Mind Over Blather: February 2007

lkjhlkjh

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Only the Willing Spirit Finds God

I've been reading the many excellent posts over at Vox Popoli deconstructing the rationale of atheism, along with most of the hundreds and hundreds of comments generated by the believers in one corner vs the unbelievers in the other corner. It's round #10^gazillion and still no decision. This match is never-ending. No, actually, it will come to an end - when Jesus Himself delivers the knockout punch.

It is written: " 'As surely as I live,' says the Lord,
'every knee will bow before me; every tongue will confess to God.' "

-- Romans 14:11

Until that day though, there is no logical proof that can be formulated to convince the unbeliever of the existence of God. God doesn't work this way. God is spirit. The knowledge of Him comes from a willing spirit, not through the neural networks of the mind. This is not to say that God is not logical but that there is no logic that will suffice as proof of God for one who has hardened his heart against Him. They are in danger of committing the unforgivable or unpardonable sin as described in Mark 3:28-29:

Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

Jesus made this statement after the scribes accused him of casting out demons through the power of Satan. These guys would not acknowledge the miracles performed before their very eyes as proof of Jesus' divinity. Refusing to believe, they made ridiculous excuses for these powers, which Jesus quickly shot down with logic - as He always did. They couldn't win any argument against Him. But, instead of bowing before Jesus Christ, they crucified Him. Sound familiar? If you can't win an argument, attack the person. And attack they did, in the worst way. Of course, they could not possibly realize that this most profane of acts would bring about the most precious of gifts that God had planned for man - salvation and eternal life. He does indeed work in mysterious ways.

Fast forward to today and nothing has changed. There are those who willfully shut out the gentle urging of the Holy Spirit, the Word of God, the testimony of His Apostles, and any logical argument for God. They are either waiting for irrefutable proof or have said in their hearts that there is no God. Instead of trying to find Him they find every excuse to deny Him.

Why would someone willfully deny God? Because giving oneself over to the Holy Spirit and confessing that Jesus is Lord and Savior brings about a transformation. But they like being what they are and have no desire to change. Acknowledging no higher being to whom they must answer, they are unable to see themselves as fallen and in need of salvation. The very concept is contemptible to the unbeliever. Man's ego, as was in the beginning, is still what separates him from God. BTW, Satan has the same problem.

There is a saying, "If you love something, set it free. If it comes back to you, it's yours. If it doesn't, it never was." God seems to have this attitude about us. Unfortunately, if we will not be God's, we will be nothing because in the end His Creation is all there is. There is no place for those who willfully reject their Creator.

View Archived Comments

Archived Comments

Billy D ~

Awesome post lady.

I don't, nor ever will, understand why someone would willfully choose to be away from the Lord. That's a wicked dark place, you know?

Mar 02, 2007 13:13

Morris ~

There is plenty of proof of God's existence and also of the Messiah. But as you say, nothing will convince the heart that is hardened against Him. So many proofs and they *will* not see.

Mar 02, 2007 14:33

Taylor ~

I don't, nor ever will, understand why someone would willfully choose to be away from the Lord.

I can understand very well because I was there. I still remember the contempt I felt when discussing our Lord with Christians. Quite the rebellious fool I made of myself.

Then one day I found myself so happy, my life so perfect, and knowing full well that none of it was my doing or anyone else's. I HAD to thank someone and all I could see was God. I decided then that I would get to know my awesome God who I realized had been there all along, giving me so much, patiently waiting for me to come around to Him. Also, I wanted Him at my side when life wasn't always going to be so perfect. I still have a long, long way to go to really know Him. But, if it can be said of anyone, it can be said of our Father, "To know Him is to love Him."

Mar 02, 2007 22:34

Taylor ~

There is plenty of proof of God's existence and also of the Messiah.

Morris, this is quite true. My nature is to be logical. Having a BS in Mathematics and MS in Computer Science, with a whole lot of hard science classes from when I was pre-Med, I know logic and a little about our natural world. I also try to observe and analyze. So, this is not a blind faith I have. My mind has to put everything in place and make sense of everything. God gave us everything we need to find Him. We all have the capacity. Whether we use it is another matter entirely.

Mar 02, 2007 22:49

Giraffe ~

Until that day though, there is no logical proof that can be formulated to convince the unbeliever of the existence of God.

There is plenty of proof of God's existence and also of the Messiah.
Morris, this is quite true.

Contradicting yourself.

There is a lot of evidence. I don't think it is proven. Most atheists are intelligent, and if there where absolute proof they would be forced to admit it. As it is, they can ignore the evidence because of their biases and feel intellectually superior. Because they are a**holes. :)

There is evidence but not proof, so it requires faith. I have to admit, faith isn't always easy for me.

Mar 03, 2007 17:26

Taylor ~

Contradicting yourself

Am I? Perhaps so. Perhaps not. My brain isn't up to taking this apart at this time as I just woke up. I'll think on it.

As it is, they [atheists] can ignore the evidence because of their biases and feel intellectually superior.

The statement Jesus made regarding a rich man getting into heaven could also be said of the intelligent man. The rich man puts riches ahead of God. The intelligent man puts his own cognizance ahead of faith and consequently belief.

I was discussing God with a friend of mine, an atheist, not of the asshole variety. F. is a decent guy, uber-intelligent, M.I.T. post-grad. I asked him what he would do if God appeared to him. His response was very telling. He said he'd ask God about the universe and other things that he's curious about. I laughed, then said, "You have the CREATOR of the entire universe, your own creator in front of you and you would treat him as some Nobel laureate who happens to have some more information than you. Can that huge brain of yours compute how ridiculous this response was?"

F. grudgingly conceded that I had a point.

Then I proceeded to tell him that it was his own ego that was preventing him from even considering the existence of God. And that if God did indeed appear to him, he'd be on the floor unable to utter a word, much less have the presence of mind to chit-chat with the Almighty. I laughed again.

I have to admit, faith isn't always easy for me.

Nothing good is easy in this world. This is because we must overcome the inertia of evil set in motion thousands of years ago. Our fallen world and our own fallen nature are like a river going in one direction, away from Him. We, who would be of God, are like those salmon struggling to swim upstream.

Giraffe, it is the most natural thing in this world to not have faith. I submit that this will not be a problem in the Kingdom to come as all things will flow towards Him.

Mar 03, 2007 21:00

Difster ~

God's proof is written on our hearts.

Furthermore, anything you can be talked in to, you can be talked out of. Getting saved is done through the Holy Spirit and no amount of convincing by men can give someone their salvation.

Mar 06, 2007 04:10

Morris ~

Taylor, I know what you mean about having a logical mind that has to have everything in it's place and make sense of it all. When I was saved God was very good to me. He led me to proof after proof (intellectually speaking) of Himself and His Word. Some of the proofs he led me to, such as the heptadic structure of the Bible, blew me away. Dif's comment "Getting saved is done through the Holy Spirit and no amount of convincing by men can give someone their salvation." is spot on. That had to happen for me to believe in Him, but that He decided to give me all these extra proofs was such a blessing.

Mar 09, 2007 04:24

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Blind Trust Can Get You Killed

Just driving back from the store a bit ago and I see something that always makes me shake my head, resisting the urge to stop, roll down my window and shout, "Hey, you're endangering your child, STUPID!" Diplomacy has never been my strong point. What would incite me to such an almost outburst? I will tell you in the hopes that perhaps someone will read this, recognize themselves or someone else and have their eyes opened to this unnecessary and stupid risk.

I have observed time and again a woman, a man, or a couple walking along the street, pushing a baby stroller with their backs to the oncoming traffic. How on earth can anyone be this ignorant, blindly trusting that everyone who is driving up behind them will not run them down? When I used to run on the streets I would always run against the oncoming traffic, even if I was on the sidewalk. This wasn't even something that I had to consider - it was common sense and basic survival instinct. I wanted to be aware of what was happening around me - especially with regard to cars.

Today's example of stupidity involved a mother and stroller. She was walking on the street pushing her baby in a stroller, her back to the traffic, talking on the cellphone. All it would take is one distracted driver, which with cellphones and other electronic devices on cars is more and more common today, to run them over and kill them. She would never know what hit her.

View Archived Comments

Archived Comments

Billy D ~

"...always run against the oncoming traffic, even if I was on the sidewalk."

I was actually taught this in school when I was a wee lad.

Feb 28, 2007 01:33

Taylor ~

I don't remember being taught this, but would feel extremely vulnerable if I were to walk or run with my back to oncoming traffic - especially right on the street. That people do this with their babies, oblivious to the risk, is mind boggling to me.

Feb 28, 2007 02:28

Wonder Woman ~

Elmer the Elephant taught me as a small child to walk against the traffic when a sidewalk wasn't available.

However in school we were to walk with our right arm towards/against the wall, making traffic jams less.

Cell phones are dumb, all the time.

Why is it we can't go ANYWHERE without an "urgent" call from someone wanting to know something about some thing?

I work at a spa part-time. People (spa-ees)KEEP THEIR CELL PHONES ON whilst relaxing in a significant spending venture for mind/body/soul.

Completely baffling.

Stupid cell phones.

Feb 28, 2007 03:19

Spacebunny ~

I don't even know the number of my own cell phone and the only person who has it is my hubby. I don't give it to anyone because the only time I have it on is when I need to use it which is about 5 times a year. I do keep it in the car with me though especially when travelling with the kids in case there is an emergency.

She would never know what hit her.

I bet she would assume it was a car or truck though, seeing as she's the road ;)

Feb 28, 2007 15:27

Difster ~

I was taught in school to go WITH traffic as well. I never saw the wisdom in that though so I bucked it and walked, rode my bike on the other side of the road.

Feb 28, 2007 22:11

Spacebunny ~

You ride your bike with the traffic as you are supposed to obey all traffic laws while on your bike. But you walk against the traffic.

Feb 28, 2007 22:27

Difster ~

supposed to

I don't own a bike now but I would still ride against traffic if I had to ride on the street. I'd risk the ticket.

Feb 28, 2007 23:26

Taylor ~

For an ex-Marine and former motorcycle owner you certainly are precautious when it comes to bicycles! Just teasing ya, Difster. I wouldn't want to ride my bicycle anywhere there's any significant traffic - at least not in Dallas. But SB is right, if you're on a bike, you are bound by the all the rules. I used to ride my bike all over the place, but never followed the rules... I wonder if they enforce this?

Now, if you were to ride a bicycle without any ID, how can they ticket you?

Mar 01, 2007 04:25

Erik ~

Taylor, you were largely in danger because the guys were gawking at you. This doesn't apply to the mother you saw today.

And yes, they do try to enforce those laws. I got pulled over once for running a stop sign and once for speeding. Didn't get a ticket either time tho.

Mar 01, 2007 05:09

Spacebunny ~

I used to ride my bike all over the place, but never followed the rules... I wonder if they enforce this?

I would guess it depends on how much of a dink the police are in your area.

Now, if you were to ride a bicycle without any ID, how can they ticket you?

Well, since it is now illegal to not show id to any officer who asks you I would guess that they would just take you to jail (again, depending on how obnoxious they are).

Mar 01, 2007 06:45

Billy D ~

They taught us to ride with traffic, as if you're riding at 20 mph, and someone hits you at 40 mph, the effect is that of a collision at 20 mph, vs, 60 mph if you're riding against. I had a set of dogtags made for myself, and my family, to wear in those instances. It's not any kind of official ID or anything, (so the policia won't accept it) but for strictly emergency purposes, name, address and phone number. Lightweight and no need of a wallet. (Kids still absolutely refuse to wear them though)

Mar 01, 2007 09:47

Wonder Woman ~

So, pretty much we all know *sarcastic smirk* the rules...

Everyone had their own!

WOOHOO!

Mar 01, 2007 19:42

Monday, February 26, 2007

The XX-Files

An excerpt from a story on WND, Jealous? Could cost you 5 years in jail. In Mexico, you'd better talk to your wife, have sex with her:

Perez Duarte said the law would be a weapon that women could employ to level the playing field with abusive men. She said indifference, jealousy or lack of love were crimes against women just as much as physical violence.

"Jealousy produces a particular type of stress in the person that comes up against it," she said. "It is exactly the same. They are wounds, psychological scars identical to physical scars."

Another example of an action that would put men in breach of the new law is attempting to control how wives dress.

You can never be too thin, too rich, or too tyrannical.

So, after hubby completes his 5 years of timeout for hurting wifey's wittle feelings, he gets to go home and all will be well and everyone will be happy. Right? Problem solved. Never mind that she's been shacking up with another hombre in the meantime and there's no more marriage to come back to. Never mind that she could actually be a skank that caused her husband to treat her this way in the first place. No, the State must at all costs protect and support a woman's right to be whatever she wants, do whatever she wants and above all force men to accept it - using incarceration or lethal force, if necessary. Take your pick, man.

In effect this is divorce with a 5-year jail term added on for good measure - not for breaking any law but because the wife did not like the way her husband was treating her and can now destroy his life even more than she could just through divorce.

View Archived Comments

Friday, February 23, 2007

When Good Men Do Something vs Nothing

From U.S. Tourist in Costa Rica Kills Mugger:

A tour bus of U.S. senior citizens defended themselves against a group of alleged muggers, sending two of them fleeing and killing a third in the Atlantic coast city of Limon, police said on Thursday.

One of the tourists, a retired member of the U.S. military aged about 70, put assailant Warner Segura in a head lock and broke his clavicle after the 20-year-old and two other men armed with a knife and gun held up their tour bus Wednesday, said Luis Hernandez, the police chief of Limon, 80 miles east of San Jose.

The two other men fled when the 12 senior citizens started defending themselves. The tourists then drove Segura to the Red Cross where the man was declared dead. The Red Cross also treated one of the tourists for an anxiety attack, Hernandez said.

This story made me wonder what this man would have done if he had been a passenger on any of those ill-fated flights on 9/11. The thought that able-bodied men just sat there and let those Muslim, sons of Satan, bastards armed only with box cutters take them to their deaths still makes me sick.

The events that unfolded on those airplanes are exactly what is happening today in Western countries. And I'm afraid there aren't enough good men like this 70-year old brave gentleman to save us from those whose only goal is our destruction.

Update: Here is an example of good men doing something. Gee, I wonder why I haven't heard of this before now? Filthy, traitorous MSM. Thanks for this email, Billy D.

USS New York

It was built with 24 tons of scrap steel from the World Trade Center.

It is the fifth in a new class of warship - designed for missions that include special operations against terrorists. It will carry a crew of 360 sailors and 700 combat-ready Marines to be delivered ashore by helicopters and assault craft.

Steel from the World Trade Center was melted down in a foundry in Amite, LA to cast the ship's bow section. When it was poured into the molds on Sept. 9, 2003, "those big rough steelworkers treated it with total reverence," recalled Navy Capt. Kevin Wensing, who was there. "It was a spiritual moment for everybody there."

Junior Chavers, foundry operations manager, said that when the trade center steel first arrived, he touched it with his hand and the "hair on my neck stood up." "It had a big meaning to it for all of us," he said. "They knocked us down. They can't keep us down. We're going to be back."

The ship's motto? "Never Forget"

View Archived Comments

Archived Comments

Giraffe ~

Pre 9-11, nobody realized terrorists would crash the plane. I guess they figured just sit tight, and they will let us go eventually. Contrast that with after 9-11, they killed one guy.

Feb 23, 2007 22:18

Billy D ~

It's not the same as it ever was, is it? Manly men are in shorter supply than ever, and that's even fading fast. I blame liberals, hippies, feminists...oh man, I have a list. Now the metrosexuals only worry about keeping the leather on their shoes shiny and getting back home to the Benz. See, now I'm all wound up at work.

Feb 23, 2007 22:19

Taylor ~

Giraffe, the mentality of sitting tight and letting those bastards control anything for any amount of time is what's wrong here - not the fact that they didn't realize what the eventual outcome would be. Those passengers preferred to let them to do what they wanted, even though they were outnumbered and virtually unarmed. It is inconceivable to me that real men would be this submissive.

Those senior citizens could have done the same thing, but they didn't - and those men had knives and a gun. I'll wager that if that tour bus was full of 30-something liberals, those muggers would have done whatever they wanted with them.

We have been pacified into pussiness. Just look around. It is not acceptable for a person to express outrage or anger anymore. You will be required to attend an anger management program. When is the last time you saw anyone demonstrate real anger over an injustice? We've become a society of sheep. And we will be led to the slaughter.

Feb 23, 2007 22:42

Taylor ~

Manly men are in shorter supply than ever, and that's even fading fast.

The best qualities of men, those that stand up to evil and fight for good are vilified on a daily basis in our civilized societies. It is the only way that evil can flourish and flourishing it is under the guise of progressivism and enlightenment.

This is why our peace-loving, turn-the-other-cheek Savior will eventually have to step in and kick everyone's ass.

Feb 23, 2007 22:59

Billy D ~

"This is why our peace-loving, turn-the-other-cheek Savior will eventually have to step in and kick everyone's ass."

Hoo-ah! Yeah baby!

Feb 24, 2007 02:49

Jamie R ~

Better ask somebody.

The Program.

You know His steelo.

Cleaner than a broke dick dog.

Feb 24, 2007 16:28

Taylor ~

HUH???

Feb 24, 2007 17:18

dadid_santos_sjm@hotmail.com ~

All good thank you

Feb 24, 2007 23:06

Taylor ~

De nada.

Feb 24, 2007 23:47

Difster ~

Taylor,

I'd like to see you write an entire post on the feminizing of men. I see it from the male standpoint. I'd like to see what you have to say on the subject.

Feb 25, 2007 04:01

Taylor ~

I'll see what I can do, Difster.

Feb 25, 2007 05:23

Spacebunny ~

Ugh, metrosexuals or whatever you want to call them.

Remember back in the day when leading men in Hollyweird were masculine? All of them, even the gay ones. What happened to that? Now for the most part (there are obvious exceptions, but they are just that, exceptions)they are all these effeminent guys that the teenage girls swoon over. Yuck.

Feb 25, 2007 12:57

Spacebunny ~

BTW, I am now and have always been in love with that scoundrel Rhett Butler.

Feb 25, 2007 12:57

Taylor ~

Yep, women loathe most of the sorry excuses for XYs that pass as men in today's society - whether they realize it or not. Both you and I are aware that a man who is not a real man is quite useless to us or society. But, when you allow feminists and homosexuals to have a strong voice, this is the result - as neither could exist with real men in total control.

Back in the days of strong leading men in Hollywood, those factions had no power. All they could do was lurk on the fringes, outcasts from a society that respected the natural order of things (God's way) and expected movies to reflect this.

Teenage girls have little experience or knowledge of the true character of a man. Those effemininite, narcissistic pieces of meat with eyes are the only types this culture exalts. To them, this is a man.

BTW, I am now and have always been in love with that scoundrel Rhett Butler.

I have a soft spot in my heart for those rapscallion types myself. It takes quite a woman of character to keep them. Unfortunately for Scarlett, she was not one.

Feb 25, 2007 23:15

Roci ~

It could just be the angle, but for a Navy ship, that picture shows a peculiar lack of guns.

Could be because it is the "New York", where guns are illegal.

Feb 28, 2007 20:44

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Getting Down To It

I have been remiss in my blogging. This is because the yard and home have been requiring my attention and the weather is splendid for being outside. Eighty degrees is a welcome change from the frigid temperatures we've experienced this winter - 16 degrees just last week. I was beginning to get cabin fever.

Today's chore was one of those chores that you tend to put off but once you get into it you wonder why the heck you've put it off - as is true of many things in life. I had to get up on the roof to saw off some branches from a tree that overhangs the roof. I like being up on the roof - walking along the slopes and the view is kind of neat. I even stretched out a bit and took some sun while I was up there. One of the kitties followed me up, using the tree, not the ladder like I did. I could get up there using the tree too but not with the saw. The other kitty, a little too "round" to climb, walked around the house crying up at us, distraught that she was missing out on this exciting event.

The real accomplishment of these last few days was not tackling the chores but tackling the monumental inertia which has gripped my mind for so many months now. The main reason I could work on these things is because while I was doing the labor, my mind was busy thinking about the business that I'm in the process of starting. There are many details to work out yet. It is difficult for me to justify using my time to work on mundane matters when there are more important things to be done. This way though, I had my mind on important stuff while working on not so important stuff - an efficient use of my time.

When I finished outside, I went inside to get something to eat. Taking advantage of my momentum, I cleaned out the fridge. Yay! Finally! It has bugged me every single time I opened it but would not do anything about it. Now, its sparkling neatness is a joy to behold. Baby steps...

All in all, today has been a good one - so far. Made some calls and got some needed info for the business. Another good thing, which is indicative of the disordered state of my mind was that I discovered that today was NOT Friday. Ha! This came to my attention and surprise when I heard the garbage truck making its way down the alley on its Thursday run.

View Archived Comments

Archived Comments

Billy D ~

Eighty degrees. Heaven. It was all of 35 here today. Lord I hate winter so. I was wondering what was happening. I finally get some time to blog, and read blogs, and you go away... That 'aint right.

Feb 23, 2007 00:42

Taylor ~

Spring must be sincerely welcomed around those parts. While you're enjoying the thaw, we'll be needing to turn on the AC and shortly after, it will be too hot to do much during the day. It all balances out.

Just like the blogs here. I've slacked off a bit, needing to take care of business and you're picking up the slack starting up with the blogging again. See? It all works out.

Billy D, you've probably missed some of my comments and posts talking about the terribly rough 2006 I experienced. Getting back on track has been a very slow process for me. Never realized what a wimp I was, but I am. At about 50% (an optimistic number) of my normal self, everything is a challenge. Only God knows if and when I'll get that 50% back.

Feb 23, 2007 01:25

Res Ipsa ~

"16 degrees just last week"

In Wyoming we have a name for that kind of weather, heat wave.

Feb 23, 2007 01:54

Taylor ~

Yeah, we're not used to real cold. But you Wyomingites(?) would faint in our 106 degrees with 40% humidity. I was so acclimated to the heat that I'd jog 4 miles in 108 under the midday sun with no problem.

I tried jogging once when it was 18 degrees one night. I stepped outside, started up, took a few lungfulls of that subfreezing air, it felt like my lungs were themselves freezing up. I turned around and went right back in. Forget it. That can't be good for you.

Feb 23, 2007 02:24

Spacebunny ~

I remember when we moved to FL and saw people out jogging in that insane weather. Of course, the only time my brother won't run outside is if it more than -30. Freaks, all of you.

Feb 23, 2007 06:51

Taylor ~

Hey, those endorphins don't come easy! I loved getting out in the elements and after the run, I'd feel so good, like I conquered them, but, no, that kind of cold your brother will run in just seems dangerous.

I can't run anymore. This damned fibroid tumor grew back and it doesn't seem intelligent to run with that thing jostling around in there.

It was the best thing though, because then I turned to weights for fitness. I never got the great results from running that I do from weights - and I don't have to deal with the elements or being out in the streets - which was scary at times.

Now, I wouldn't go back to running even if I could. I'm sorry I wasted those years running. Also, there are long-term damage to joints and ligaments involved with running that will catch up with you in the later years. I'm happy to no longer be in the running freak category. :) But nobody will ever take my weights or exercise ball from me! NEVER!

Feb 23, 2007 07:43

Billy D ~

You're right Taylor, I did miss all that. You can splain it to me sometime?

Feb 23, 2007 09:28

Spacebunny ~

I only lift weights. I think it is the best option for women because few women's joints can handle the pounding of running plus it is great for your bones and more muscle mass means more calories burning at any one time!

Feb 23, 2007 15:45

Jamie R ~

few women's joints can handle the pounding

Oh that's a keeper. Nice.

Feb 23, 2007 16:01

Spacebunny ~

Glad I could help Jamie!

Feb 23, 2007 17:14

Taylor ~

more calories burning at any one time

Yes, this is a super effect of weights that I never experienced with running. I have to eat regularly or my clothes will fit loosely very quickly. It's great to be able to eat anything I want. I've always eaten healthy foods but watched the high-calorie foods very closely. Not now. I still don't touch bread though. And the real strength I have that I didn't then is really handy. I used a handsaw to cut all those branches. Went through them in a snap!

I remember thinking how amazing this was when I first started seeing all these effects from weightlifting.

Feb 23, 2007 18:52

WaterBoy ~

Taylor likes being up on a roof.

James Taylor sang about being up on a roof.

Coincidence? Or is there more to Taylor than meets the eye?

Sorry, it was too obvious to ignore.

On a more serious note, have you considered swimming for a cardio routine?

Feb 24, 2007 20:44

Taylor ~

Or is there more to Taylor than meets the eye?

Yeah, she's a nut. She is not James Taylor's alter female ego. I doubt he sang about cutting branches up on the roof... Besides, he's most likely a filthy liberal. No, the only connection here are 6 letters.

I enjoy swimming a lot. At uni, I took a fitness course where I'd swim a mile every Mon, Wed, and Fri. It was great fun, except on the mornings when I was hungover...

I now get my cardio workout from a Nordic Track skier that I've had for years. It works out well and I elevate the front to get an even better workout.

My fitness philosophy is that it has to be readily available for me or I know I won't do it consistently. Having everything right here is key for me.

I've been thinking of joining a club just for the pool, sauna, and raquetball courts - but that would be more for fun and a little socializing. One of these days I'm going to have to step out of my cave and face the world again...

Feb 24, 2007 21:55

Friday, February 16, 2007

The Blue Bunny Is Back

Billy D is back on the blogosphere with his new blog, The Prodigal Son. The blog title makes one wonder what he's been up to... Welcome back, Billy D. We need more of the good guys speaking their minds.

By the way, did you know that for a while your old blog turned into an X-rated site? I was a bit shocked when I went there and WHOA! a whole lot of skin...

View Archived Comments

Archived Comments

Morris ~

It's good to see Billy back into blogging. It was he who originally encouraged me to blog - though some might say that's a good reason to take revenge... :lol:

Feb 17, 2007 12:44

Billy D ~

Snap! Thank you Taylor.
The past year has been mostly devoted to work, work and more work. When I took the job, I knew it'd be consuming, but worth it, which it was, absolutely.
And I did request in my last post before hiatus that you'd write a blog. And here you are. Sweet.

Feb 17, 2007 15:11

Jamie R ~

Billy D was right!

Feb 17, 2007 16:22

Billy D ~

Hey Jamie! Hows the American tour looking? Still in the works?

Feb 17, 2007 20:26

Taylor ~

Billy D, I was not aware of your flattering comment about me starting a blog until a couple of months afterwards. Jamie mentioned it to me and then I read it. I remember saying to him that I had no idea what I could have ever said that would make Billy D think this...

Anyhow, here I am, still floundering around. I have not yet begun to fight! Last year took a lot out of me. I'm still in first gear...

Feb 17, 2007 20:35

Taylor ~

Morris, it is a good thing that Billy D did get you to start up a blog. Were it not for you, we'd have the impression that all Aussies are like you-know-who. And that just would not be right... :)

Feb 17, 2007 23:45

Jamie R ~

I have to take my first flight, I still feel I have to ask the airline to ban all muslim looking bastards from having shoes on the flight to America. After that, sweet, I'll head up to New Hampshire. I suggested 2007 last time we spoke about it, so it's likely. I'd start a blog about it. People would have to be ready to make an appearance!

And of course, our host here would have to appear on it too!

I'll bring an Akubra hat. And I'll take a risk on the beers there.

Feb 18, 2007 05:05

Billy D ~

Stick with Sammy. (Adams) There'll never be a beer issue.

Taylor - you're a very intelligent, kind, and nice person, with IQ points to spare. It would be a sahme not to allow people access to your brain and your heart. That's why I wanted you to write.
(Now I'll probably get a toothache from all the sweet flowing in here right now)

Feb 18, 2007 12:06

Taylor ~

Aw shucks, Billy D, you're embarrassin' me...

Can't do much about the intelligence part, but as far as nice or kind, I have another side which is brought out by idiot liberals (yes, I realize the redundancy). I have zero tolerance for the hyper-stupid. You will not see me debate them on this blog as I will simply delete their comments and ban them. Life is too short to spend one second attempting to reason with a rabid monkey.

I just deleted one's hyper-stupid comment from the Global Warming post and banned her. She could not refute my response to her at Erik's blog so followed me here to see how she could get me back.

Anyway, I don't mind a good debate if the other person is attempting to be logical but that is rarely the case with most liberals. If they were logical, they wouldn't be liberal in the first place.

Feb 18, 2007 21:12

Difster ~

Taylor - you're a very intelligent, kind, and nice person, with IQ points to spare.

Not to mention stunning good looks!

Feb 18, 2007 23:36

Taylor ~

Thank you, Difster. If you all keep this up, my head could become disproportionately big and that would not be very pretty at all... :)

Feb 19, 2007 00:31

Thursday, February 15, 2007

PCness Be Damned

Bravo, Tim Hardaway. We need more people to speak out like this man.

Now, watch the hysteria that ensues and how this honest man will be harassed and reviled even though he has not done one single thing except express his opinion on homosexuals.

These days it is an heroic act to publicly express opinions that are not politically correct. The tolerance movement will not tolerate this. It is verboten! I hope Mr. Hardaway sticks to his guns and does not allow the stone throwers to force him to back down and issue a public apology.

Tim Hardaway: 'I Hate Gay People'

(CBS4) MIAMI Former Miami Heat superstar Tim Hardaway told a local sports radio show that he "hates gay people."

Hardaway made the comments while he was being interviewed by Dan Le Batard on 790 the Ticket Wednesday afternoon.

The five time All Star was asked how he would deal with a gay teammate.

"First of all I wouldn't want him on my team," said Hardaway. "Second of all, if he was on my team I would really distance myself from him because I don't think that's right and I don't think he should be in the locker room when we're in the locker room."

Le Batard took Hardaway to task, pointing out that his comments were 'flatly homophobic' and bigoted, but that only seemed to stir up the former point guard.

"Well, you know, I hate gay people," Hardaway said in response to Le Batard. "I let it be known I don't like gay people. I don't like to be around gay people. I'm homophobic. It shouldn't be in the world, in the United States, I don't like it."

Mr. Hardaway would be jailed for these comments if the thought control vermin had it their way. From WorldNetDaily Diss a 'gay'? Go to jail! Activists warn Christians targeted under new 'hate crimes' proposal

View Archived Comments

Archived Comments

Billy D ~

You know, I never was "bothered" by gays until they started kicking up dust on the issue, then took over the public education system. Now I see everyone of them as a hate-filled activist sort. Too bad.
I wish he would have said he wasn't homophobic, in that he wasn't "afraid" of them, just reviled. Like me.

Feb 15, 2007 10:41

Difster ~

I couldn't agree more about the locker room thing. I wouldn't want to be in the locker room with a guy any more than the women would want straight guys in their locker rooms.

Feb 15, 2007 15:34

Jamie R ~

Well the God of the Bible did say Abomination. Which Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary defines as 'extreme disgust and hatred'. So Tim Hardaway - part of Golden State Warriors' famous Run TMC - is just being Biblical and Godly.

Now about putting them to death....

Feb 15, 2007 16:19

Spacebunny ~

Given that my SIL has been accused of sexual harrassment by a gay coworker(she's 7 months pregnant!) you can imagine how I feel about them. When I first read that he said that I thought - good for him! And then I thought, he's going to get pummeled.

Feb 15, 2007 20:10

Billy D ~

I watched "Rome is burning" on ESPM last night. (Jim Rome) He and the panel were assailing him, calling him uneducated, etc. The thing that got me the most was, the panelists were saying things like "There is a segment of the population with certain religious backgrounds that still think like this". Just blows my mind sometimes.

Feb 16, 2007 17:50

DF ~

You are using "your" God and your scriptures to justify hate of homosexuals. It's like facist Muslims justifying their hate for infidels (everybody but "them") by citing "their" scriptures.

Oh yeh, I forgot, "your" scriptures are the inerrant ones.

I don't think I will ever equate raving fundamentalists with islamo-terrorists, but if given the chance a few might be willing to fly a plane into a tall building full of homosexuals. Justified, perhaps, because their God calls people like that an abomanation.

Think about these things will ya? Don't approve hate.

There aren't many simple answers out there unless one is a simpleton.

Now.... let me have it!

Feb 16, 2007 18:11

Taylor ~

You are using "your" God and your scriptures to justify hate of homosexuals.

You're wrong. Homosexuality disgusted me well before God had any meaning in my life. I knew then they were perverted. Don't need God to tell me this. Children are also naturally repulsed by homosexuals.

Homosexuals and those who support them just love to point their finger at Christians and accuse our God of being hateful. Don't need God. Nature condemns homosexuality just fine. Anyone with half a brain can see this.

Feb 16, 2007 18:49

DF ~

So, would it be justified to fly a plane into a tall building full of gays, because you are disgusted with them?

Do they have the same right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that you and I have?... or not.

BTW. I am pretty well acquainted with the newphew of my girlfriend who, no doubt, will be a flaming homosexual. He's already flamboyant, effeminate, overly emotional, and in playing a word game over the holiday's last year, he had to think of something with the word "devil" in it... he said... "The Devil Wears Prada" is a sissy sort of a way. It was a total hoot! That boy is 10. I guess I should hate little Sammy too.

Doesn't it seem strange that with so much (presumeably justifiable) hate of gays from people like you, that to really choose that orientation is rational or even possible?

I've known quite a few, many are truly tortured souls. Most would like to be left alone and not hated or reviled by the self-righteous or God righteous.

Enough talk about them. People give this issue way more time than it is worth and the Republicans love it. It keeps the base riled up so we'll vote for them (again) next election.

Can't you see that?

And I'm no liberal.

But more of a live and let live kinda guy.

Feb 16, 2007 19:15

Taylor ~

DF, if you can have your opinion, why can't I? I've never hurt or would ever hurt anyone for being something.

Get off your high horse and let people have their opinions. Tim Hardaway has a right to have his own opinions, no matter what they are. He's not saying I'm going to kill every faggot I see. He doesn't want to be around them. I know a lot of people I don't want to be around, including idiots, liberals, faggots, whores, drug addicts, alcoholics, etc. the list goes on. It's called freedom of association.

Feb 16, 2007 19:35

DF ~

Taylor: Never ever said you can't have your opinion! My gosh, this is your blog! Which I enjoy btw.

You can even have the opinion that I have half a brain!

It's just that hate turns me off, it probably turns off God too since he told us to love one another.

Someone will explain that away, that John was only talking to them about Christians loving each other, etc.

And I certainly do sound like I'm on a high horse when I advise, live and let live, don't I?

So people can hate hate away and cheer on the haters, and I will recall where it is said,

"God is love."

Feb 16, 2007 19:58

DF ~

Taylor: Ironic verse of the day that's coming up today on your blog.

I only just now noticed it.

Peace, DF

Feb 16, 2007 20:06

Taylor ~

DF, God is good. He hates sin. We are also told to hate evil and sin. If I hate something, I did not sit down and decide to hate it. I just do. I'm not going to make any excuses for it. I love good things. I didn't sit down and decide that either. I just do and won't make any excuses for it.

Nobody is going to make me think that something which is bad is good. And nobody is going to change my mind that something which is good is bad. Although, society is going that way, I will not.

Feb 16, 2007 20:09

DF ~

Well said Taylor. DF

Feb 16, 2007 20:33

Huckleberry ~

All of this has been engineered by ESPN...take a look at this month's issue of ESPN The Magazine...the coverstory is the John Amechi thing, they've been cramming it down their audience's throat for weeks, and I bet they paid Hardaway to say what he said just to drum up some more controversy and push book sales.
Ya it should be noted that they also have capital interest in Amechi's book.
Its all rigged...

Feb 17, 2007 05:17

Giraffe ~

ESPN radio is all over it. Now he apologized twice. What a joke.

Feb 17, 2007 16:43

Jamie R ~

he told us to love one another

And that homosexuals are an abomination. Refer to the definition again.

You see you can't use the bible and then not use the bible.

Best to just sit back and plan your own plane flights into buildings full of hate-filled bible bashers.

You'll be best served by trying to outlaw the bible completely, you're going to have to hate it to stop it! Good luck trying to outlaw the STDs, drug use, AIDs rates, murders, suicides and other commonly related things in the homosexual community.

By their fruits.

Feb 17, 2007 19:37

Taylor ~

Thank you, Jamie. You nailed it.

There is one thing that is never mentioned about the Bible's references to homosexuals. This is that every king of Israel and Judah was judged by God to be either good or bad. One of the criteria which God used was whether the king DROVE out the homosexuals from the kingdom. God was satisfied to see that the king did not tolerate them - He was not asking for their execution.

Good and bad cannot co-exist. It is impossible. This is becoming more and more evident.

Feb 17, 2007 20:26

Taylor ~

Now he apologized twice.

Giraffe, it seems that one apology isn't enough to amend for uttering the unspeakable. One must be made to grovel and beg forgiveness, declare oneself to be the vilest of all scum and then bend over in submission to let them have their way. Then maybe, just maybe, after he's been thoroughly punished they'll let up. They'll never forgive or forget, but will be satisfied that they've done everything possible to make him pay.

This MO seems very familiar. Don't many women behave this way when they feel they've been wronged? Society has turned into a controlling bitch.

When you think about it, this makes sense. In a society where acting like a real man has been continuously attacked and maligned there can be no other outcome.

Feb 17, 2007 21:37

DF ~

Jamie: God-righteous indignation indeed. Great to know that you are on God's good side. Don't you just FEEL it? Hate for/with him is righteous hate isn't it? Were all as pure as you.

Yeh, I'm certainly advocating for gathering all the christians like you together and offing you all in one firery display. That's how I came across alright.

Fundamentalists are fun!

And in the "straight community" there are/is:

No:
STDs?
drug use?
AIDs rates?
Murders?
suicides?

Feb 19, 2007 15:19

Giraffe ~

There is no higher crime than offending a liberal.

Feb 19, 2007 16:45

Jamie R ~

You stand with homosexuality in its defence DF. I'll stand with the God of the Bible on his views.

I'd switch sides if I were you.

Besides, if homosexuality had a God he would be from San Francisco and be dead from AIDs already.

Feb 20, 2007 01:31

Difster ~

I guess gay is the new black. It used to be that black people could say anything about anyone.

Feb 20, 2007 05:57

Monday, February 12, 2007

Too Horrible

At times nature can be cruel, but there is also a raw beauty, and even a certain justice manifested within that cruelty.

The alligator, one of the oldest and ultimate predators, normally considered the "apex predator", can still fall victim to implemented 'team work' strategy, made possible due to the tight knit social structure and "survival of the pack mentality" bred into the canines.

See the remarkable photograph below courtesy of Nature Magazine.

Note that the Alpha dog has a muzzle hold on the gator preventing it from breathing, while another dog has a hold on the tail to keep it from thrashing. The third dog attacks the soft underbelly of the gator.

Be prepared for the photo. If you are easily disturbed do not look at it.

WARNING: Not for the squeamish!

CLICK HERE IF YOU DARE

View Archived Comments

Sunday, February 11, 2007

Hollow Points

Guns, and more specifically non-gun owners, have been the topic of late on several blogs. Res concedes that non-gun owners are not parasites. I agree that the term parasite is probably not the most accurate. I have my own thoughts on this.

There is one reason that I would accept as valid, if a little sad, that someone would not possess a firearm. I know a woman who simply does not trust herself to own a gun. She is 100% pro-gun but can get extremely nasty and violent if she has one too many drinks. She knows this about herself and would rather risk her own safety than someone else's at her own hands. And, she doesn't even drink that often, but knows that it would only take one time. Obviously, she has issues...

For the rest of us, I would say that choosing not to own a gun is at best illogical, at worst, cowardly, stupid and irresponsible, most especially if one is the head of a family.

If someone views a gun as dangerous, then I would also expect them to never, ever get into a vehicle and certainly not allow their children to get into one either. There are far more accidental deaths by automobiles than by guns. Of course, most non-gun owners do own vehicles or ride in them, which is why it's illogical to be against guns simply because they might pose a danger.

We risk injury or death in vehicles every day because transportation is necessary in order to conduct our lives. Owning a gun has far less risk, and when you consider that guns are the only means of self-defense that is real, effective and most importantly, timely, the risk is outweighed by the necessity - should it ever arise. Being prepared to protect your life and those of your loved ones is far more important than getting to point B and much less dangerous.

The cowardly part comes in because non-gun owners will hide behind someone else, expecting them to put their necks on the line to protect them and their families - when they could do it themselves were it not for their cowardice.

It is quite stupid in that expecting and relying on that same someone and their gun to be around at precisely the time they're needed could end up costing them and/or their family their lives. Often, danger requires immediate response. 911 is not immediate. To think that danger will wait or can be fended off until the hired help rolls up is stupid.

Finally, non-gun owners are irresponsible because they are not taking responsibility for defending their life and those whose lives are dependent on them. While the act of self-defense is not an everyday activity, being prepared for such is the responsible thing to do. Expecting someone else to do it is not responsible - especially when they are unreliable.

I might also add that non-gun owners are lazy because they will not take the time and effort to provide for THEIR OWN self-defense. We are often accustomed to having others do what we could do for ourselves. While in some cases, such as cleaning, yardwork, etc, this may be good in that it affords us more time to do other things, in the case of self-defense, there is no one else who can do this job. This is why it is called SELF-defense.

The main reason I think that people are anti-gun is because they have been brainwashed to believe that guns are dangerous, cause crime, and that people who do want to protect themselves with guns are uncultured Neanderthals. This is a perception - not reality - as all statistics prove them wrong. Yet, the brainwashing is so thorough that even in the face of reality all they see is
GUNS = BAD.

Most people who are against guns are the ones who live in relatively crime-free areas. They have an underlying "crimes happen to other people" attitude. I doubt they've ever faced a menacing figure in their doorway. If they do live in crime infested areas and are still against guns, then they are idiots who think anti-gun laws will prevent them from becoming victims of guns. Only another gun will help you from being the victim of a gun!

Perhaps anti-gun people are pacifists who think that by simply having a gun they are somehow condoning violence. This is very sad, because it is only when good, peaceful people own guns that violence can be contained. Criminals are violent and bad, but they're not THAT stupid - nor very brave.

View Archived Comments

Archived Comments

farmer Tom ~

Well said.

Feb 11, 2007 14:15

Difster ~

Other than the example that you cite, there is little, if any reason not to own a gun.

Having a child with a propensity for violence would be another, though similar reason.

If you have a particularly irresponsible child or a teen ager that you know is on drugs, that makes gun in the house more dangerous and should preclude having a revolver in a nightstand drawer. It shouldn't prevent you from having A gun in the house though.

Feb 11, 2007 14:23

Billy D ~

Good post. I have a friend (co-worker) who was going to have his son come over and play with my daughter. The only issue was, his wife found out I am a gun owner, and told him he would have to "sweep the house" to make sure they weren't within reach of the kids beforehand. (He laughed while he told me this) It just blows my mind at the utter stupidity of some folks.

Feb 11, 2007 14:25

Taylor ~

Thanks guys. There's so much more on this topic but I got tired.

his wife found out I am a gun owner, and told him he would have to "sweep the house" to make sure they weren't within reach of the kids beforehand.(He laughed while he told me this)

Billy D, I'd have laughed back and said, sure, but I can assure you that you won't find my guns - just like your balls. Not really, but I'd think it. So, wifey is demanding that hubby invade someone's privacy to make sure that little darling is safe from dangerous gun and stupid gun owner. Was he going to go through every drawer in the house? Look under every bed, pillow? What exactly does a sweep consist of and how does it actually accomplish anything - unless it's so thorough that it is a search? This is so typical of that mindset.

Again, so much to this topic...

Feb 11, 2007 20:31

Billy D ~

I actually first responded, "So I should take Taylor's out of her room too?" (My nine yr old is named Taylor) He just looked at me like he really believed for a minute that she had her own guns in her room...

Feb 12, 2007 09:45

Taylor ~

Ha! That's a good one. So, you have a little Taylor. Seems to be more popular these days. I see Taylors popping up all over the place - on TV too.

Feb 12, 2007 10:35

Giraffe ~

There is also the issue of trust. Anti-gunners think that they can't trust gun owners, preferring to trust the government. That always works out great.

It makes me think that liberals have some character flaws. The think everyone else is as evil as they are.

I agree that this is probably the main reason:

The main reason I think that people are anti-gun is because they have been brainwashed to believe that guns are dangerous, cause crime, and that people who do want to protect themselves with guns are uncultured Neanderthals.

You don't find too many women that aren't afraid of guns. Why is that? Fear of the unknown?

Feb 12, 2007 19:26

Taylor ~

It makes me think that liberals have some character flaws.

You're kidding, right? Um, was Muhammad Muslim?

Why is that? Fear of the unknown?

Maybe guns symbolize a recognition that we don't actually live in Disneyland - in contrast to what many of us want to believe. You know, women and reality often don't mix. Some women would prefer to 'feel' that there could never be such a nasty occasion where a gun might be necessary.

Feb 12, 2007 22:48

Giraffe ~

I didn't say what I meant very well.

I meant to say that maybe they see their own flaws and project them onto others. They have no concept of 'the good guys'. I can't see any other reason to believe that the Waffen SS should be the only ones with guns.

Feb 13, 2007 00:41

Morris ~

"Yet, the brainwashing is so thorough that even in the face of reality all they see is GUNS = BAD."

That mindset is so obvious here in Australia, too. The brainwashing here has been very thorough. Having been brought up on a farm back in the 50s before all this anti-gun insanity came in here, I know guns are just a tool and perfectly safe in the hands of responsible people.

Feb 14, 2007 01:54

Taylor ~

Morris, yes, I'm aware of the brainwashing job done on your countrymen. Mad Max would be ashamed.

It's a good point you make about guns just being a tool. We have other tools around our homes that can be very dangerous, yet people's eyes don't glaze over when they're mentioned. Every day the emergency rooms get cases from accidents occurring from them. Stupid or dangerous people will always find a way to hurt themselves or others.

Feb 14, 2007 06:48

Jamie R ~

Doesn't say responsible people in the Second Amendment though Morris, it says everyone.

Nineteenth century judges couldn't decide if the Amendment was synonymous with individual self defence and in a military context at the same time. But the latter was not in dispute. And if malls, schools, post offices and the like are being intruded by a government colluding with big business then that has lost its right to govern, henceforth the Second Amendment says to shoot em up!

Feb 14, 2007 17:16

Saturday, February 10, 2007

A Fine Friendly - Effing France

Caught the match today on TV. It was especially delightful to watch Argentina hand France a defeat right in très Gay Paree, played in front of a record French national team attendance of 79,862. Ha Ha!

Saviola strike shuts down France

Javier Saviola's first-half strike earned an accomplished Argentina a deserved friendly win over France in Paris.

The Barcelona forward smashed home a close-range finish in the 15th minute for the only goal of a game the South Americans mastered on the whole.

France hardly had a sniff at a packed Stade de France, with Argentina's defence - superbly marshalled by captain Roberto Ayala, making a record 107th appearance for his country - completely dominant.

The visitors' classy but hard-working central midfield of Fernando Gago and Esteban Cambiasso were also mightily impressive, giving Les Bleus' forward line no room to operate.

The hosts' only real chance fell to David Trezeguet in the first half, but he was unable to score against the country he grew up in, poking a weak finish straight at Argentina's under-used goalkeeper Roberto Abbondanzieri.

With both sides so comfortable on the ball, it was no surprise that keeping possession was paramount in the first game between the two countries since 1986.

That was especially the case in a first half of decent quality but very few clear-cut chances.

Argentina quickly got used to the intensity of the game, with Gago and Cambiasso controlling the pace in central midfield.

The first half-chance of the game fell to France left-winger Florent Malouda, who snatched at a 20-yard shot with his wrong foot in the 12th minute and dragged the ball wide.

The visitors were ahead three minutes later thanks to the sprightly Saviola.

His back-flick sent Javier Zanetti clear down the right, and the Internazionale utility man's cut-back found Hernan Crespo.

The striker's shot was saved by Gregory Coupet, but the ball spilled out to the onrushing Saviola, who slammed home into an empty net from eight yards out.

The rest of the half saw France push on, but Argentina were comfortable at the back, Ayala and the magnificent Gabriel Milito excelling in central defence.

The hosts' only other real opportunity before the break fell to Trezeguet in the 41st minute, but after running onto a neat flick from Franck Ribery, the Juventus striker could only stab a weak shot straight at Abbondanzieri.

France coach Raymond Domenech brought on Lyon duo Vincent Clerc, who earned his first cap, and Sidney Govou for the second half.

But the game followed the same pattern as before the break, the Argentinian defence coping superbly with everything in front of them.

With left-back Gabriel Heinze dominating his battle with Ribery on France's right-wing, there was precious little service for Thierry Henry and Trezeguet.

At the other end, Coupet was called into action in the 56th minute, palming away a stinging Crespo shot from outside the area.

Real Madrid's Gago - making his debut for Argentina - continued to shine in the middle, and by the 65th minute, catcalls and whistles were heard from the home crowd as Les Bleus struggled to get the ball off the visitors.

The 71st-minute introduction of Nicolas Anelka for the anonymous Trezeguet brought more pace to the attack of France, who piled forward in the final quarter of an hour.

However, apart from a snap-shot from Ribery, Abbondanzieri was left untroubled, mainly thanks to the superb work of Ayala and Milito.

El Conejo (The Rabbit) Saviola's Goal - Argentine style
(you'll understand if I don't translate)

Saviola and other highlights in Portuguese

View Archived Comments

Thursday, February 8, 2007

The Food Also Rises

There is something about partaking nearly an entire 1.75 liter bottle of vodka that is not conducive to blogging. I've been wanting to write something, but my brain is not firing on all cylinders at the moment.

Cousin dropped by for a visit yesterday afternoon. We started out by sharing a maté as we always do. Then I suggested that perhaps a drink would take the edge off the pain that was making his handsome face wince. You see, he'd just had a colonoscopy in the morning, which thank God, showed no scary stuff, just some internal hemorrhoids which were the cause of the intermittent bleeding and the reason for the doctor's visit. The doctor assured him it was no big deal and he could either have surgery to remove them or live with it. He did snip one off right then and there, which I suspect was the cause of his serious discomfort.

Cousin took me up on the offer so I made him a vodka tonic. Being the hostess with the mostest, I couldn't let him drink alone so I joined him. Things were going merrily along. The remedy was working as Cousin was feeling no pain. I was feeling just dandy myself. This is why what happened next was so strange. I'm talking on the phone, when out of the blue, without the slightest warning, everything comes up. I fling down the cell phone and run to the bathroom. I didn't quite make it. This is a first for me. I have never, ever not known ahead of time when my body is about to return everything to back where it came from. Always ready for the inevitable, I will be kneeling there, waiting...

Now, I'm finally in position, kneeling, one hand holding my hair back, hurling into the toilet. Cousin is standing by, helpless to do anything for me. He's got the phone now and I hear him say to my friend who's still on the line, "What did you say to make Taylor throw up?" That struck me as funny. It is not easy to laugh and throw up at the same time.

This put an end to our night. I cleaned up everything, showered and put myself to bed. There was no way Cousin was going to drive so he stayed in the guest room.

I never once did feel bad. Very strange. Woke up this morning ravenous and a little dull-headed. When I saw that there were only two inches of vodka remaining in what had been a brand new huge bottle, I couldn't believe that I wasn't in severe hangover distress. Expensive alcohol is worth every extra dollar. Those two inches will remain in the bottle for a long time.

View Archived Comments

Archived Comments

Difster ~

Spontaneous Reverse Peristalsis. HA!

I don't recall ever not knowing when I was going to puke except as a kid. Sometimes in the middle of the night while sick or after eating WAY too much junk food I'd spew without any apparent warning. As an adult though, I don't recall that happening.

I've known a few people who cry when they puke. I've known a few others that have only puked once or twice in their lives.

Feb 09, 2007 05:55

Taylor ~

I do recall having tears after vomiting. Not crying, just tears in my eyes, probably from the stress on the eyeballs or something.

There's an actual phobia that I just recently found out about, emetophobia, which is defined as a persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of vomiting or throwing up. I know someone who suffers from this phobia and will not fly - scared that it might cause her to vomit.

I don't enjoy vomiting, but I know that I will almost always feel better afterwards. I have never purposely made myself throw up though. That's taking it too far for me.

Feb 09, 2007 06:22

Jamie R ~

Ha ha Taylor threw up. I, personally, would have spewed all across the blogosphere, more fun.

Feb 09, 2007 14:50

Billy D ~

Cheap booze can kill you. Rum is worst. (Boca-Chica is some hardcore nasty)
For Vodka, go with Grey Goose. Not too expensive, but very nice. Smooth.

Feb 10, 2007 15:30

Taylor ~

I've heard that clear alcohols have less toxins in general compared to colored ones like bourbon, Scotch, rum. That's why when I drink I usually stick to Vodka, even though I really like single malt Scotch. My body has never tolerated alcohol too well.

Not too long ago we had a Vodka blind taste test at a friend's place. We had about 8 different Vodkas, including Grey Goose, which is what I'd always stocked. It turned out that I liked Stoli the best. So, that's what I've been getting now.

Feb 10, 2007 18:28

Giraffe ~

Drunkard!

Feb 13, 2007 00:43

Taylor ~

Hey! I resemble that comment!

Feb 18, 2007 00:13

Monday, February 5, 2007

Global Warming Manipulation

From Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?:

Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition. Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and that for 32 years I was a Professor of Climatology at the University of Winnipeg. For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why.
.
.
.
No doubt passive acceptance yields less stress, fewer personal attacks and makes career progress easier. What I have experienced in my personal life during the last years makes me understand why most people choose not to speak out; job security and fear of reprisals. Even in University, where free speech and challenge to prevailing wisdoms are supposedly encouraged, academics remain silent.

I once received a three page letter that my lawyer defined as libelous, from an academic colleague, saying I had no right to say what I was saying, especially in public lectures. Sadly, my experience is that universities are the most dogmatic and oppressive places in our society. This becomes progressively worse as they receive more and more funding from governments that demand a particular viewpoint.

Dr. Timothy Ball, Professor of Climatology for 32 years, must know how Galileo must have felt. To go from esteemed scientist to pariah because his expertise and extensive knowledge lead him to conclusions that conflict with the politically correct scientific view must just blow this poor man's mind. When scientists are being shouted down and harassed simply because they hold an opposing view, it is then beyond obvious that there is more than professional disagreement going on behind the scenes.

Facts are the enemies of politics, agendas, activism, that is, any effort which seeks to control and manipulate. Facts must be hidden, blurred, and countered with much louder anti-facts, over and over again, until the truth is either forgotten or viewed with contempt and ridicule.

In this day of technology and the Internet one would think that we would all be more informed. On the contrary, the inundation of information that floods our minds every day has in effect made any single piece of information much less meaningful, especially when so much of it is conflicting. We know that the truth must be in there somewhere but knowing what's bullshit, what's informed speculation, what's uninformed speculation, what's right on the money, what's agenda driven drivel and what are bald faced lies is becoming nearly impossible.

From what I've read and from what I know and from what I suspect, I have come to one conclusion. Man's activities do not cause Global Warming. Rather, is it Global Warming that is being used to control man's activities. An inconvenient truth indeed.

Update: Found this 115 minute video, Junk Science: Global Warming Myth Busted. Al Gore's movie An Inconvenient Truth should be in the science fiction genre and Al Gore should be charged with fraud or malfeasance or something.

View Archived Comments

Archived Comments

Billy D ~

C'mon up to my neck of the woods. -30 wind chills for at least the next week. Global warming my ass...

Feb 05, 2007 23:01

Taylor ~

While I do certainly sympathize with you being in those frigid conditions and can't even imagine how one manages in such extreme cold, it also gives me great pleasure to watch the weather and news coverage of the cold that is gripping much of the nation - knowing how ridiculous it makes that retard, Al Gore, and all those other clueless liberals look - hoping they're ALL freezing their asses off...

Feb 06, 2007 00:32

Difster ~

The bitter cold isn't that bad; you know it's going to end.

I will definitely watch this video when I get home.

Feb 06, 2007 05:37

Spacebunny ~

Yeah, when I was in grade school we were entering the next ice age....

I find it interesting to note that a mere few hundred years ago Greenland was actually green and now it's covered with ice....

Feb 06, 2007 18:11

Taylor ~

I've noticed that they're turning up the heat (no pun intended) on their dire warnings for the Earth and are now declaring Global Warming a fact. It would seem that people need more fear put into them.

It is not what man can do to nature that we should fear, but rather what man can do to man, especially those socialist/communist bastards.

Feb 06, 2007 19:18

Jamie R ~

I'm supporting the French drive to build a stronger UN agency to tackle global warming. Shit, say what you want, but the Maginot Line really did hold its ground, you can't blame the French for the failure of that.

Feb 08, 2007 13:29

jon ~

The Truth about Tim Ball - the guy you cite.

Feb 18, 2007 23:32

Taylor ~

Dr. Ball's credentials are not the subject of this post. He is a man with whom I happen to agree. The topic here is Global Warming. If you can refute each point made in the 115 minute video that I have embedded here and every other scientist who agrees with Dr. Ball, then please do so.

Attacking one man does not serve to bolster your arguments. As such, I will have to agree with the dissenters from your own blog whose comments I cite below.

From http://www.desmogblog.com/dr-tim-ball-on-cfcs-and-the-sponsorhip-scandal:

"Kevin Grandia is NOT a climate expert, Dr. Ball is. Some of the greatest scientific claims ever made were initially met with extreme prejudice. Ignorance, religion and politics have always been threats to absolute knowledge. The concept of the world not being flat or not being the center of the universe bruised many egos. I'm afraid Dr. Ball and other likeminded scientists are bruising more than just egos. Vast amounts of money, government programs and political crusades are threatened by what could be the real truth. How little the common man has progressed. Kevin Grandia and Al Gore are pinheads."

"I am surprised to find a Ball supporter here. Or anywhere. I guess there are more of us out here than the Global Warming types want to believe. I am not a scientist but I have read both sides of this arguement. At best, results are inconclusive. But what I want to know is why was the global temperature more tropical during the reign of the dinosaurs? Or what caused the Ice Age? I don't believe we were around for that so how did that happen? Maybe it is just like Dr Ball said, climate is cyclical; there are warming periods and cooling periods. Can anyone explain this?"

"Facts are the Earth has cooled and warmed numerous times. We know this from ice core data. Clearly mankind had nothing to do with this before the present climate era. The output of the Sun is NOT constant due to solar flare activity. MY point, the Earth's climate was, is and will always be dynamic. Thank goodness it takes a long time for significant change. I'm surprised Al Gore is not trying to stop Continental Plate movement, after all in time(million years) North America will be way closer to Asia!! I 'm a trained engineer which is not pure science, rather applied science. I have many problems with the concept of "Global warming", primarily our contribution to it. As you say, the evidence is not 100% conclusive. I'm tired of movie stars/politicians talking about how its warmer now, than when they were children. That's not science. First lets come up with a good model for global climate mechanics. After that, determine if human activity is a significant component. If it is, then do something about it. So far, all I see is a new way to tax people and corporations. This reminds me of the Tobacco law suits, its all about the money!"

Feb 19, 2007 04:17

Taylor ~

Continued from last post:

"This people at Desmogblog like to mudsling at those who dissent with their tunnel vision about "manmade" global warming or the ozone scam, claiming dishonesty from scientists that are accused of taking money from the Oil and Tobacco (tobacco??) companies. So if that's the game they like to play, well, I say they dont' mind to take the money coming from Casinos-online-pusher and recently tried John Lefevbvre. At least money from oil comes from an activity that has "pushed" forward civilization in ways never seen before, and without it civilization would surely plunge back into the stone age -or medieval times. Make your pick."

"Co2 has clear positive and negative temperature correlations, which says it does not make a difference. You know this is correct because co2 is in saturation and a doubling will not change temperature by much if anything. There are many feedback loops from plants, oceans, and soil that clearly says that co2 is not a factor. This entire debate is about one political faction (oil) against another (liberal, socialist, media) both wanting control. Ask yourself if the planet were cooling, which some data indicates(entire USA average), would the environs advocate massive buring of coal and fuel? No they would not, because it would add to oil political power. Reason says that both sides should receive equal funding or none at all. That 30 billion spent in the last 6 years should be refunded to tax payers, or at least half refunded to the opposing view. Fair is fair."

"After looking over this site I had to chuckle. What brought the biggest laugh was DeSmog's Bookshelf. George Monibiot pens a tome called Heat: how to stop the planet from burning. The way I understand it is that in about 3 billions years this little blue ball we call earth is gonna become as burnt as a marshmellow held over a roaring fire, an orbiting cinder if you will. These people featured here, Gelbspan, Kolbert, Romm, Goodell all would have thrived in the middle ages. Global Warming, UFO's, Conspiracy, any crank cause to get into print is their mindset. Nobody can take any of this blog seriously. Dr. James Foy"

Feb 19, 2007 04:20

Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )