DISQUS

Hi J-P,

Glad to read you again. I appreciate your methodical approach to Obama. Permit me a comment: Of what exactly does "a natural affinity" between (American) blacks and Jews consist?

I hear in that phrase a cliche that should not be tolerated. Each people's past legacy of oppression, dispossession, slavery are distinct. The dangers each face today are also distinct. The most important "affinity" for American blacks and Jews should be that they are Americans, meaning that our shared citizenship trumps ethnic, racial, or religious identity. While reading your remarks with interest, I look to American conservatism to make this happen.

"Change" - it isn't just for presidential candidates anymore.

"Change" - it isn't just for presidential candidates anymore.

What a funny (and practical) idea for a post.
For simple, try a crock pot -- most things you just throw in and they cook themselves.
For a little more involved, trust your gut (so to speak) rather than books: walk through the supermarket and fill up your cart with all the items that seem tastiest to you. This tomato, that melon, this cheese, that fish. But DON'T BUY any of it. Note what you selected, put the items back on the shelf, and then look up recipes for those items. If it's not fun to make, it's not (ful)filling to eat.
And like someone else said, a good set of knives is important.

What a funny (and practical) idea for a post.

For simple, try a crock pot -- most things you just throw in and they cook themselves.

For a little more involved, trust your gut (so to speak) rather than books: walk through the supermarket and fill up your cart with all the items that seem tastiest to you. This tomato, that melon, this cheese, that fish. But DON'T BUY any of it. Note what you selected, put the items back on the shelf, and then look up recipes for those items. If it's not fun to make, it's not (ful)filling to eat.

And like someone else said, a good set of knives is important.

Last year I attended the Castro District's infamous, massive street party - in a costume mocking Islamic suicide bombers. I even brought a real Koran.
http://tinyurl.com/yrs54f (w/ pic)
Call it going back to an old "haunt" (pun intended), purging old memories, making new ones. Note well that there were far more costumes mocking Christianity (esp. Catholicism) than those mocking Islam.
So here's to a happy and fun and safe Halloween for everyone - but especially for kids.

Last year I attended the Castro District's infamous, massive street party - in a costume mocking Islamic suicide bombers. I even brought a real Koran.
http://tinyurl.com/yrs54f (w/ pic)

Call it going back to an old "haunt" (pun intended), purging old memories, making new ones. Note well that there were far more costumes mocking Christianity (esp. Catholicism) than those mocking Islam.

So here's to a happy and fun and safe Halloween for everyone - but especially for kids.

FWIW, your presence before the microphones is somewhat more authoritative than the impression you make on your blogs.
If a label becomes necessary, I usually pick "center-right."

Impromptu? Had me fooled. :-) Your example of the workplace conflict back in 1990 was plain and clear. Good stuff.

FWIW, your presence before the microphones is somewhat more authoritative than the impression you make on your blogs.

If a label becomes necessary, I usually pick "center-right."

Impromptu? Had me fooled. :-) Your example of the workplace conflict back in 1990 was plain and clear. Good stuff.

First, those verses Laura cited are jawdroppers. I'm almost feeling I should go away and meditate on them before even commenting....
Second, this is the first presidential election in which religious values are serious considerations. It means that, no matter how many of my friends will, I will not vote for Rudy Giuliani in the primary. (Most of my political pals are "9/11 Republicans" and therefore pleased, if not enthusiastic, about his candidacy.) It means, like Ann Coulter said during the Q&A at CPAC, that if both major party candidates are for abortion, then something is really wrong with the country.
At this point I like Duncan Hunter the best of the lot.

Randy,

Since you've written so openly on the subject, I'll comment here (instead of, say, by private email).

The short answer is: my faith does not reside in science. It seems clearly that your faith does not reside there, either. While you take time to cite research about sexual orientation change, I don't even consider such things. Such research obviously has its value in the broader public debate in which you have a part.

I stick with choice (tempered by faith or will power - or both), specifically moral choice. That is, choice based not on whim or comfort or social conformity, but choice based on what works in terms of my emotional and psychological peace of mind and confidence, and in terms of being a role model. Including, potentially, a husband and father. (Gay activists have a term for such moral choice. They call it "self-hatred.")

With a temperament grounded in the arts and in politics, genetics play almost no role in my understanding of what's possible or preferable. To some extent, especially in the arts, it is natural and necessary to have some fluidity in one's sexual experiences or preferences or mere curiosities. I mean, there is something "demonic" in being possessed by the urge to write poetry, or to act, or to paint. People like us must find a way, as the poet Rimbaud said, to cultivate an "upsetting of all the senses."

If I could reduce it to a few words, I'd say that that was the appeal of homosexuality for me: an attempt to "discover" myself by stepping outside of myself. That's also a big reason why, from the get-go, I found it burdensome and unsatisfying. Who wants to, or can, live constantly at odds with one's better, sounder nature? Although many of us who reflect and then comment critically about the gay subculture see precisely that in those who persist in living that way.

In any case, it's possible, fortunately, to throw oneself into poetry without being a flagrant homosexual. For Baudelaire wrote about the need for poets to get drunk: on wine, women, or virtue. Two - or even just one - out of three fit the bill just fine.

Power to you, Randy. Power to all of us.

First, those verses Laura cited are jawdroppers. I'm almost feeling I should go away and meditate on them before even commenting....

Second, this is the first presidential election in which religious values are serious considerations. It means that, no matter how many of my friends will, I will not vote for Rudy Giuliani in the primary. (Most of my political pals are "9/11 Republicans" and therefore pleased, if not enthusiastic, about his candidacy.) It means, like Ann Coulter said during the Q&A at CPAC, that if both major party candidates are for abortion, then something is really wrong with the country.

At this point I like Duncan Hunter the best of the lot.

Randy,
Since you've written so openly on the subject, I'll comment here (instead of, say, by private email).
The short answer is: my faith does not reside in science. It seems clearly that your faith does not reside there, either. While you take time to cite research about sexual orientation change, I don't even consider such things. Such research obviously has its value in the broader public debate in which you have a part.
I stick with choice (tempered by faith or will power - or both), specifically moral choice. That is, choice based not on whim or comfort or social conformity, but choice based on what works in terms of my emotional and psychological peace of mind and confidence, and in terms of being a role model. Including, potentially, a husband and father. (Gay activists have a term for such moral choice. They call it "self-hatred.")
With a temperament grounded in the arts and in politics, genetics play almost no role in my understanding of what's possible or preferable. To some extent, especially in the arts, it is natural and necessary to have some fluidity in one's sexual experiences or preferences or mere curiosities. I mean, there is something "demonic" in being possessed by the urge to write poetry, or to act, or to paint. People like us must find a way, as the poet Rimbaud said, to cultivate an "upsetting of all the senses."
If I could reduce it to a few words, I'd say that that was the appeal of homosexuality for me: an attempt to "discover" myself by stepping outside of myself. That's also a big reason why, from the get-go, I found it burdensome and unsatisfying. Who wants to, or can, live constantly at odds with one's better, sounder nature? Although many of us who reflect and then comment critically about the gay subculture see precisely that in those who persist in living that way.
In any case, it's possible, fortunately, to throw oneself into poetry without being a flagrant homosexual. For Baudelaire wrote about the need for poets to get drunk: on wine, women, or virtue. Two - or even just one - out of three fit the bill just fine.
Power to you, Randy. Power to all of us.

Thanks for the report back from the front lines. And thanks for your service.