You just don't get it, do you?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071220/ap_on_go_co/congress_guns_12

I'm not a gun nut, on either side of the issue. Guns, as far as I'm concerned, are OK... to a point. I'm not a fanatic FOR them. I'm not a fanatic AGAINST them.

The problem I have here is with the politicians. They want this law because it makes them look like they've done something useful. Have they?

The law they're enacting attempts to ensure that guns aren't sold LEGALLY to people with mental health issues. This, in and of itself, is not a bad thing. I can agree to that. The question is... what consitututes a mental health issue? Is it someone who's obviously (visibly) got problems. I'd think that most people (I would hope) would already have a problem selling guns to such individuals. Is it meant to cover those with transient, or episodic, bouts of mental illness? Ok, you could make a case for that... fine. However, maybe it could also be used to cover pretty much anyone that displays any kind of anti-social behavior.... NOW WE'RE TALKING! This could be what we're all looking for. This could be a way around the constitution that will allow us to deny guns to anyone we choose! Rather than going into all of the myriad possibilities at this point... I'm gonna switch tracks...

What kind of fucking idiot, with even the slightest semblence of a clue, believes that, for even a moment, this will stop a person "with mental health issues" from getting their hands on a gun? When will the general public stop experiencing the "feel good" factor when this type of legislation is enacted. It's all total BULLSHIT!. Guns exist. Guns can be bought, both legally AND illegally. Period. They can also be stolen, for that matter.

Well then, let's take this further... We should make ALL guns illegal! Yeah, right. The only way this COULD ever work, is if our government both changed the consitution, AND went out and proactively wrested all the guns from LEGAL gun owners. Only then, could they go after all of the (even before the law) illegal guns. I'm pretty sure this would lead to the next Civil War.

The bottom line is: Bad shit happens from time to time in our free society. Guns are here. They're not going away anytime soon. Let's stop smiling, open-mouthed, everytime these politicians shower us with these excremental laws that have nothing to do with the issue, but everything to do with self-promotion. This is, literally, nothing but a great big steaming pile of shit disguised with a generous, gleaming layer of self-righteousnous.

Let's Crown the Patriots NOW!

Why wait until the end of the season. What's the point. The Patriots were handed the game the other day (against the Ravens), a game they otherwise would have lost, by the officials who were there to ensure fair play.

In the interest of full disclosure... I'm not a Ravens fan. I'm am a Dolphins fan, but I'm not a person who, necessarily, hates the Patriots. The Patriots ARE A VERY GOOD TEAM!

What constitutes having 'control of the ball' before a receiver goes out of bounds on a catch? My assumption was that the receiver had to have it in his clutches (i.e. have his hand(s) and or arm(s) firmly around it without bobbling it. The officials in the Ravens-Patriots game set a new standard... Apparently, you only have to have it balanced delicately on your fingertips as you step out of bounds.

The officials in the game last week either:
a) handed the game to the Patriots, or
b) set a whole new standard for 'control of the ball as the receiver goes out of bounds', or
c) were on acid, or
d) had money on the game

Let's give the officials the benefit of the doubt and assume that it's b)... shall we. Let's see just how many other calls go the same way the rest of the season.

And what if monkeys fly out of my ass???

The following is my response to this:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070830/ap_on_re_us/virginia_tech_investigation_14

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that I'm a student of Virginia Tech. Let's also say that, again for the sake of argument, I've got some mental stability issues. Instead of grabbing the nearest automatic rifle and opening fire, all of the sudden, my ASS opens up and starts sprouting monkeys. Not likely, I know, but stay with me. These aren't your cute cuddly monkeys like you see in the zoo. Not humorous chimpanzees like Cheetah from the Tarzan movies. No, these are vicious monkeys hell-bent on mischief and mayhem like the ones from the Wizard of Oz. Full grown, mad as hell and complete with wings. They're on a mission from the wicked witch herself.

So... Let's say this happens at 7 AM in the morning and a couple of people get killed or maimed. Not surprising really, given what they are (vicious monkeys) and where they're at (densely poplulated college campus). Some time goes by (maybe a couple of hours), no more reports of mayhem on campus. Hmm... Maybe the monkeys got tired of the mayhem and flew off somewhere. The authorities at VT are thinking, "Whew! Man, we (somewhat) dodged that bullet". They really have no way of knowing one way or the other. So, they craft a carefully worded e-mail to their students saying that there may be some cause for concern on the campus, so be very, very careful.

The problem was that the monkeys hadn't flown off somewhere, they'd just gotten together for a concentrated attack at a specific location. They didn't give any advance indication that this is what they'd planned to do, but that's what they did. They ended up killing and wounding scores or unsuspecting students.

What were the folks at VT thinking!? They should have warned everyone immediately! Then all those students could have huddled (safely?) in their rooms until the all clear was given. Maybe the Governor of Virginia himself should have declared a state of emergency until all those monkey were rounded up and euthanized. If only that had happened, all that additional bloodshed could have been avoided. Who knows how many lives could have been saved.

Let that be a lesson to everyone. If you're not completely and totally prepared for the outrageously improbable. If you don't have a plan for, and have the capacity to react to, every possible eventuality. You are going to wish you had an ass full of killer monkeys. Because you'll certainly be more comfortable living with them, than you will being dry fucked by the pompous pricks with the 20-20 hindsight vision goggles sent to judge you in the aftermath.

Pay Your Taxes Or Expect A Raid

Ed and Elaine Brown of New Hampshire haven't paid income taxes since 1996, despite being convicted of evading taxes. The United States has between 250,000 and 500,000 tax protesters, and not one of them has ever prevailed definitively in court. Even our tax-evading friend , Tom Cryer, should expect a nasty backhanded slap from an appellate court.

Apparently it's not enough that the taxpayers of this country support those who actually need help. Those who, through social or accidental circumstance, cannot support themselves. Now we have to support greedy pricks like these as well.

Ya know, I half expect this shit from inbred half-wits in the sparsely populated regions of... oh, I don't know, pick a state (Montana, Texas, Louisiana), but New Hampshire?

If they don't want to pay their fair share of taxes, then simply revoke their citizenship and deport them. Oh, wait... Then they might become illegal aliens. Well, we have laws for that kinda shit too.

read more digg story

New Law Proposed: NY State may Ban Text Messaging While Driving

This is in reaction to horrific vehicular deaths of five teens where driver was texting while driving. Recent poll of people 18-24 years old shows 2 out of 3 admit to sending text messages while they drive.

Words escape me to descibe this type of insanity. Only someone of extreme stupidity would attempt this. Unfortunately, said idiot took some of his friends with him.

You can't legislate this type of behaviour out of existence. You might as well close your eyes, make a wish, and toss a coin into the fountain for all the good it will do. Only Darwin can rid our midst of this type of plague. Teach your children well so Chuck doesn't claim your offspring next.

Oh! I'm sorry. I forgot. This is America. We can solve all our parenting woes through legislation. Carry on...

read more digg story

I've been skewered

I recently found out that I've been a victim of credit card fraud. I don't know how it happened and I don't know when it happened.

Some clever, ingenious fuckwad got enough information about one of my credit cards to be able to use it to the tune of about $1450. I don't know if the person who stole the information is the same person (or persons) who used it But, I want to find out. I. Really. Want. To. Know. Who.

Granted, it's always possible that, somehow, I'm the one responsible for the information getting out. If that's true, I'll take responsibility for being stupid. Show me where I went wrong. However, at the moment, I can't imagine how my stupidity might have caused this.

I could wait for the bank to work their magic and get all the charges reversed. After all, they have a lot more leverage than I do with the merchants who accepted the charges. Therefore, they have a lot better chance of getting their money back. It is mostly their money anyway since I'm only liable for $50 worth of those charges. What do I care?

I care. I've been contacting most of the merchants myself in an effort to find out what I can do, or find out, about what happened. I want to educate myself in what is possible in this regard. If possible, I want to find out who it was. No doubt, my bank will not tell me what their investigation turns up. They'll only tell me that, after all is said and done, I owe them $50.

Even so, I want to locate the person who has so deftly bent me at the waist and had their way with me. I want to have my turn. I realize that I had the benefit of the '$50 liability limit' vaseline. If I get a hold of them... they won't.

Just execute them...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070719/ap_on_re_us/sex_offenders_1;_ylt=AjKnPuwoqBhgXPpORdqffEIE1vAI

That's what everyone wants anyway, right? That way we can all feel SAFE!

If you can't see/feel my tongue in my cheek, waving it's little middle finger in front of your face, then FUCK YOU!

Jesus Christ! It was tragic whatever happened to 'Jessica'. I don't, in any way, mean to detract from that. I don't even know what happened to her and I can get a sense that it must have been very, very bad.

The supporters of this law tried to do a very good thing... but also, a very impossible thing. It's as simple as that.

We are a society. Society, as a whole, contains people from all walks of life. Whether you like it or not. The only way you could possibly, effectively do what this law is trying to do is... Procure a little island... like Australia... and send them all there. If I remember correctly, England tried that a few years back. Hmm... How did that work out?

As much as I'd like to have a little hideway where we could send all of societies little mistakes, it ain't gonna work. First, we have to have someone we trust to decide who to send. I don't trust myself to make that decision, much less you self-righteous pricks. We're all way too self-centered these days to make those kinds of decisions. Oh, I'm sorry, I meant to say... We're all too focused on what's best for the 'children' to make rational decisions in that regard.

We're all too busy with our own lives to make sure that we actually 'raise' our children. Pay attention to what their needs are. We must have more LAWS that absolve us from some of that responsibility. Otherwise, it's just too much. It's just better that way.

I'm having this psycho mental image flashing in my brain... right out of 'Children of the Corn'. Children are running our society by mind control. Only it's better! The children can't actually control our minds, but politicians can by simply invoking the phrase 'to protect the children'.

So, in conclusion... It's probably better for all concerned, just to execute them.

Put your hands together now... Please

Have people grown immune. Have they become so self-absorbed. So self-centered... that they can't take the time to show their appreciation for a musician playing in their midst?

I'm almost certain that, if each party present and engaged in conversation tonight were to be polled, they wouldn't classify their chatter as 'important' or 'crucial to the existance of the species' (ok, a few might claim this). Meanwhile, there was a young man playing the guitar and singing on stage. No doubt he was paid by the bar to perform. I'm glad the bar saw fit to pay him, because the patrons weren't gonna give him the time of day. Ok, he wasn't great, but he wasn't that bad. He was certainly good enough, at times, to be worth taking two fucking seconds out of your worthless fucking life to put your hands together and show a little appreciation.

Tonight at the watering hole, I moved from my usual place at the bar, over to the restaurant so I could see and listen to the guy play. I sat at a table by myself and listened to the man play and sing several songs. Some songs were familiar, others were not. After the first song, I dutifully put my hands together and gave him some applause for the pleasure he provided me in listening to him play. I was the ONLY ONE who bothered to do this. I sat and listened to the next song... applauded again... same result (I guess I'm the only one listening to the music). This went on for a few more songs and our musician never failed to thank me for my applause. The thanks was personal because, after all, I was the only one applauding. After sitting there and listening to him play a dozen or more songs, and (being the only one) applauding after each one, I went and introduced myself and apologized to him saying that I hope that I embarassed the rest of the audience more than I embarassed him. He was a very gracious entertainer. I've never been an advocate of giving something for nothing, but that works both ways. I guess it's a good thing he (hopefully) had a guaranteed paycheck.

When I was young (in early grade school, 7-8 yrs old), we used to, as a class, clap after being shown a particularly moving nature film (or any film really). Our teachers rebuked us, saying that applause is reserved only for 'live' performances, and not for 'recorded' material. I've always remembered that. That's why I clap when I encounter someone talented enough to provide that 'live' experience.

To everyone there tonight... Get over yourself and put your hands together... It only takes a moment.

April Fools!

The democrats have sniffed the waters and, by God, they smell blood! Hot on the heels of the President's report that the plan we had for the Iraqi government isn't going as expected, they have now seized control of the armed forces. Bush, obviously doesn't know what he's doing, so they're doing something about it. They've done what they do best... passed a law (or is it legislation, or a resolution, or something else, I don't know?), requiring our troops to be out of Iraq by April 1st next year. Maybe they're gonna all stand up and shout "April Fools" when it gets here. At any rate, it appears that our legislature now controls the military. Hmmm.

Never mind the Constitution, and the balance of power and such... The Legislative branch of our government can control and direct our military just as efficiently as the Executive branch. I'm sure that our founding fathers meant for everyone to share. Why don't we invite the Supreme Court in and ask them what they think as well?

I'll be the last person to say that Bush has done everything right. He (oh. so. obviously) hasn't. While I'm not gonna argue whether the war is just or not, I'll say that, if we back out now, we'll end up with another Afghanistan. Possibly even creating another Bin Laden (If we haven't already). We left Afghanistan, back then, at the mercy of the USSR. The USSR was, at the very least, an enemy we (as a general population) understood. We, for the most part, understand communism and it's pros and cons. Leaving Iraq too early will drop it squarely into the hands of Iran and/or Syria. Both Islamic states. In general, I don't think Americans understand the Islamic state as well as they do the communist state. With the communist state they picture Stalin, Lenin, and that ilk. At least they picture people, and thus, some semblance of humanity. With Islamic states all they see are suicide bombers and faceless religious figures stoking the fire.

Communism=Stalin, Lenin
Islam=Bombs, innocent dead people

I'm not saying that Stalin and Lenin didn't have blood on they're hands. They most certainly did. But, at least they had stern political control of the country they led. They were held accountable to history for what they did. The terrorists performing these acts 'claim' no country (or, at least, no country in their right mind will claim them). They claim to do it all in the name of 'Islam'. That scares more people than the bombs they carry.

Bottom line. We leave to soon and we leave Iraq to be molded for the next century or more by the Iranians and the Syrians. Neither of these countries are very friendly to the West. If we stay... who knows?

We're damned if we do... damned if we don't. If we didn't in the first place... well, that's water under the bridge.

Suck on that before you go whining.

F@$k Tank Johnson

I'm sitting here watching "The Best Damn Sports Show Period" (with the sound off, which I think is the best way) and they have a banner across the bottom that says something like "Should they give Tank another chance?"... Jesus Christ on a greased up, chocolate covered, nut infused, mint flavored stick... NO!

God in heaven, have mercy on my soul... First, we tried to get athletes to behave, back in the 80's, by telling them that they're role models (whether they like it or not) and should try to remember that the children of America look up to them. They should, for heavens sake, try to set a good example for our youth. I think this was, as far as my personal memory serves me, our first collective attempt at reigning in the Prima Dona athlete. No doubt, there were those that were like that well before (Ty Cobb, for example), but they were hailed as heros and their sins forgiven.

I think the modern day, rich, spoiled athlete was spawned (I hesitate to say, born, because some of them were surely begotten in an entirely evil manner. i.e. the spawn of Satan) in the eighties. Part of the feel good Reagan years, maybe. But, I'm sure the roots go back much further (I can't be bothered to research it though, so fuck it). Fast forward to today. (Practically) Every. Single. Professional. Athlete. Is a millionaire. That means that they have the means to do pretty much anything they want to do. They also seldom have the self-control required to keep themselves out of trouble. Society has taught them that ,because they're superstar athletes, they'll be forgiven for ANY wrong they do. They're also now very, very rich. Money will buy you a LOT of forgiveness as well (at least in the court room).

Most people with common sense say, treat the bastards like any other criminal. Put them in jail just like you would "me", if I'd done the same thing. Others, the sports 'purists', say we should judge them only on their athletic prowess. What overall good would it do for society, if this athlete, or that, had to spend time behind bars? The argument is that, certainly community service serves the greater good in these cases. Right?

As a society, we still celebrate the athlete. For the most part, that's good. We should celebrate those who've strived to become the best of the best. Most of today's athlete must have been inspired by the achievements of those that came before them. There's no way to reach that ultimate goal without passion and inspiration.

What will 'inspire' tomorrow's athlete? The desire to be the best? Or the desire, simply to be rich, and by all accounts, above the law?

God help us all, I could say this about so many other professional athletes, but his name just happened to be on TV when I started writing this... So here it is... Fuck Tank Johnson. Future athletes don't need him. Let him get a real job and fade into obscurity.

Is she really that stupid... or does she think I am?

A few nights ago, my wife and I came back to the hotel around midnight (maybe later) to find that the interior door between the lobby and the elevator was closed. A bit odd. Hmmm, I thought. What's that all about? It wasn't locked, so we forged on through the door only to be met by a pungent odor (it reeked!). My first thought was that it smelled kinda like motor oil or some other type of industrial lubricant. So, rather than blindly plunging headlong into what I thought could possibly be the result of some kind of chemical spill, I decided to backtrack and ask the lady at the front desk... "What's that smell?" Her response was ... "Well, some of our guests like to cook spicy foods". I thought that was an odd response, given what the hallway smelled like but, OK... no chemical spill, let's get on to the room then.

We take the elevator up to the 3rd floor. The door opens and the smell has gotten much stronger. Definitely not the aftermath of a killer curry or anything like that. This has the odor of stale sewage and petroleum products. We round the corner to the beginning of a long hallway (total length has got to be 100 yds or more) and notice that another interior door (halfway down the hall) is closed. I'm think... Hmmm, this is very odd. Our room is on the other side of that door. Still... It's late. Time for bed, so let's move along. About half way to the door, the carpet starts squishing. Further still, each step creates a little splash. The floor is soaked! My first thought was that there's been a fire... but... wouldn't there still be firemen about? Surely, with this much water, it would've had to be a pretty good one? But no, it smells, but not like a burnt smell or anything like that. We don't see any charred walls or anything.

Anyway, we wade through the mess, past the closed door and on to our room. We try our keys and find that they've somehow been de-magnetized (more on this later). That means we have to trudge back through the flooded hallway and back to the elevator to the lobby. When we get there, we find our heroine obviously trying to find rooms for some displaced guests. Whether they were newly arrived guests for which they no longer have rooms, or guests who were in the rooms (now ruined) prior to whatever happened, I don't know. What I do know is this... her earlier explanation for the smell was complete and utter bullshit. This brings me to the realization that, either she's a complete idiot, or she thinks I am (OK, sometimes I am, but not on this occasion).

In a display of uncharacteristic diplomacy, rather than call this woman on the obvious lie she told, I decide to simply ask for our cards to be re-coded. After all, unlike the poor folks she's waiting on, we still have a habitable room. I figure we should get out of the way as quickly and as quietly as possible.

We find out later (assuming that this story is true), that someone set off a sprinkler head by hanging some clothes on it (or something like that). I guess the deluge of water re-hydrated years of freeze dried cleaning products, hair spray, coffee, tea, sweat, urine, and other bodily fluids that had collected in the carpet over the years. That reminds me... I think I need new shoes after wading through that crap.

Will hanging clothes on a sprinkler head cause it to start spewing? I don't know, but I'm not going to experiment with the one's in my room.

A Metaphorical dilemma

"He smokes a cigarette like a paedophile going down on a 12-year old"

Have you ever had a metaphor just scream itself at you? No matter how hard you tried to resist it? This happened to me the other day. It came at me from out of nowhere and implanted itself in my brain.

I'm plagued by the imagery my metaphor has brought to life. Yet, I'm somehow pleased that I was able to express myself in such a literary manner. I'm shocked by the imagery, and disgusted at the thought.

The man I'm talking about isn't a paedophile. He's a normal human being. He's a good and decent person.

Man, I must be warped

So much for the Good Samaritan

http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/061807/met_178250725.shtml

It's 2AM, you're fading fast. Probably well on your way to sawing a few logs, when suddenly, you hear someone scream "I've been shot!". Suddenly you're wide awake. Your adrenaline is pumping. You realize someone is in trouble. What do you do? Ignore it and hope it goes away (so you can get back to sleep)? Bang on the wall/ceiling/floor and tell them to pipe down (so you can get back to sleep)? Call 911 and let them deal with it (so you can get back to sleep)? Or, maybe... gasp... get involved and see if you can help?

This poor guy chose the last option. In a selfless gesture, forgetting about his own safety, he grabbed his shotgun and went to see what happened. What he found was a woman who's leg was bleeding badly. He administered first aid. He waited for the authorities and medical help to arrive. Then, thoroughly exhausted, adrenaline supply depleted, he went back home and crashed. This was, by far, his worst mistake. For his trouble, he was fired!

The fact that this fellow worked for the company that managed and/or owned the apartments where he lived was, apparently, the most important issue here. Never mind that he risked life and limb to rush to someones aid, saving the woman's leg, if not her very life. He should have consulted his employee handbook first. Had he done so, this whole messy business could have been avoided (as far as his job was concerned anyway).

The company's policies were clearly laid out in the employee hand book. The issues were also discussed at a recent employee meeting and... covered in a recent e-mail. With all these warnings about proper workplace procedure, how could this guy have gotten it soooo wroooong? Wait a minute... he wasn't at work, was he? He was at home, nearly asleep. But, he lives 'on-site', so I guess he 'works' there 24/7. Policy prohibits any type of weapon being used in the workplace. The report says his weapon was never fired, so I guess, simply carrying it over there was interpreted as using it. It also states that you should contact (for lack of a better word) headquarters immediately. Well, he fell asleep, didn't he, thinking he'd contact them (later) in the morning.

Then, to top it all off, the company's dismissal complaint stated that he was guilty of "gross misconduct". What kind of fucked up world are we living in? What was the corporate thought process here? Note: This is me imagining what 'might' have been going on in someone's head and not an actual quote by any of the company's managment.

Corporate managment: We must fire this guy before he saves again and garners us more free, good publicity. What if, during his next heroic act, he actually shoots the bad guy? Even worse, what if he doesn't kill the bad guy and the bad guy lives to (gasp!) sue us?. Ohhh, the liability of it all!

Yeah, that sounds about right.

This guy is more than welcome to move into my neighborhood. We need more good citizens like this. Bravo, my good man. Keep up the good work. I only wish I had a job to give you. It'd be yours.

Evil Religion?

I ran across this quote today and it seems to dovetail nicely with my last post:

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. - Steven Weinberg

My first thought was "Yeah! Take that, religion. See what kind of trouble you cause, damn it!" I'm a cynical guy and this had immediate appeal for me in that respect. It's the kind of statement that lays it out in black and white and really drives a point home.

Then I thought about it for a moment... or two... Is religion the only impetus for making good people do evil things? Most certainly not. Is he talking about religion as a concept, meaning peoples' belief in a higher power that motivates them to behave in a particular manner? Or is it the institution of organized religion, that promotes (and uses) peoples' belief in a higher power to motivate them to behave in a particular manner? A less cynical person might say these questions are one and the same.

These seem like very good questions to me. And I don't know which angle he was shooting for. I'm not even sure that I care. The point is not that religion is making good people do evil things. For the most part, religion is a positive influence and provides basic positive guidelines by which people can (and, for the most part, should) live their lives. It's the religious zealot and their belief that this higher power empowers them. That's where things start to go wrong. Religious zeal provides the zealot with a sense of power and, as the saying goes, power corrupts.

When this is taken to the next level, the problem is magnified. Religious leaders hold sway over large groups of people. Imagine how empowering this might be. With a army of zealots hanging on your every word, who among us would not be... corrupted absolutely?

Ok. Let's get started

Things piss me off. I don't get pissed off every day but, occasionally, things being what they are in today's society, the pressure builds. This is where I'm gonna unload.

I only write (seems it's the only way I CAN write) when I'm mad about something. It's an 'in the moment' kind of thing. I don't have a current rant (an inspiration, if you will) to call upon for my first post, but instead, I'll post something I wrote a few weeks ago.

Jerry Falwell died today May 15, 2007. He was a man of God. A man of his convictions. In some ways, I admire those qualities. I never admired Jerry Falwell.

Why didn't I admire Mr. Falwell, seeing as how I admire those qualities? Well, it seems (in some small ways), we're somewhat alike. Like him, I don't have much tolerance. I have a low threshold of tolerance for idiots (No, I'm not saying he was stupid).

His convictions led him to promote an unprecedented level of intolerance, for a Christian man of God. He was a Christian leader who could have had a great and POSITIVE influence on a large number of people. Instead, he concentrated his energies on those things that were divisive, instead of unifying.

He attacked gays on the grounds that homosexuality is a moral affront to God. He said that it's wrong simply because 'God said it's wrong'. He also implied (and sometimes outright said) that their actions were the direct cause of some very evil things (such as 9/11, for instance). No matter how righteous the man was. That's wrong.

My views are a little different. Centering more on scientific rather than moral grounds. My general argument centers around the fact that, by it's very nature, a homosexual union cannot conceive children and, therefore, cannot pass on that particular genetic trait (otherwise, there's a big hole in Darwin's theory, right?). That being said, homosexuals are human beings, and as such, deserve the same respect as any other.

As far as the the Reverend goes, I'm not up on all things Falwell, so I can't speak to any specifics. I'm sure that the man had some good qualities. At the very least, simply because he had millions of followers/supporters, he must have been, at the core, a decent man. He was certainly a charismatic man who believed strongly in faith and family. I can respect that.

I think maybe he went overboard in the belief that, because he knew he had that kind of influence, maybe if he overstated things here and there, he'd be able to push people (just a little bit) in the direction he thought they should be going. Sort of like a 'the end justifies the means' kind of thing.

I could have gone and read a lot more about Jerry before writing this, but I wanted this to come mostly from inside (from the heart, if you will) and not from something that someone else had written, so that's what I've done.

I'm doing my best not to speak (too) ill of the dead. So now I'll just say this to Jerry... You made the world a better place (by leaving it). RIP.

If you read this and it pissed you off. So what. It's just my opinion. Get your own!