Letters to the Editor

When I was in college and for several years thereafter, I regularly wrote "letters to the editor", all of which were published. Most of these letters were in response to things I'd read in the paper that I disagreed with. In a very real sense, these letters were my precursor to keeping a blog; particularly my ranty entries.

Back then, writing a letter to the editor meant typing a hard copy letter on my typewriter, after first writing it in pen on a yellow legal pad. I never liked messing with carbon, so I either made a photocopy of the letter at the library, or saved the handwritten copy as my copy,

After mailing it, I'd wait a day or two to make sure they'd gotten it, then check the paper every day to wait for it to appear in print. When it did, I'd cut it out from the paper and save it in a scrapbook. I'd continue to watch the paper for several days, in case there were rebuttals to my letters, which happened from time to time.

All these years later, I'm amazed at my patience and how long the process took compared to now. Nowadays, I'll fire off a comment on a blog or a site like Alternet and it appears immediately. Rebuttals, similarly, can appear within a minute.

I've not written a letter to a traditional newspaper in over 20 years. The main reason for that was when I joined the police force in a relatively small community, I didn't necessarily want my employers to know my opinions on politics and other controversial matters. So, I reluctantly gave up my letters to the editor hobby.

I even remember the topic of my very first letter, written in 1977. At that time, the drinking age was 18 and my state was considering raising it to 19. As I was already 19 at the time, it wouldn't affect me, but I opposed raising the age. I pointed out that 18 year olds could be sent to war, get married, sign contracts, and so on, so it was not fair to bar them from drinking. I said that all rights and responsibilities of adulthood should be granted at the same age in order to be consistent and fair. If 18 year olds were "children" when it came to having a beer, then they ought to be considered "children" when it came to going to war. I don't remember the exact words, but that was pretty much the gist of it.

Have you ever written a letter to the editor?

Blogging Is Its Own Reward

I've belonged to Blog Catalog, a blog bookmarking site, for about a month now and I've noticed several generic-type blogs there that seem to exist for the sole purpose of making money. Such blogs have little to no content that indicates the blogger's personality or interests.

Also, I've seen a related type of blogger who seems mainly interested in statistics: hits, increasing their ranking in blog clearinghouse sites like Blog Catalog, comments, etc. They offer to read and comment on your blog in exchange for you doing the same, and don't seem to care whether their visitors have a true interest in their blog's contents, just so long as it drives up the statistics and rankings.

Don't get me wrong -- I am pleased to see a lot of visitors on my blog and I cherish the comments I get. But because I don't do much "shameless promotion" of my blog, the hits and comments I get are from people who are truly interested in what I've got to say and their interaction on my blog isn't solely motivated by a desire to increase statistics on their own blog. Indeed, I'm a bit disappointed when I encounter people on my blog who are thus motivated.

I joined Blog Catalog mainly to find other blogs that I'm truly interested in reading, hoping others would likewise find my blog interesting. Though I'll add nearly anyone to my friends list there who asks, only those blogs I'm actually interested in and/or who were my friends before I joined Blog Catalog go in my neighborhood.

I've never made a dime off any of my blogs and though I'd not ever turn down any money offered, it's not my motivation for blogging. One of my prime motivations is to make people think of things in ways they might never have considered before, particularly in the realm of sexual ethics. From the unsolicited emails I get, I see that I am doing just that and one such email means more to me than any money I could make or getting a top blogger award.

Plus, blogging is just plain fun. I've met lots of like-minded people while blogging, while also making friends with and gaining understanding of those who have a different view of the world.

How about you? Why do you blog and what do you see as your most valuable "reward" from doing so? Do you belong to any blog bookmarking sites and, if so, why?

Ted Kennedy Endorses Barack Obama

Today, on The Huffington Post, Senator Ted Kennedy published an article about his endorsement of Barack Obama for president. What follows below is my comment to that article:


To be honest with you, Senator, I have no clear preference for the Democratic candidate at this time. I believe that either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton would make a good president -- as would John Edwards.
I also understand that the bickering between them is all part of the political game and that they could and would work together if one is the nominee and the other accepts the Vice Presidential nomination.

My primary wish for the 2008 election is that we do not elect another Republican to the White House. I think we've had more than enough of neocon and religious fundamentalist-inspired Republican ideas in the last eight years, and any of the Democratic candidates would be a breath of fresh air after the Bush presidency. So, I will support the candidate who has the best chances of defeating the Republican nominee in November, though which of the candidates that is remains not fully clear to me at this time.

As an American in my late 40s who has been obliged to work without any health insurance whatsoever for the last four years and who hasn't had a raise in three years, I want a president who can positively affect the passage of a comprehensive health care plan that will not be dependent on how good of a job I have or how much money I make.

In closing, thank you for your words, Senator Kennedy. Some time ago, I was struck by how much Barack Obama reminded me of your brother, but this fact, in and of itself, is not quite enough for me to choose between him and Senator Clinton.

Your thoughts?

10 Celebrities I Love to Hate

Because I've got things on my mind, and I'm distracted and at loose ends, I've decided to fall back on a no-brainer entry idea -- the list. Today's list is the ten celebrities I love to hate. I am merely listing the first ten that came to mind and they are not in order of rank. And I'm sure I'll think of some I like to hate more once I post this entry. For the purposes on this list, I define a "celebrity" as merely someone whose name is recognized by a lot of people

1. Mel Gibson

The man is a flaming anti-Semite and probably an all-around bigot as well.

2. Richard Simmons

That Disco Stu hairstyle went out years ago, and there's just something about him that makes me feel queasy.

3. James Dobson

This promoter of theocracy should focus on his own damned family for a change.

4. Ann Coulter

She is merely one of many pundits who epitomize the coarsening to political discourse in our society.

5. Dr Laura

A busybody, self-righteous moralist spouting her own brand of bigotry mislabeled as psychology.

6. Dr Phil

Dr Laura's male counterpart. What is it about these Dr. Firstname celebrities, anyway?

7. George Bush

One of our least intelligent presidents who has earned his spot on the list of the ten worst presidents

8. Fred Phelps

The obssessively anti-gay fundie who protests funerals. Need I say more?

9. Chef Gordon Ramsey

The petulant, tantrum throwing chef from the reality show, Hell's Kitchen. Grow up and get a damned life, already.

10. Simon Cowell

The wiseass judge on American Idol who apparently gets off on humiliating contestants who don't make the cut. What a prick.

Feel free to list the celebrities you love to hate.

When Is Marital Infidelity Most Likely to Occur?

According to the Infidelity Facts website, marital infidelity is statistically most likely to occur:

1. After the first year of marriage

This is when the novelty of being married wears off, and the humdrum routine sets in.

Infidelity at this point in a marriage is typically of the one-night stand variety, and usually does not affect the love one has for their spouse. However, those who stray at this time are more likely to repeat it in the years to come.

2. After the first child is born

The entrance of a child inevitably changes a marriage. Much of the focus and attention that was previously given to one's spouse is now directed at the child. Add in the fatigue, stress, and change of routine involved, and you have all the ingredients for a fling.

3. The fifth to seventh year

This is the proverbial "seven-year itch". Affairs at this time happen because a relationship has commonly run its natural course in that all the goals for a relationship have typically been met in this time frame. What is ahead for a couple at this point is years and years of the same old, same old. The anticipation of greater things to come is gone.

Infidelity at this time tends to be the most serious; full-blown, long-lasting love affairs, rather than just getting a little on the side.

Though I am neither monogamous nor married, I can fairly well attest to the truth of this one, as my primary relationships typically are of a time limited nature, though the average longevity of one of my primary relationships is a bit shorter at two to four years. For me, the tedium sets in precisely because I know my partner all too well and there's little new to discover about them.

4. Middle Age.

Also known as the mid-life crisis. The kids are grown, the house is empty, and the couple is back to being just a couple again. Unlike when they were newlyweds, however, the couple knows one another all too well and there's nothing left to distract them from any faults in their marriage. It is at this time that a married person will ask themselves, "Is that all there is?" and figure that if they want something else, they'd better go out and get it while it's still a reasonable possibility.

CB Radio

Starting back in the mid 70s, CB radios became a big fad. Once pretty well confined to truckers, all sorts of people began buying radios for their cars, and some also got base stations for home use.

I remember one of my friends' fathers got one for his car and we'd sit out in his car, late into the night using it, until the old man chased us out, worrying that we'd wear down the car battery. At that time, I vowed to get one of my own, once I had a car.

After I went off to college, I finally got a CB. I had a great time with it, even though the range wasn't all that great. As I remember, it wasn't even as good as my hand-held police walkie-talkie in the 1980s -- on that on a good day, it could reach as much as thirty miles.

Nevertheless, the CB suited my purposes just fine. I met a lot of my one-night stands through the CB and I think I picked up women this way about as often as I did going to a bar and doing it the old-fashioned way. It was a wonderful tool that helped to speed up the process of getting laid regularly.

Back then, CB had a similar appeal that the internet does today. Instead of internet screen names, we had "handles". Mine was "William the Conqueror".

For other people, the CB filled the role that a cell phone does today, especially in families who had both base stations and car radios.

CB mania lasted no more than a decade or so. By the mid-80s, CB usage was once again pretty much the province of truckers and die-hard radio enthusiasts. I think my aunt was still using her base station in the late 80s, however.

How about you? Did any of you have a CB and, if so, what was your handle?

The Separation of Marriage and State

While looking up definitions of "sex-positive" on the Glossary of Relationship Terms the other day, I came upon a rather interesting entry about the "separation of marriage and state" which pretty well sums up my views.

According to the Glossary, the separation of marriage and state is:

A slogan or summary statement representing the position that a government should be involved in neither:

* the definition of marriage;
* the establishment and maintenance of the institution of marriage; nor,
* legislation and enforcement of laws regarding marriage, apart from:
a. the protection and support of the members of each family;
b. the support of consensual relationships and self-constituted family units, also their protection from outside forces; and,
c. the employment of judges for the disposition of children and property in the event of divorce.

Comments: The slogan is modeled on the phrase, "the separation of church and state," which is said to derive from a remark by Thomas Jefferson.

The position is often nested into a more comprehensive view, for instance, one or more of these:

* Persons and their personal relationships are more fundamental than the state and should not be rendered susceptible to being cogs in a socio-economic machine, which is what governments are wont to do. (Personalism)
* Personal matters are no business of the state, and marriage is primarily a personal matter. (Libertarianism)
* Coercion of any sort is entirely inappropriate when it comes to sexuality, relationships, and marriage, except to counter coercion and violence.
* Religion is none of the business of a government where there is no state establishment of religion; there should be no state establishment of religion; and, since religions have always been much involved in the definition of marriage, a state that involves itself in the control of marriage will find itself either offending one or more religions, seldom all equally, or discriminating against those whom the religions discriminate against; and a government should never be complicit in discrimination, whether between religions, between religion and no religion, or with regard to those against whom one or more religions discriminate.

One implication of the position is that government would no longer be prohibiting such things as group marriage and gay marriage, but instead would be trying to foster a peaceful environment for all sorts of relationships and a fair playing field for the people in them.

Various alternatives to the governmental control of marriage are suggested, for instance:

* Marriage in any formal sense should be abolished.
* Marriage and the form it takes should be by contract between consenting parties, perhaps even a contract to be periodically renegotiated.
* Marriage should be a matter worked out between the families of the parties.
* Marriage should be defined and regulated by the institutions, for instance the religious institutions, to which the parties voluntarily belong. And,
* A combination of the last three: Marriages should be contractual but marriage as such should be institutionalized by families and voluntary religious groups.


When you have time, check out this site -- it will keep you busy for hours.

My Favorite Childhood Cartoons

I must be feeling nostalgic, as I recently wrote an entry about my favorite childhood board games. Now, I leave you with a post about my favorite childhood cartoons. The emphasize is on childhood cartoons, so I'm not including current favorites like The Simpsons or King of the Hill.

1. The Flintstones.



2. The Jetsons



3. Wally Gator



4. Wacky Races



5. Casper the Friendly Ghost



6. Yogi Bear



7. Fat Albert



8. Road Runner



9. Bullwinkle and Rocky



10. Pink Panther



What were some of your favorite childhood cartoons?

Odds and Ends

I can't think of anything specific to write about today, so I leave you with an assortment of odds and ends

Officials in St. Louis recently presented a bill that would ban swearing in bars, along with table-dancing, drinking contests and profane music.

What's next on the nanny agenda? Will they try to ban drinking in bars next?
______________________________

Yet another celebrity has met an untimely, premature death. This time it was actor Heath Ledger, who was found dead in bed yesterday. Drugs were involved, but it remains unclear as of this writing whether his death was intentional or an accident. It seems the mere fact of celebrity puts one at a higher risk of premature death.
______________________________

What was the first record album/CD that you ever owned? Mine was "The Age of Steam" by Gerry Mulligan. That's jazz, for those who might not be familiar with him.
______________________________

The Democrats will have their primary in my state on Saturday. After much thought, I have decided to cast my vote for John Edwards. I think he acquitted himself well at the debate, when he called Clinton and Obama for bickering with each other, asking them whether this would help Americans to gain access to health care, to get an education, and so on.

He's got a fair chance of winning this particular primary, as he was born and raised here and speaks to the concerns of rank and file workers in the state.

I don't have as much confidence for him pulling off the nomination, but who knows?
_____________________________

I call this one "The Clueless Husband".

What Does "Sex Positive" Mean?

I recently joined Blog Catalog, on which I describe my blogs as being "sex-positive", among other tags. Though the term is self-explanatory to me, I've found that it isn't as clear to many others and there is confusion as to what it means. On one site, I read:

So what SHOULD we mean by "sex-positive"? The ability to choose and "un-choose" one's partners at will, I suppose, unconstrained by any "societal" mandates or gender-biased prohibitions. How to condense that into a more precise, accurate term, on the other hand, I'm not sure.....

To which someone answered:

As I hear it used among feminists and progressives, "sex-positive" seems to mean that one doesn't subject sexual matters to critical scrutiny. If you critique, for instance, pornography, polyamory, prostitution, sadomasochism, or anonymous sex, you are not "sex-positive." (Monogamy, however, is always in season: fire at will!)

To answer the second commenter, the biggest reason why monogamy is currently under critical scrutiny is because it's been rarely questioned and has had the official backing of church and state for hundreds of years. It hasn't needed a movement to defend it, unlike other forms of non-traditional sexual expression. Indeed, for many years, it has been considered the only ethical way of expressing one's sexuality in polite society.

For myself, being sex positive is to believe that sex is a natural, normal, healthy human need that can properly be expressed with or without love being present. Sex positivity affirms sexual pleasure for its own sake, unlike sex negativity, which asserts that sex is solely for procreation. What separates healthy sex from unhealthy sex is that healthy sex is always consensual and engaged in by those old enough to give informed consent. A sex positive society has more than one choice for ethical sexual relationships, including the right to make the traditional choice or to choose celibacy. Indeed, the traditional choice can only truly be a choice when it isn't by default; when society respects that one can choose something else.

According to the Glossary of Relationship Terms site, sex positivism is:

1. The view that human sexuality, including one's own, is delightful in itself, even apart from procreation. In theological terms, human sexuality in its generality is seen as preceding the Fall of humankind into sin and is viewed as a divine gift. A sex-positive stance does not preclude a morality of sexuality; nor does it preclude the social channeling of sexuality.

2. Belief that healthy sexual expression should be encouraged in a wide range of contexts. Within a sex-positive stance in this sense, there is much room for debate as to what is healthy for the individual and for society, so long as human sexuality is not seen as degrading in and of itself.

Comment: The term "sex-positive" is attributed to sex educators at the National Sex Forum (San Francisco, California) in 1968 or 1969.

Or, more briefly put:

Simply put, being sex-positive is about wringing the guilt out of sex. It’s opposed to self-loathing, hatred of the body, and fear of sexuality in general.

Works for me.

Dumbass Voters, Part II

Ok, it's time to rag on Neal Boortz again.

I listened to him the other night and he was elaborating on his theme that some people ought to be prevented from voting. (See my post, "The Dumbass Voter".)

In his most recent rant on this topic, he lamented that so many "non-achievers", whom he also referred to as "losers", "dregs", "worthless", and "useless", were allowed to vote, mainly because they would likely vote for Democrats.

He stated his wish that only "achievers" be allowed to vote. An "achiever", according to Boortz, is not simply a person who has a regular job. And full-time parenting or volunteer work is entirely off Boortz' radar. I'm sure he also cannot conceive of achievement that does not involve making money. Rather, an achiever in his book is a workaholic who works 60+ hours a week, at a high-paying, high-status job. People more likely to vote Republican, that is.

Boortz even complained about voting day being on Tuesday -- he saw this as a conspiracy against "achievers" who cannot leave their jobs in order to vote on a work day, despite 12 hours being available for that purpose.

This is all part of his continuing lament that rich people are badly done to in our society; that "losers" are simply "insanely jealous of rich people", when they suggest that not all rich people are hard-working paragons who deserve every penny of the money they have. Apparently inheritance, dirty business practices, favoritism, and nepotism do not exist in Boortz' world. He is ready to believe any negative stereotype as being typical of all poor people, without exception, but woe to the person that even suggests that even a fraction of rich people are rich because they inherited the money or got a good job because their golf buddy down at the country club put in a good word for them.

And of course, middle class and poor people are "ignorant losers" to him when they dare to vote for their own interests instead of voting to favor the rich or big business.

He also continued with his ongoing assertion that poor people are poor because they "choose" to be poor; that they're just simply too damned lazy to be rich. In his world, every person who works hard will become rich and, presumably, start voting Republican. And he believes they can do it all by themselves with no help from anyone or the government. Of course, it's completely out of his ken that some people might be satisfied with making a moderate amount of money and value things other than making the most amount of money possible.

My father grew up desperately poor during the Depression. His father was a tenant farmer, which is one small step above a sharecropper. After serving in World War II, he got an office job with a major oil corporation and, over the years, made his way up the ladder to a respectable mid-level executive position, after getting his BS in Business Administration. My father never became rich, but achieved a solid upper middle class position. But compared to his childhood origins, he was rich indeed.

But he didn't do it all by himself, with no help from people or the government. First, he had parents who believed in him and allowed him to finish high school, in a time and place where most lower-class children quit school as early as possible to help support the family. Secondly, he got his job with the oil corporation in part because my mother's father put in a good word for him. Third, he'd have not been able to go to college at all if not for the government and the GI Bill.

And my father, though an "achiever" in Boortz' book, never once voted Republican. Though he traveled far from his humble roots, he never forget where he came from and how it was for those left behind. Grateful for the help he got along the way, he realized that many good, hard-working people weren't fortunate enough to get the breaks that he'd gotten. When I was a kid, he told me that Democrats looked out for the little guy, while Republicans helped the rich get richer. He said he'd cast his first vote for Harry Truman in 1948 and he'd seen no reason to switch parties as the years went by.

If Boortz had his way, he'd have us return to when our country was new and only propertied white men -- the rich of that time -- were allowed to vote. And a country like that would be little more than serfdom for the rest of us.

Do you want to live in a world like that? I don't. I might hate when dumbasses vote for candidates I don't like, but I think it's a small price to pay for a free society.

The Countdown Begins

One year from today, the Bush presidency will finally come to an end, and a village in Texas will once again have its official idiot in residence.

We can only hope that the next resident of the White House will not be "more of the same", but will be a progressive leader who can begin to reverse the wrongs of the last eight years.

Let the countdown begin!

Spirit in the Sky

While listening to the radio the other night, a favorite song from years ago came on the radio: "Spirit in the Sky" by Norman Greenbaum. This song, heard in several movies over the years, such as Apollo 13, embodies what I consider to be the best of rock: a hard-driving bass line, a growling guitar, fun lyrics, innovative sound effects, and a beat that inspires energy in the listener. It is one of the finest examples of what I call "a song with muscle". And, after nearly 40 years, it still sounds fresh and exciting. It was included in Rolling Stones' 500 Greatest Songs of All Time and also VH1's Greatest One-Hit Wonders.

This song also brings back a personal memory for me as well. In the spring of 1970, when I wasn't quite 12 years old, my mother was hospitalized for several days. One rainy afternoon, my father and I went to the hospital to visit with her. In the car, while on the way to the hospital, this song came on the radio. I can remember turning it up and listening intently, accompanied by the slap, slap sound of the windshield wipers keeping time with the beat.

When my mother died 18 months later, I was reminded of that afternoon, and the words provided some comfort to me then. I don't always relive the memory of that afternoon when I hear the song now, but it's never entirely forgotten, either. Either way, this song will always remain on my list of all-time favorite songs.

Static

It's winter and at this time of the year, there is usually low humidity. And you all know what that means.

That's right -- static electricity.

I can remember being a kid and walking around the house, rubbing my socked feet across the carpet, and touching metal items all over the house with the side of my hand. I did this just to see that blue spark of static leap out to meet my hand and to hear the satisfying crackle. The harder I'd rub my feet, the bigger the blue spark would be.

I used to shock my siblings and, I must admit, the dog. I'd touch him on the end of his nose and he'd grimace as the shock got him. It got to the point where he'd run and hide every time he saw me begin to rub my feet along the carpet. He wasn't stupid.

And I can remember doing the laundry and never using a static sheet in the dryer. I liked pulling the clothes out of the dryer, all stuck together, and hearing the satisfying kkkkkrrrrrrttt as I pulled clothes apart. Sometimes I'd even turn the light out, so I could see the blue sparks as well. But now that I do my laundry at the laundromat, there is never any static, though I still don't use dryer sheets.

I once worked in a plant where magnesium powder was used, and sometimes it was my job to vacuum out the excess powder from the inside of the machine. And this is where I've gotten the strongest static shocks of my life. It was hard to keep hold of the vacuum hose, as strong currents of static would reverberate up the hose. I remember one time, standing about a foot away from another person who held the hose and a huge blue spark of static leaped from his elbow to mine. At that level, it wasn't really fun anymore.

Sometimes, now, I get shocked by my car when I touch metal parts on the frame when getting in and out of it. Not always, though; it depends on the humidity level.

How about you? Are you fascinated by static electricity like I am or do you think I'm nuts?

Predictable Reaction

Did a herd of locusts hit the supermarket?

No, we finally had some snow, and a herd of lemmings rushed to the store to get milk and bread. I don't get it -- why does snow make people suddenly get a taste for milk and bread? And why just plain bread with nothing to put on it? I don't think a milk sandwich will taste very good.

I can see wanting to stock up on food if you're running low, but I don't see why it always has to be milk and bread. People are so damned predictable