"Amendment 2" or "If You Care About Your Grandpappy"

OK, so I know this is going to end up on Facebook, which is OK with me, but it's also totally against my usual inclination to be annoyed by political crap on people's pages.

AAAAANYWAY, I'm bored, and I'm waiting for GA tickets, so I'm gonna write up a post about the second constitutional initiative on Florida's ballot.

While I have no clue (and I mean no clue) why people care if gays get married, that has nothing to do with this post. You can argue with me about that later. I just want everyone, before they get carried away with their emotional voting, to read the language of the proposed amendment. To save you some internet searching, I'll quote it in relevant part here:

"[N]o other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized."

There are two (2) reasons why you need to vote "no" on this amendment. (Well, there are more, but there are two that aren't subjective.)

1) THERE IS ALREADY A LAW IN FLORIDA THAT SAYS MARRIAGE IS EXCLUSIVELY BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN.
This is just an amendment on principle. It's an EMOTIONAL move to establish something that is already in print. Does this remind anyone else of John Kerry and those dogs?

2) THIS BILL, WHILE TRYING TO PREVENT HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGES, OVEREXTENDS ITSELF INTO THE LIVES OF THE ELDERLY.
That's right. That's my main contention. Most (young) people don't realize that senior citizens get stripped of some pension benefits if they get remarried. That's why most older Americans choose not to remarry. Instead, they live in what's considered a "domestic partnership," where they can qualify for joint health care benefits and whatnot.

So, while this initiative is proposing to "protect marriage," it's really hurting the freedoms of a class of people I KNOW we want to protect. It's not fair for government to basically require senior citizens not to get married, and then tell them that they can't enjoy a domestic partnership either. And we want domestic partnerships for them. Maybe that way, they'll stop transmitting VD to each other.

Typos Found: 5 Typos Fixed: 5

In my never-ending appreciation of irony, I'll go ahead and point out that someone--you know who you are--found typos in my blog. My excuse (which still stands firm) is that I update, at times, from my iPhone, and the auto-correct feature on it sometimes oversteps its bounds. Evidence for its culpability: every post that had a typo was written on the iPhone.

I feel this is conclusive.

In any event, this post serves as an open invitation for anyone who reads my blog (which should be considerably more people now that it's feeding on Facebook) to comment if I misspell/mistype something.

Also, let this serve as an invitation to peruse this blog, which is among my favorites:
www.typoeradicationadvancementleague.com

The "L" Word Is Not "Lesbian."

I've heard several accounts of how relationships should progress, and I don't buy any of them. I've had a couple of years to think about what relationships are and what makes them effective. Yes, effective. Not fruitful, because even I'm not that idealistic.

Some say, "Everyone settles." That's crap. I won't settle. I'll compromise, and don't argue that that's semantics. I know exactly what I want, and I'll get that. If it comes with a few unanticipated extras, so be it.

And it's pretty basic, really. All I want is someone who impresses me and who knows when to tell me to shut up.

Dating as a way of experiencing others to see what you like. Absolutely. BUT. I add one qualifier. I won't date or waste my time on anyone I know I can't marry. Suddenly, it makes sense why a lot of Jewish guys won't date outside their faith. If I can't see myself ending up with you, there is no point in my being there. That is not to say that, if the experience turns out otherwise, it was worth nothing. You add things to the "I can't marry somebody who..." list, and you move on.

Now, about that L word. I hate it, and I hate being pressured to use it. When I'm in love with someone, I feel like I could be with that person forever: have kids, grow old, and forget his name in my age-induced dymensia. Though I've had snippets of this feeling in the past, I can't honestly say that I've ever fully felt it. Besides my friends, I've never looked at someone and thought that I could talk to them every singe day for forever. I get bored of people very quickly, and it makes me wonder whether I'll every truly love someone. Especially since I'll never settle.

Product Review: Intuition Razor

Besides all the negatives involved with shaving in general, the only problem with this razor is getting that infuriating Jewel song stuck in your head each time you shave.

Hmm.

On Monday, I drove for four hours in silence. My thoughts were enough to fill up that time, and then some. I am not sure if this is good or bad, but I am sure that I didn't want the radio or my phone interrupting me.

My Hands Are Shaking

Every time I read something written about my Mom, it gets me frustrated to the point where I shake all over. I had a friend call me about some blog posts about my mom, and I just read them. Not only is it embarrassing, but it is also so upsetting to see the crap people say without any regard for who may be reading. The Internet, for all its benefits, is a coward's tool. Maybe I'm being ironic. I dunno.

I've seen my entire family trashed. Mostly, they've been trashed by criminals and, in my experience, perjurers. I've seen people lie about ME and my actions straight to a judge's face.

It's simply sad that people eat up the yellow crap. You can talk about small-town politicians all you want, but in the end, they're still small-town politicians, and you're still nobody.

I thought this would help, but I'm still livid.

The Beginning of Something Dreadful, Maybe.

Today, I started The Wire from Season One, Episode One. Pray for me.

Musings

I recall a time--I may have been 11--when I found an Aerosmith CD among my sister's stack of jewel cases. I couldn't stop staring at the image of a cow's udder pierced with a gold ring. I couldn't tear my eyes away, partly because I knew it was a perverse image.

Once, I kissed a guy whose chest smelled of lime. In the morning, his breath tasted like cigar smoke.

"If Thatcher and Reagan Had Bred, Democrats Would Be A Lot More Scared Than They Are Now."

Upon my asking what date it was, one of my students raised his hand last Saturday and said, "Miss, it's the ides of March." I almost cried I was so happy.

One if the teachers with whom I work told his class a story from his vacation, during which he mistakenly found the spot at which Julius Caesar died. ON THE IDES OF MARCH!! His story made me squirm, and it gave me chills.

Often, I wish I had more time with these kids so I can teach them everything I know. Sometimes, I see them get excited about learning stuff, and that excites me.

NPR and Its Effects on Idle Youths.

I donated $50 to public radio this week and felt really good about it. This is the point at which you (the reader) jump up and down and yell at me that I'm not a real libertarian.


I can't help that they put on such fantastic programming. "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me" is like crack cocaine!

Things I Resent/Animal Symbolism in C.S. Lewis.

Taking a new direction.
For a while, I was reading that "Stuff White People Like" blog. It's hilarious, but after a while, I found myself resenting it. My conclusion is that I see too much of myself in it.

To an extent, I resent myself for judging people based on how they write. Really, I don't resent that I do that, but I had to add something to fulfill the "Things" I Resent part.

Seriously, folks, don't resign yourselves to the thought that "you can't spell." It's just as sad as those who simply "hate math." Depressing!

Today I reread The Horse and His Boy. I'm hoping to get through Prince Caspian before the movie comes out. Anyway, in the former, Lewis writes a scene where these horses are being chased by a lion. Later, we find that the lion was none other than the Jesus-lion, Aslan. Although plainly obvious imagery, Lewis still feels the need to point out that Aslan chased the horses so that they would run through their fatigue in order to warn the king of Archenland in time that he could plan a defense against an impeding army of horsemen.

It's taking me way too long to tie this metaphor into law school, which is what I did when driving home from the airport today.

Pfft.

Policeman

The other day, I was sitting in the courthouse for a long period of time. Nevermind why I was there, as it is of no consequence. For most of the time I was sitting there, I was accompanied by, among others, a policeman. As I listened to him talk, I was appalled at the shit that was coming out of his mouth.

First, he tried to convince me that using a taser was as perfunctory as shaking hands. I wish I'd have taken notes or something, as I can't really recreate it, but the tone with which he talked about this tool was airy. He even mentioned that tasing is an appropriate thing to do preemptively, to calm someone down before they get "rowdy."

After the discussion about tasing, and after he noted how appalled I looked, he moved on. I'd told him that most laws are outdated, and that legislature needed to cut back on inanely making laws. I brought in the example of the drinking age, and how it's really just a bullying mechanism for a federal government that constantly oversteps its bounds, etc. He said, "What I say to those sorts of laws is, why not?"

His justification for laws was, "Why not?"

I don't think I need to say why this upsets me. Your liberties are being taken away, and your answer is, "Why not?"

It bothers me that I'm fighting for your freedom as well as mine.

Conformity

Just to add a little bit to the end of my last post:
Using established norms is shunned by most free-thinkers. Probably because they're free-thinkers. However, I think it is not only important, but also beneficial to use established norms and ideals to your advantage. If you can manipulate systems to your advantage, I feel it is necessary to do so.

For example:
WHY is the Ron Paul campaign not using phone banks, television commercials (although I'd heard about one out there somewhere), etc. to get out its message? I'm not entirely sure, although I'd guess that it's because "mainstream" doesn't appeal to those running the campaign. You have to seem mainstream in order to seem legitimate to the typical mainstream voter. And, frankly, that's for whom they need to be vying. That normal (yes, used as a noun here) who thinks, "You know, that Ron Paul has some good ideas," but won't ever end up voting for him because he didn't have the organization to get people out there on and before election day.

So, is it because he didn't have the organization, or is it because the Ron Paul campaign doesn't think its base of supporters is socially capable of reaching out to mainstream America (see previous post)?

In either case, there should've been TV ads. Where is all this money going?!?

Some Observations on Typical Libertarians.

This weekend I met a whole new group of folks while campaigning for Ron Paul. Once more, I was severely disappointed with the caliber of person I met. One or two of the folks seemed decent. They were normal, insightful, well-informed. And they expressed their views with civility and clarity.

There were, however, several of the "typical" libertarians about. I'm defining "typical" not as the majority, but rather as the ones who stand out most in my eyes. The typical libertarian is that ubiquitous crazy. He's the one who carries around flags and yells at people in the street and protests other candidates' rallies. He's the one who gets the normal people involved in his bullshit, and he's the one who ends up making ALL libertarians look insane to the rest of the world.

The typical libertarian has intelligence. He does. What he doesn't have is any semblance of social skill. Oh, and he's a male. He's usually obnoxious to those who don't "get it." If he gets attention--for even a brief moment--from a female, he announces it to all who will hear, for this attention is novel.

Each group of libertarians has its one guy--usually the one blessed with naturally good looks--who leads the pack. The other guys in the group look up to him and envy his ease with women. They don't understand that, really, it's not that difficult.

Free Talk Live has a "shrine of female listeners," depicting those women who "validate" that they're listeners of the show. I get it, females don't usually listen. However, I've not pinpointed the exact reason for actually having this webpage. Is it so libertarian boys can get off on looking at liberty-minded women? Is it to prove that liberty-minded women exist?

As I'm writing this, I'm thinking that it might be the other way around. The typical libertarian woman seeks male attention with her intelligence and her "wit," (in quotes because the wit usually only appeals to its intended audience, and I am of the opinion that real wit is more universally accepted than that). It's not in her nature to seek male attention with her looks. Reasons for this will go unexplored in this entry; there are just too many. This, I think, is the reason that there is a shrine of female listeners: to give the typical libertarian female an outlet for flaunting herself physically. It was an untapped market (and arguably should've remained so).


This week, I was told by a guy working on the Giuliani campaign that I'd "changed his views on libertarians." I'll admit that I'm far from normal. I'm borderline insane, even. I do, however, think it's OK to conform to an extent. As long as you know that you're doing it. You acknowledge it, you accept it, and you take off with it.



Disclaimer: if you think I'm talking about you in this blog, I'm probably not. I tend not to befriend most of the "typicals."

Let's Do the Damn Thing.

Most of you would call me an "armchair," to which I take no offense. However, I have sat for too long on the sideline, watching others being made fools of. Many of you are too smart for your own good, and I acknowledge that it's probably not within your control. Many of you consistently need a cause, and I cannot fault you to the extent that yours overlaps with mine. Many of you don't really know anything about libertarianism, except that you have a friend who is one.

You've all heard me call myself, at one time or another, "your friendly neighborhood libertarian," and I take this title more seriously than it may sound.

I'm extraordinarily regular. I guess I mean mainstream. I am swayed by advertisers and I watch J.J. Abrams' shows and I appreciate designer bags. And it is because of--not in spite of--this that I find my opinions to be different. I shun those who shun the status quo, but I attempt to do it with the subjectivity that I find they so consciously lack.

Read. Or don't read. Debate. Or glaze over.

Just know that, if you care to listen, I'll be voicing my opinions on this here blog, and I intend to remain, respectfully,

Your Friendly Neighborhood Libertarian.