least the Brits understood that Ironpants Maggie was no threat and had the nescessaries to govern.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Between The Anvil and The Hammer
There is controversy about Raph Koster's keynote suggesting that virtual worlds and games are irrelevant to a world that has it's Darfurs. Some see this as a trivialization of the game worlds; others, a Panglossian attempt to recruit game devs into social causes.
Yes, media can change people not because it changes the way they think but because it can change what they think about and the act of thinking can change the way they think. D'oh.
A series like The Prisoner can change what we think about and did. It is great art and remains relevant or is possibly more relevant. If one sees games in this view, then games that give more to think about are positive.
Virtual worlds are different. They don't tend to have the same 'god like' Number 2 running the show and defeating every attempt to escape, though it is to be noted that through iron-will and persistence, Number 2 did break the will of his captors.
But these are still just works of art. Reality changes in much more complex and difficult to control ways. Did the Prisoner cause the kids to go to the streets in 1968 to stop the war? Some, likely yes. Did they stop the war? No. That happened when the cost began to bankrupt the economy, there was no political advantage, and it was clear no win possible except for the locals. Like Number Six, iron will and discipline broke absolute power.
So is there some lesson virtual worlds and games should teach with respect to Darfur? Maybe. If you want to create worlds that teach lessons, they can certainly do that.
Or perhaps Darfur will be another example to the West like Vietnam that absolute power simply will not change hearts and minds. It can aid them when they are ready to change but otherwise, human suffering like human evolution is controlled by humans who ARE the emergent controls.
I see the campaigns of the left and well-intentioned as hollow when it comes to acts. It takes incredible experience and planning to create real change. It is not enough to say, "We Can"; we have to say "We Can Do THIS" and this must be doable. Otherwise, as Orwell is quoted, the anvil breaks the hammer, and the follow on is that whatever was between the anvil and the hammer at that point is left undone.
Frustratingly sad but so. I am in sympathy with Raph because we can lose consciousness of what is to be done and what is doable by retreating into fantasy worlds. I agree with Prokofy Neva we can lose it just as easily while shopping for groceries. I disagree that art of any kind is the means, just a reflector. In this is the heart of the problem of our media society: leaders should not be simply reflectors. Hope is a condition, not a goal. Actions without a goal are as dangerous as words without a cause.
If you want to make a change, put $25 into an organization feeding the refugees. This will not solve the problem. It will keep someone alive long enough to make a plan and maybe act on that. Little acts can lead to great victories if they follow the human instead of directing them.
Yes, media can change people not because it changes the way they think but because it can change what they think about and the act of thinking can change the way they think. D'oh.
A series like The Prisoner can change what we think about and did. It is great art and remains relevant or is possibly more relevant. If one sees games in this view, then games that give more to think about are positive.
Virtual worlds are different. They don't tend to have the same 'god like' Number 2 running the show and defeating every attempt to escape, though it is to be noted that through iron-will and persistence, Number 2 did break the will of his captors.
But these are still just works of art. Reality changes in much more complex and difficult to control ways. Did the Prisoner cause the kids to go to the streets in 1968 to stop the war? Some, likely yes. Did they stop the war? No. That happened when the cost began to bankrupt the economy, there was no political advantage, and it was clear no win possible except for the locals. Like Number Six, iron will and discipline broke absolute power.
So is there some lesson virtual worlds and games should teach with respect to Darfur? Maybe. If you want to create worlds that teach lessons, they can certainly do that.
Or perhaps Darfur will be another example to the West like Vietnam that absolute power simply will not change hearts and minds. It can aid them when they are ready to change but otherwise, human suffering like human evolution is controlled by humans who ARE the emergent controls.
I see the campaigns of the left and well-intentioned as hollow when it comes to acts. It takes incredible experience and planning to create real change. It is not enough to say, "We Can"; we have to say "We Can Do THIS" and this must be doable. Otherwise, as Orwell is quoted, the anvil breaks the hammer, and the follow on is that whatever was between the anvil and the hammer at that point is left undone.
Frustratingly sad but so. I am in sympathy with Raph because we can lose consciousness of what is to be done and what is doable by retreating into fantasy worlds. I agree with Prokofy Neva we can lose it just as easily while shopping for groceries. I disagree that art of any kind is the means, just a reflector. In this is the heart of the problem of our media society: leaders should not be simply reflectors. Hope is a condition, not a goal. Actions without a goal are as dangerous as words without a cause.
If you want to make a change, put $25 into an organization feeding the refugees. This will not solve the problem. It will keep someone alive long enough to make a plan and maybe act on that. Little acts can lead to great victories if they follow the human instead of directing them.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Dark Stars and Standards
With all of the discussion on XML-Dev initiated by Simon St Laurent about the ten year aniversary of XML and the question, is it time for a new review, I have an odd thought given we are comparing the last experience with SGML's struggles and the ease with which XML was sold.
Is there a dark star phase for technologies and ideas? I tend to think of SGML as being sold to publishers and industries whereas XML was sold to programmers. Do standards or technologies endure a phase where the amount of combative energy among the users of different types is such that there is insufficient momentum for it to collapse and fuse until a primary group emerges or is identified which can instantly coalesce and create the required amount of cooling for the collapse?
What are the standards evolution analogs of neutrinos, photons, and electrons?
Humans are the emergent controls of their own evolution. Their intelligence is the fuel and until the coalescence, they cannot shine. The question is, are our conflicts, our resistance to our commonality, our desperate clutching of our self-identity, the dark matter?
It's a fun model.
Is there a dark star phase for technologies and ideas? I tend to think of SGML as being sold to publishers and industries whereas XML was sold to programmers. Do standards or technologies endure a phase where the amount of combative energy among the users of different types is such that there is insufficient momentum for it to collapse and fuse until a primary group emerges or is identified which can instantly coalesce and create the required amount of cooling for the collapse?
What are the standards evolution analogs of neutrinos, photons, and electrons?
Humans are the emergent controls of their own evolution. Their intelligence is the fuel and until the coalescence, they cannot shine. The question is, are our conflicts, our resistance to our commonality, our desperate clutching of our self-identity, the dark matter?
It's a fun model.
Friday, February 01, 2008
It IS About Race
I'm being asked about my voting preferences in the upcoming elections. First, I'm a Democrat. Readers of my blog know that and know my positions on the War, Bubba Bush, Rove the MasterBaiter, and so on. No mysteries there.
1. If it comes down to McCain vs Clinton: I vote for Clinton. I've had enough of the Republicans. Although I respect John McCain, his age and his party work against him.
2. If it comesdown to Obama vs McCain: I vote for McCain. Obama is slick but hollow. A good speechmaker, he may be just a bit too much like John Kennedy who was also a good speech maker but shallow in foreign affairs and up to his hips in scandals which fortunately for him, weren't revealed until after he was assasinated and deified.
Is it about race?
We're told we can't ask that question. The fact that we are told that means it is about race. We were told we couldn't ask questions about the war too because we'd be unpatriotic. When a topic goes off limit, it is worth talking about. I don't hold race against Obama personally. I hold the notion it isn't worthy of discussion against his supporters. I have the very fresh memory of the announcing of the results of the OJ Simpson verdict when the black community stood up and cheered for a man who had cut the head off his wife and murdered a young boy in cold blood. I can't get over it or past it. Now I see Oprah talking about a 'new day for our people' and I have to wonder if I am in the demographic. If I have to wonder, it is about race. Otherwise, why vote for someone who doesn't even have enough experience to know a slum lord from a land lord.
From then until now, I've had all I can stand of tribal drum beating from the far right wing nuts of the Republican Baiting Party to the Al Sharpton's who can't seem to understand that as long as race is an excuse, nothing is inexcusable. Now we can add the Millenials with their age bigotry to this camp who believe it is time for them to take over the country. When you can pay for it, you can have it, kids.
I don't think this country needs a Great Get-Even and that may be what we get with Obama. That WOULD be the politics of the past.
No, what we need is a good hard nosed executive. There is work to be done and I've had enough of visionaries and other feel good fairies. I want to know how the next President will manage my money and the resources I want to leave to my children.
1. If it comes down to McCain vs Clinton: I vote for Clinton. I've had enough of the Republicans. Although I respect John McCain, his age and his party work against him.
2. If it comesdown to Obama vs McCain: I vote for McCain. Obama is slick but hollow. A good speechmaker, he may be just a bit too much like John Kennedy who was also a good speech maker but shallow in foreign affairs and up to his hips in scandals which fortunately for him, weren't revealed until after he was assasinated and deified.
Is it about race?
We're told we can't ask that question. The fact that we are told that means it is about race. We were told we couldn't ask questions about the war too because we'd be unpatriotic. When a topic goes off limit, it is worth talking about. I don't hold race against Obama personally. I hold the notion it isn't worthy of discussion against his supporters. I have the very fresh memory of the announcing of the results of the OJ Simpson verdict when the black community stood up and cheered for a man who had cut the head off his wife and murdered a young boy in cold blood. I can't get over it or past it. Now I see Oprah talking about a 'new day for our people' and I have to wonder if I am in the demographic. If I have to wonder, it is about race. Otherwise, why vote for someone who doesn't even have enough experience to know a slum lord from a land lord.
From then until now, I've had all I can stand of tribal drum beating from the far right wing nuts of the Republican Baiting Party to the Al Sharpton's who can't seem to understand that as long as race is an excuse, nothing is inexcusable. Now we can add the Millenials with their age bigotry to this camp who believe it is time for them to take over the country. When you can pay for it, you can have it, kids.
I don't think this country needs a Great Get-Even and that may be what we get with Obama. That WOULD be the politics of the past.
No, what we need is a good hard nosed executive. There is work to be done and I've had enough of visionaries and other feel good fairies. I want to know how the next President will manage my money and the resources I want to leave to my children.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Epiphany and Cecile
Here are some new instrumentals for you. These are reflective, meditative, lush... ah heck... ear candy.
Why Epiphany? Why not?
Why Cecile? Fred didn't fit.
Both of these are part of the new Virtual Reality world being built for the University of Western Australia - Perth. I can't wait to see the completed work.
Epiphany
Cecile
Enjoy!
Why Epiphany? Why not?
Why Cecile? Fred didn't fit.
Both of these are part of the new Virtual Reality world being built for the University of Western Australia - Perth. I can't wait to see the completed work.
Epiphany
Cecile
Enjoy!
Monday, January 14, 2008
Hanging On The Santa Cross
There is a strange cultural phenomenon here in the South. When a person dies in an auto accident, the family or friends of the victim will put a wooden cross memorial at the site of the incident. These crosses dot the Alabama highways and are a accepted as an expression of public personal grief even as they ugly up the roadsides.
This year I saw one that filled me with dark fascination. Someone decorated the wooden monument with a holly bough and a Santa hat. Imagine that: a Santa Cross.
I've been interviewing people for jobs at our company. This is new for me. I didn't expect to become the manager of product development eight months after accepting the job, but one who takes chances the way I have in my career doesn't always predict the path ahead. I know why I left but that doesn't mean I had a good plan if any. Uncertainty can be pleasant or unpleasant. I manage it. I enjoy it. Risk is acceptable regardless of what I have to lose because when I manage it, there is a thrill to that. No matter how nasty people or circumstances are, one can make do and better themselves.
Something I notice is just how dissatisfied some are with their current employer, yet how reticent they are to take a new job when offered until they get the opinions of the very people they are leaving if they take a new job. Perhaps we want approval or applause or maybe we just don't have enough confidence to believe we can control the circumstances wherever we land. I understand that.
Yet I don't understand when someone is so uncertain that they will endure another season in a freezing hell over taking a chance that they might have to manage uncertainty. We can talk about having to take care of our families, our responsibilities, but eventually we have to take care of business, we have to manage uncertainty.
Sitting here watching a miles long flight of birds flying Southeast, content in the cold, and otherwise looking for grain, maybe that is the way most people manage the winters of discomfort and discontent.
Others put up a Santa Cross.
I understand both. I just don't want to hang on one and wait for the wind to turn warm again. Better to fly.
This year I saw one that filled me with dark fascination. Someone decorated the wooden monument with a holly bough and a Santa hat. Imagine that: a Santa Cross.
I've been interviewing people for jobs at our company. This is new for me. I didn't expect to become the manager of product development eight months after accepting the job, but one who takes chances the way I have in my career doesn't always predict the path ahead. I know why I left but that doesn't mean I had a good plan if any. Uncertainty can be pleasant or unpleasant. I manage it. I enjoy it. Risk is acceptable regardless of what I have to lose because when I manage it, there is a thrill to that. No matter how nasty people or circumstances are, one can make do and better themselves.
Something I notice is just how dissatisfied some are with their current employer, yet how reticent they are to take a new job when offered until they get the opinions of the very people they are leaving if they take a new job. Perhaps we want approval or applause or maybe we just don't have enough confidence to believe we can control the circumstances wherever we land. I understand that.
Yet I don't understand when someone is so uncertain that they will endure another season in a freezing hell over taking a chance that they might have to manage uncertainty. We can talk about having to take care of our families, our responsibilities, but eventually we have to take care of business, we have to manage uncertainty.
Sitting here watching a miles long flight of birds flying Southeast, content in the cold, and otherwise looking for grain, maybe that is the way most people manage the winters of discomfort and discontent.
Others put up a Santa Cross.
I understand both. I just don't want to hang on one and wait for the wind to turn warm again. Better to fly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)