I'm back like a vertebrae!
I don't know who did it or why, but someone paid to have my account reactivated. Whoever did it: Thanks! I'd forgotten how cool this site was.
I haven't been on for a couple years since becoming a dad. Since then I've also gotten published and gotten a better job and I've become a CG artist as well.
I'd love to know who did this for me. Whoever you are, you're lmy hero of the day.
I don't know who did it or why, but someone paid to have my account reactivated. Whoever did it: Thanks! I'd forgotten how cool this site was.
I haven't been on for a couple years since becoming a dad. Since then I've also gotten published and gotten a better job and I've become a CG artist as well.
I'd love to know who did this for me. Whoever you are, you're lmy hero of the day.
Sorry about the delay in blogging, but since the last post I've discovered I'm going to be a father, landed a book deal, had to bail a good friend out of jail and deal with the fact that rae was in a car accident that totaled the car. She's okay, but the car's a goner. We're now going through the private hell of trying to find a new or used car of some quality worth sinking a monthly payment into.
There are quite a few things I want to blog about, but focusing with everything else going on has been difficult.
One thing I do want to comment on comes from a debate I was in regarding the myth of "activist judges." So-called activist judges are those judges who conservatives deem have created brand new laws, unintended by the people or constitution, during high-level court rulings.
However, when you look at these cases you find a few commonalities. First, and foremost, the "activist judge" label only ever gets applied to rulings, all rulings, that go against conservative goals. That should be your first warning sign.
Second, I read a lot of these cases on a level many people haven't. I've done deep analysis of Supreme Court and Appelate Court rulings such as the SWANCC, Lake Tahoe, and W. Va. mountaintop mining cases, among others. In general, the reality is that the decisions are made exactly in line with every other legal decision, based off of existing case law and constitutional interpretation. How strictly the word of the constitution is followed has nothing to do with whether a judge is an "activist" or not, but more to do with the judge's own political leanings.
If a conservative judge desires a conservative ruling that pushes the boundaries of the letter of existing law, be it Scalia or Thomas, they'll push the language to the extent of rationality. Same goes for liberal judges. They desire a ruling and seek to fit it within a legal framework.
Many argue that no legal change should be made unless its by people's vote, which sounds great, but actually undermines the entire construction of the three-branch system of government. Rule of majority is the first order of business for a democracy, however, our Founding Fathers put in a check against TYRANNY of the majority: the judicial system.
The judicial system is there because rule of the majority allowed segregated schools, Jim Crow laws and drinking fountains marked "colored only". The judicial system is there because rule of the majority would allow certain states to prevent blacks and whites from marrying. The judicial system is there because rule of the majority allowed impromptu eugenics and castration against alleged sufferers of mental retardation, which in some cases were simply poor children who couldn't afford to go to school.
Sometimes, justice and fair treatment of human beings cannot wait until 60 million white southerners decide its okay to start treating the rest of humanity like human beings. That's the wisdom of the judicial system. That's why our current system works better than any other in the world.
Hamstringing judicial jurisprudence may be one the most assinine concepts to hit the political scene in some time, and the lemmings that usually go for it tend to have fairly good notions in mind, but they haven't thought things through.
Even the conservatives who pump the concept do not actually want to see it through. it would leave them in too much of a lurch when their chosen judges would have to follow caselaw that goes against their desires.
The Strict Constructionists would have you believe they support sticking to the specific letter of written law, and that the laws should never be re-interpreted by judges. Of course, this stipulates that judges should keep thinking to a minimum, which is the opposite of the reason that they're judges.
Laws, and language change over time. So does the social situation of the country. Plessy v. Ferguson gives way to Brown v. Board of Education, and rightfully so. However, there is no honor, dignity, rightness, promotion of public good or strengthening of the union in allowing 50 years of human degradation because you want to wait for a constitutional amendment. All of our greatest Supreme Court Chief justices knew this, and often commented on it.
Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once said: "A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged; it is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in color and content according to the circumstances and time in which it is used."
Those who rail against so-called activist judges disagree, and would have our judicial sytem simply parroting arcane and outdated legal language and concepts to the detriment of justice and our country. Hannurabi's Code was written in stone, since then we've devised legal systems that are just a bit more flexible.
There are quite a few things I want to blog about, but focusing with everything else going on has been difficult.
One thing I do want to comment on comes from a debate I was in regarding the myth of "activist judges." So-called activist judges are those judges who conservatives deem have created brand new laws, unintended by the people or constitution, during high-level court rulings.
However, when you look at these cases you find a few commonalities. First, and foremost, the "activist judge" label only ever gets applied to rulings, all rulings, that go against conservative goals. That should be your first warning sign.
Second, I read a lot of these cases on a level many people haven't. I've done deep analysis of Supreme Court and Appelate Court rulings such as the SWANCC, Lake Tahoe, and W. Va. mountaintop mining cases, among others. In general, the reality is that the decisions are made exactly in line with every other legal decision, based off of existing case law and constitutional interpretation. How strictly the word of the constitution is followed has nothing to do with whether a judge is an "activist" or not, but more to do with the judge's own political leanings.
If a conservative judge desires a conservative ruling that pushes the boundaries of the letter of existing law, be it Scalia or Thomas, they'll push the language to the extent of rationality. Same goes for liberal judges. They desire a ruling and seek to fit it within a legal framework.
Many argue that no legal change should be made unless its by people's vote, which sounds great, but actually undermines the entire construction of the three-branch system of government. Rule of majority is the first order of business for a democracy, however, our Founding Fathers put in a check against TYRANNY of the majority: the judicial system.
The judicial system is there because rule of the majority allowed segregated schools, Jim Crow laws and drinking fountains marked "colored only". The judicial system is there because rule of the majority would allow certain states to prevent blacks and whites from marrying. The judicial system is there because rule of the majority allowed impromptu eugenics and castration against alleged sufferers of mental retardation, which in some cases were simply poor children who couldn't afford to go to school.
Sometimes, justice and fair treatment of human beings cannot wait until 60 million white southerners decide its okay to start treating the rest of humanity like human beings. That's the wisdom of the judicial system. That's why our current system works better than any other in the world.
Hamstringing judicial jurisprudence may be one the most assinine concepts to hit the political scene in some time, and the lemmings that usually go for it tend to have fairly good notions in mind, but they haven't thought things through.
Even the conservatives who pump the concept do not actually want to see it through. it would leave them in too much of a lurch when their chosen judges would have to follow caselaw that goes against their desires.
The Strict Constructionists would have you believe they support sticking to the specific letter of written law, and that the laws should never be re-interpreted by judges. Of course, this stipulates that judges should keep thinking to a minimum, which is the opposite of the reason that they're judges.
Laws, and language change over time. So does the social situation of the country. Plessy v. Ferguson gives way to Brown v. Board of Education, and rightfully so. However, there is no honor, dignity, rightness, promotion of public good or strengthening of the union in allowing 50 years of human degradation because you want to wait for a constitutional amendment. All of our greatest Supreme Court Chief justices knew this, and often commented on it.
Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once said: "A word is not a crystal, transparent and unchanged; it is the skin of a living thought and may vary greatly in color and content according to the circumstances and time in which it is used."
Those who rail against so-called activist judges disagree, and would have our judicial sytem simply parroting arcane and outdated legal language and concepts to the detriment of justice and our country. Hannurabi's Code was written in stone, since then we've devised legal systems that are just a bit more flexible.
"...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." -- Article VI, Section 3 of the United States Constitution.
Why is it the people who claim to be the most patriotic, and wave the flag the most, seem to be the most ignorant of the laws, foundations, and motivations of our country?
Sometimes, someone says something so dumb that you have to do a double-take and you try to convince yourself that you misheard it.
While I'm sure such examples crop up by the hour, in this case I'm referring to the outcry at the request of incoming Congressman Keith Ellison, D-Minn. Ellison, a muslim, wants to take his oath of office on the Koran and not the bible. Since he's muslim, and not christian, him swearing in on the bible makes about as much sense as having him sworn in on Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.
Seems pretty open and shut, especially given the EXTREMELY specific constitutional statement that there should be no religious test for public office.
But, in a clear case of "stupidity knows no bounds," somebody had to protest, of course.
Among many, that somebody included Dennis Prager, who wrote a column stating that Ellison should not be allowed to swear in on the Koran because it would undermine American civilization.
Prager wasn't the only one, just the loudest. And it's not an issue of "right vs. left" as Prager got slammed by Right-leaning columnists as much as he did by the Left.
If anything, Ellison should be commended. He could have just taken the oath on the bible, but instead, he seems to actually want his oath to mean something.
Prager has backtracked recently, claiming, again erroneously, that it's a matter of the U.S. being based on the bible, making it the country's de facto Holy Document.
But again, he runs into a little brick wall I like to call historical fact.
U.S. Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, near the end of George Washington's last term as president, was intended to outline the nature of the U.S. to foreign countries. It states, in no uncertain words,
"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"
As you know, or should, foreign treaties are ratified by the Senate and signed by the president. They were all Founding Fathers, who had lived through the creation of our nation, headed by the leading figure of our country and it's first president. They agreed that the U.S. was not founded on Christianity.
While there is no doubt that Christianity influenced many aspects of the nation, our Founding Fathers came from an assortment of backgrounds, which included a few deists and a couple in-the-closet atheists. They went through great pains in numerous documents to distinguish that religion shouldn't be a factor in our governmental workings. There are endless reams of quotes from Jefferson, Franklin and Paine, among others screaming at us not to use religion as a measuring stick, standard, or test, for governmental action, influence or dogma.
It's all in writing, all over the place.
When Ellison swears in on that Koran, it won't be an erosion of American values. It will be an affirmation of them.
Why is it the people who claim to be the most patriotic, and wave the flag the most, seem to be the most ignorant of the laws, foundations, and motivations of our country?
Sometimes, someone says something so dumb that you have to do a double-take and you try to convince yourself that you misheard it.
While I'm sure such examples crop up by the hour, in this case I'm referring to the outcry at the request of incoming Congressman Keith Ellison, D-Minn. Ellison, a muslim, wants to take his oath of office on the Koran and not the bible. Since he's muslim, and not christian, him swearing in on the bible makes about as much sense as having him sworn in on Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.
Seems pretty open and shut, especially given the EXTREMELY specific constitutional statement that there should be no religious test for public office.
But, in a clear case of "stupidity knows no bounds," somebody had to protest, of course.
Among many, that somebody included Dennis Prager, who wrote a column stating that Ellison should not be allowed to swear in on the Koran because it would undermine American civilization.
Prager wasn't the only one, just the loudest. And it's not an issue of "right vs. left" as Prager got slammed by Right-leaning columnists as much as he did by the Left.
If anything, Ellison should be commended. He could have just taken the oath on the bible, but instead, he seems to actually want his oath to mean something.
Prager has backtracked recently, claiming, again erroneously, that it's a matter of the U.S. being based on the bible, making it the country's de facto Holy Document.
But again, he runs into a little brick wall I like to call historical fact.
U.S. Treaty of Tripoli in 1796, near the end of George Washington's last term as president, was intended to outline the nature of the U.S. to foreign countries. It states, in no uncertain words,
"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;"
As you know, or should, foreign treaties are ratified by the Senate and signed by the president. They were all Founding Fathers, who had lived through the creation of our nation, headed by the leading figure of our country and it's first president. They agreed that the U.S. was not founded on Christianity.
While there is no doubt that Christianity influenced many aspects of the nation, our Founding Fathers came from an assortment of backgrounds, which included a few deists and a couple in-the-closet atheists. They went through great pains in numerous documents to distinguish that religion shouldn't be a factor in our governmental workings. There are endless reams of quotes from Jefferson, Franklin and Paine, among others screaming at us not to use religion as a measuring stick, standard, or test, for governmental action, influence or dogma.
It's all in writing, all over the place.
When Ellison swears in on that Koran, it won't be an erosion of American values. It will be an affirmation of them.
This is a one of several little videos I made. Trying to learn video editor. EL Magico is the name I use on other boards.
Okay, here's the thing that really irks me about the national political conversation, or lack thereof. We really don't, as a country, seem to care as much about progressing as we do about our "side" being right. It doesn't matter what party you belong to, even if it's a third party. I'm going to use the Foley incident ONLY because it is the most recent. There are examples from all sides. Foley has horrible conversations with underage boys. Everybody castigates him, because that is what is expected of them. Then the politicking begins. Republican bloggers and pundits are trying to change the focus to 1. suspicion about the timing of the release of the information, and 2. claims of hypocrisy on the part of the Dems. Dems, nowhere near guiltless, don't wait for even the tiniest scrap of evidence or investigation before it's a "cover-up" and somehow Foley's actions are a reflection on the entire Republican Party. And no matter what they do, if you support a Third Party, any action they take are the signs that it's time for them to go. We seem to have totally given up on listening to the other side. What's worse, the drive for our side to be right, and our side to "win" overrides the general concern for the well-being of America. Democrat, Republican, Independent, you, your friend, me. We're all responsible for a serious breakdown in the national dialogue. We get immediately defensive when a member of the party we support gets in trouble. We try to "flip the script" on the other side. If someone criticizes Bush, someone invokes Clinton, no matter how irrelevant it is. If someone criticizes Kerry, someone immediately points out all the Bush incidents of alleged "flip-flopping." We do it under the guise of "I'm concerned about the welfare of my country" but in truth most of us do it because we want our side to come out smelling like roses, even if our side is no side. How do we fix it? I really don't know. But we need to acknowledge it. A friend once introduced me to a great quote that I had not encountered before: "The first thing you should do when you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging." How do we get Americans to put down the shovel?
So, last night rae and I attended a fetish flea market and play party in D.C. It's been the first time in a while we went out and mingled with others in the lifestyle. Of course, my friend Vox next door and all our friends are in the lifestyle, so we are frequently among people like us, but this was the first time since about the start of summer that we attended a social event.
The Crucible throws these fetish flea markets and play parties about twice a year, and generally we make both of them.
The first half of the day is a big vendor's shop, with every type of BDSM accoutrements' that you can imagine. Corsets, whips, floggers, bondage restraints, jewelry, clothing, artwork, DVD's...You name it. If it's kink, it's probably there. Unless, of course, you are like me and have been saving up for one specific thing that you want. Then it's not there.
You see, I went to the Flea Market for one real reason: To buy a violet wand set. My last set was taken by my last slave without me knowing it. Something I'm still more than a little steamed about. Then, she claims, when she went to send it back to me it fell off the car and shattered. In return, she paid some bills that I was otherwise going to pay. But since then I've wanted a new set, of course. Violet wands are one of my specialties, one of the things I am known for in the scene.
For those who do not know, violet wands are electrical play devices. There's the "wand" itself, and various glass attachments that glow violet when the wand is turned on, kind of like those bulbs you put your hands on at gifts shops where the little rays are attracted to your fingertips. However, whenever you touch someone with the wand they receive a jolt of static electricity, like when you touch a doorknob after petting the cat. The difference is that with the wand it's constant and not just a zap. Different attachments give different types of shocks, and what's more, you can use a body contact to charge yourself, and everything you touch gets zapped, and everything conductive you pick up will become charged. So run your fingers along your lover's spine and they get a constant tingly zap. You can imagine the other areas you can touch.
I'm so adept with it that I've given demos at scene events, like at Vox's Heaven and Hell masquerade ball. I charge myself and use things like samurai swords and gently draw the edge along my slave's skin. The sword transmits the charge, and it feels like she's being cut (the smaller the edge, the sharper the intensity of the zap, so you can imagine what the fine edge of a katana can do...Interestingly, I'm the only one I've seen use a sword like that).
But I've digressed.
SO I went to the flea market to buy one thing: A violet wand set. Now, they aren't cheap. You are lucky if a starter set of just the wand and a couple attachments can be found for $300. And I want something deluxe. Last time we went there were at least three different dealers with three different models. So why is it this time when we go there's......NOT A SINGLE ONE.
I mean, c'mon, I've heard of Murphy's Law, but that is ridiculous.
After quite a bit of searching I found a place that sold them, but didn't have any with them. They only had one at the shop and it was a pretty deluxe kit, but it was on sale. So I forked over 5 benjamins, and they'll send it to me this week.
We also got our photos taken by a professional fetish photographer. Nothing wild, just portraits together that he's going to send us prints of.
Afterwards, we dolled up and went to the play party.
I ran into a lot of old friends, met a few new people as well, and caught up with the happenings in the lifestyle. There are a lot of upcoming events I want to go to, not the least of which is BR2006, the largest lifestyle event on the east coast. Hopefully rae and I will make a few of them.
After some waiting, we got an open station and got to play. Won't go into details on that...hehehe.
But much, much later, we came across a unique device. This guy was giving demonstrations of a vacuum bed.
Here's how it works: You get into this latex bag, more or less, and then a vacuum pump sucks all the air out (your head, of course, is free) until it becomes formfitting. Rae wanted to try it and found it a very interesting, actually calming, experience. I watched, and every time I see it I keep thinking it looks like Han Solo when he got frozen in carbonite.
Even though I've been really busy lately, I'd like this to be the first instance of a steady return to the lifestyle. And I can't wait til I get my wand set in the mail.....neither can Rae.
The Crucible throws these fetish flea markets and play parties about twice a year, and generally we make both of them.
The first half of the day is a big vendor's shop, with every type of BDSM accoutrements' that you can imagine. Corsets, whips, floggers, bondage restraints, jewelry, clothing, artwork, DVD's...You name it. If it's kink, it's probably there. Unless, of course, you are like me and have been saving up for one specific thing that you want. Then it's not there.
You see, I went to the Flea Market for one real reason: To buy a violet wand set. My last set was taken by my last slave without me knowing it. Something I'm still more than a little steamed about. Then, she claims, when she went to send it back to me it fell off the car and shattered. In return, she paid some bills that I was otherwise going to pay. But since then I've wanted a new set, of course. Violet wands are one of my specialties, one of the things I am known for in the scene.
For those who do not know, violet wands are electrical play devices. There's the "wand" itself, and various glass attachments that glow violet when the wand is turned on, kind of like those bulbs you put your hands on at gifts shops where the little rays are attracted to your fingertips. However, whenever you touch someone with the wand they receive a jolt of static electricity, like when you touch a doorknob after petting the cat. The difference is that with the wand it's constant and not just a zap. Different attachments give different types of shocks, and what's more, you can use a body contact to charge yourself, and everything you touch gets zapped, and everything conductive you pick up will become charged. So run your fingers along your lover's spine and they get a constant tingly zap. You can imagine the other areas you can touch.
I'm so adept with it that I've given demos at scene events, like at Vox's Heaven and Hell masquerade ball. I charge myself and use things like samurai swords and gently draw the edge along my slave's skin. The sword transmits the charge, and it feels like she's being cut (the smaller the edge, the sharper the intensity of the zap, so you can imagine what the fine edge of a katana can do...Interestingly, I'm the only one I've seen use a sword like that).
But I've digressed.
SO I went to the flea market to buy one thing: A violet wand set. Now, they aren't cheap. You are lucky if a starter set of just the wand and a couple attachments can be found for $300. And I want something deluxe. Last time we went there were at least three different dealers with three different models. So why is it this time when we go there's......NOT A SINGLE ONE.
I mean, c'mon, I've heard of Murphy's Law, but that is ridiculous.
After quite a bit of searching I found a place that sold them, but didn't have any with them. They only had one at the shop and it was a pretty deluxe kit, but it was on sale. So I forked over 5 benjamins, and they'll send it to me this week.
We also got our photos taken by a professional fetish photographer. Nothing wild, just portraits together that he's going to send us prints of.
Afterwards, we dolled up and went to the play party.
I ran into a lot of old friends, met a few new people as well, and caught up with the happenings in the lifestyle. There are a lot of upcoming events I want to go to, not the least of which is BR2006, the largest lifestyle event on the east coast. Hopefully rae and I will make a few of them.
After some waiting, we got an open station and got to play. Won't go into details on that...hehehe.
But much, much later, we came across a unique device. This guy was giving demonstrations of a vacuum bed.
Here's how it works: You get into this latex bag, more or less, and then a vacuum pump sucks all the air out (your head, of course, is free) until it becomes formfitting. Rae wanted to try it and found it a very interesting, actually calming, experience. I watched, and every time I see it I keep thinking it looks like Han Solo when he got frozen in carbonite.
Even though I've been really busy lately, I'd like this to be the first instance of a steady return to the lifestyle. And I can't wait til I get my wand set in the mail.....neither can Rae.
Well, Sept. 5 was my birthday. I really don't tend to make that big a deal out of it. In fact, the older I get the less a deal I like to make of it. I doubt I'm very different in that regard than most people.
I'm now 33 years old. Looking back, I can't say I'm dissatisfied with the way things have gone, except my attempts at matrimony. However, being in a wonderful relationship now really takes the edge off those regrets.
Career wise I'm pretty happy with what I accomplished. I hit most of my major goals in the time I wanted to hit them. My last major goal, becoming a published author, is closer than ever. Sure, I imagined crazy stuff like getting a Pulitzer or a Hugo before I was 30, but I was too busy experiencing life in a wider spectrum to be that focused. As it is, my friends tend to think of me as a pretty focused guy. Oftentimes, among family and friends, I'm viewed as the "successful one" I think.
Sure, I have the usual amount of trepidation about getting older, but who doesn't? I am feeling the biological clock ticking away, however, and more and more I'm thinking about creating some mini-mes to make sure the human populace is sufficiently traumatized once I'm gone.
However, all that's minor. What's really important is....
BIRTHDAY SWAG BABY!
I made out like a fat rat! Best year I've had in at least the last 10 years. First, I got a 2 gig iPod nano from Rachael, which I'm sure she already regrets, as those little ear buds will have to be surgically removed from my head if I keep them in any longer. It has a 500 song capacity and it's not even the size of my old zippo.
Then, a good friend of mine, Vox, got me a new daisho set (katana and wakazashi, samurai swords for the uninitiated). Now, I have a half dozen already, but not like these. These were made in Japan the old fashioned way, folded steel, ray skin covered hilt, full tang. If you've ever held the typical katana you can buy anywhere, and then held a real one....man, the difference is trippy. Firstly, these have a LOT more mass to them than my other more decorative swords. But when you wrap your hand around the hilt, man I can't describe the difference. It's night and day. The only draw back is that apparently the guy who makes these in Japan won't sharpen them. SO it's not just that the sword is not sharp, the edge is actually flat. Someone told me it has something to do with Japan not making weapons after WWII due to it's constitution, but I didn't realize that would apply to swords.
On Monday, we went to the Renaissance Festival, where I got a pair of stainless steel daggers, with stainless steel sheaths and hilts. One hilt is carved into the likeness of Isis, the other, Osiris. The full-metal construction not only makes them very pretty, but also makes them really useful for electrical play with a violet wand kit, since they'll conduct a charge from wherever I hold them.
In addition to that, there's a shop at the Rennfaire called the Brass Dragon, that sells these dragon scultpures out of beaten brass and whatnot. Very beautiful and very expensive. I got a black and gold dragon pendant. It's gorgeous, and rachael is making me a chainmail necklace to wear it with.
On top of that, I snagged the "Super Dimensional Fortress Macross: Do You Remember Love -- Perfect Edition" DVD off Ebay for a buck. A gift to my self.
Christmas will be hardpressed to top that!
I'm now 33 years old. Looking back, I can't say I'm dissatisfied with the way things have gone, except my attempts at matrimony. However, being in a wonderful relationship now really takes the edge off those regrets.
Career wise I'm pretty happy with what I accomplished. I hit most of my major goals in the time I wanted to hit them. My last major goal, becoming a published author, is closer than ever. Sure, I imagined crazy stuff like getting a Pulitzer or a Hugo before I was 30, but I was too busy experiencing life in a wider spectrum to be that focused. As it is, my friends tend to think of me as a pretty focused guy. Oftentimes, among family and friends, I'm viewed as the "successful one" I think.
Sure, I have the usual amount of trepidation about getting older, but who doesn't? I am feeling the biological clock ticking away, however, and more and more I'm thinking about creating some mini-mes to make sure the human populace is sufficiently traumatized once I'm gone.
However, all that's minor. What's really important is....
BIRTHDAY SWAG BABY!
I made out like a fat rat! Best year I've had in at least the last 10 years. First, I got a 2 gig iPod nano from Rachael, which I'm sure she already regrets, as those little ear buds will have to be surgically removed from my head if I keep them in any longer. It has a 500 song capacity and it's not even the size of my old zippo.
Then, a good friend of mine, Vox, got me a new daisho set (katana and wakazashi, samurai swords for the uninitiated). Now, I have a half dozen already, but not like these. These were made in Japan the old fashioned way, folded steel, ray skin covered hilt, full tang. If you've ever held the typical katana you can buy anywhere, and then held a real one....man, the difference is trippy. Firstly, these have a LOT more mass to them than my other more decorative swords. But when you wrap your hand around the hilt, man I can't describe the difference. It's night and day. The only draw back is that apparently the guy who makes these in Japan won't sharpen them. SO it's not just that the sword is not sharp, the edge is actually flat. Someone told me it has something to do with Japan not making weapons after WWII due to it's constitution, but I didn't realize that would apply to swords.
On Monday, we went to the Renaissance Festival, where I got a pair of stainless steel daggers, with stainless steel sheaths and hilts. One hilt is carved into the likeness of Isis, the other, Osiris. The full-metal construction not only makes them very pretty, but also makes them really useful for electrical play with a violet wand kit, since they'll conduct a charge from wherever I hold them.
In addition to that, there's a shop at the Rennfaire called the Brass Dragon, that sells these dragon scultpures out of beaten brass and whatnot. Very beautiful and very expensive. I got a black and gold dragon pendant. It's gorgeous, and rachael is making me a chainmail necklace to wear it with.
On top of that, I snagged the "Super Dimensional Fortress Macross: Do You Remember Love -- Perfect Edition" DVD off Ebay for a buck. A gift to my self.
Christmas will be hardpressed to top that!
Signs, signs everywhere signs....
Not sure if this is a local phenomenon or something national, but here in Maryland I've noticed an interesting trend in political signs on the runup to this November's election. The Republicans are not announcing their party on their campaign signs. I was driving around a few days ago and it hit me that neither Ehrlich nor three other Republicans running for office in Maryland put the fact that they were Republicans on their campaign signs.
I thought at first that it might just be a general trend for this election among both parties, but every Democrat's sign I saw clearly marked that they were Democrats.
Why is that?
Usually something is omitted from a campaign sign because the candidate does not want potential voters to think about that fact. In this case, the Republicans seem to be afraid to remind voters that...well, that they are Republicans. The Democrats, however, do not have the same fear.
Now, this could be a Maryland phenomenon, because Maryland (despite having a Republican Governor) grows more and more a Blue State each election. Ehrlich is hanging by a thread, and Republicans running for local offices are already expecting to catch part of the Bush Backlash. But this is the first time I've seen a party act in a manor that indicates they believe their very party affiliation is a detriment...so it's better if voters don't think about it.
That's pretty profound, and may be rather telling about what Republicans are expecting in November.
I'd be interested to hear from others in other parts of the country to see if they are observing the same phenonemon.
Intersting side note, there's one Democrat in Maryland that has a billboard up of him standing next to Hillary Clinton....he's using his association with Hillary as a selling point. That means that strategists have detected a groundswell in part of the public that actually believes aligning yourself with Hillary will be positive for your campaign. That's very interesting indeed.
Sound off about signs in your area, tell me what you see.
Not sure if this is a local phenomenon or something national, but here in Maryland I've noticed an interesting trend in political signs on the runup to this November's election. The Republicans are not announcing their party on their campaign signs. I was driving around a few days ago and it hit me that neither Ehrlich nor three other Republicans running for office in Maryland put the fact that they were Republicans on their campaign signs.
I thought at first that it might just be a general trend for this election among both parties, but every Democrat's sign I saw clearly marked that they were Democrats.
Why is that?
Usually something is omitted from a campaign sign because the candidate does not want potential voters to think about that fact. In this case, the Republicans seem to be afraid to remind voters that...well, that they are Republicans. The Democrats, however, do not have the same fear.
Now, this could be a Maryland phenomenon, because Maryland (despite having a Republican Governor) grows more and more a Blue State each election. Ehrlich is hanging by a thread, and Republicans running for local offices are already expecting to catch part of the Bush Backlash. But this is the first time I've seen a party act in a manor that indicates they believe their very party affiliation is a detriment...so it's better if voters don't think about it.
That's pretty profound, and may be rather telling about what Republicans are expecting in November.
I'd be interested to hear from others in other parts of the country to see if they are observing the same phenonemon.
Intersting side note, there's one Democrat in Maryland that has a billboard up of him standing next to Hillary Clinton....he's using his association with Hillary as a selling point. That means that strategists have detected a groundswell in part of the public that actually believes aligning yourself with Hillary will be positive for your campaign. That's very interesting indeed.
Sound off about signs in your area, tell me what you see.
One of my big pet peeves is what I call the castration of the American male. By this, I mean the penchant in our society for the last, oh, 20 years, to portray everything that is intrinsically male to be negative attributes that need to be cast off.
You can see it everywhere you go; on television, in books and in movies, everything men have a natural bent for is cast in a negative light. On commercials, you see the classic couple, the bumbling, clueless husband, and the condescending, smart wife who "tolerates" his foolery.
Yet nobody seems put out by it. And people wonder why men's values are so all over the map these days.
I think that we would find, if we were to cease the constant assault on the American male psyche, that perhaps men's natural instincts aren't as bad as we are constantly told it is.
For millions of years, being male seemed to work just fine. I really don't think all of our natural urges suddenly became irrelevant.
We ARE naturally competitive. That is behind our drive to achieve, to strive to be better, to be something greater than our parts.
Socially, the drive to be the best is being doused. Everyone gets a trophy these days after the little league game. Everyone's kid has their own bumper sticker about their kid doing such and such at school. But you can't douse a million years of instinct. And when you deny that part of a young man, you don't squash it, you just force it to come out in other ways....ways you as a parent no longer have control over.
You get bullies, delinquents, and boys who grow up having no concept of being able to direct their natural instincts toward something positive...because we tried to deny those instincts' existence.
Of course men want to collect the most "toys." That comes from eons of instincts of providing for their family. Try to squash that, and what you get is men who still have the urge, but no direction. SO when your husband spends the check on a new DVD player instead of something necessary for the household, that's why.
Yes, men are sexually agressive creatures. No, you can't control that for long. Does that mean they are naturally unfaithful? No. It means that when a wife or girlfriend tries to control him via sex, eventually his instincts will kick in and he'll get it from somewhere else. And the better the man, the more opportunities for that "somewhere else" there will be. Hen peck him, and eventually he'll explode.
But usually by the time the American male is maried it's too late. It starts at birth. It starts with parents today jumping on their son for demonstrating natural male instincts without providing another outlet. Yes, you should stop him from beating up another kid in the sandbox and teach him why it's wrong. But that's where most parent's stop. You need to find another outlet for them.
The bitter irony of it all is that women probably suffer more from the castration of the American male than the men do. More and more unsatisfied with their men, but don't know why. Cosmo is telling them everything they do is fine (while also telling them they neeed to lose weight they couldn't possibly lose) and everything you do is wrong. When they get you to see things their way, they can't figure out why they're so irritated with you.
I see couples like this all the time, and it's like nails on a chalkboard.
There's nothing intrinsically wrong with being a man. It's what you were born to be.
You can see it everywhere you go; on television, in books and in movies, everything men have a natural bent for is cast in a negative light. On commercials, you see the classic couple, the bumbling, clueless husband, and the condescending, smart wife who "tolerates" his foolery.
Yet nobody seems put out by it. And people wonder why men's values are so all over the map these days.
I think that we would find, if we were to cease the constant assault on the American male psyche, that perhaps men's natural instincts aren't as bad as we are constantly told it is.
For millions of years, being male seemed to work just fine. I really don't think all of our natural urges suddenly became irrelevant.
We ARE naturally competitive. That is behind our drive to achieve, to strive to be better, to be something greater than our parts.
Socially, the drive to be the best is being doused. Everyone gets a trophy these days after the little league game. Everyone's kid has their own bumper sticker about their kid doing such and such at school. But you can't douse a million years of instinct. And when you deny that part of a young man, you don't squash it, you just force it to come out in other ways....ways you as a parent no longer have control over.
You get bullies, delinquents, and boys who grow up having no concept of being able to direct their natural instincts toward something positive...because we tried to deny those instincts' existence.
Of course men want to collect the most "toys." That comes from eons of instincts of providing for their family. Try to squash that, and what you get is men who still have the urge, but no direction. SO when your husband spends the check on a new DVD player instead of something necessary for the household, that's why.
Yes, men are sexually agressive creatures. No, you can't control that for long. Does that mean they are naturally unfaithful? No. It means that when a wife or girlfriend tries to control him via sex, eventually his instincts will kick in and he'll get it from somewhere else. And the better the man, the more opportunities for that "somewhere else" there will be. Hen peck him, and eventually he'll explode.
But usually by the time the American male is maried it's too late. It starts at birth. It starts with parents today jumping on their son for demonstrating natural male instincts without providing another outlet. Yes, you should stop him from beating up another kid in the sandbox and teach him why it's wrong. But that's where most parent's stop. You need to find another outlet for them.
The bitter irony of it all is that women probably suffer more from the castration of the American male than the men do. More and more unsatisfied with their men, but don't know why. Cosmo is telling them everything they do is fine (while also telling them they neeed to lose weight they couldn't possibly lose) and everything you do is wrong. When they get you to see things their way, they can't figure out why they're so irritated with you.
I see couples like this all the time, and it's like nails on a chalkboard.
There's nothing intrinsically wrong with being a man. It's what you were born to be.
Arrrgh! I'm going crazy. I'm on the verge of achieving one of my biggest dreams, a book deal. The deal is with a big role-playing game company and may be the first in a series of books. But I will have to sign a nondisclosure agreement, meaning I can't talk about it publicly, so all I can do is tell close friends and family, which means I can't splurge all over role-playing boards and what-not that I tend to frequent.
[Tick voice]Irony, what a cold cruel mistress you are![/Tick voice]
[Tick voice]Irony, what a cold cruel mistress you are![/Tick voice]
FEBRUARY 2010
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JANUARY 2010
DECEMBER 2009
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
NOVEMBER 2009
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30