Monday, July 30, 2012

Batteries are primative

Dr. Michio Kaku says that Batteries are primitive. Check it out.

He has a point but not in the way he is thinking. For years I've been saying our next important breakthrough needs to be in batteries. Consider that many of the technologies first exhibited in the original Star Trek TV show are not available, cell phones (communicators, though not as powerful yet, still a huge advancement), the doors on the ship (yes, believe it or not), and other things, even tricorders to some extent.

But not a battery powerful enough to emit a plasma beam, or energize a shuttle craft. Batteries are primitive. But we don't need to be building better batteries to hold energy for use later.

Consider this for a moment. We need to eliminate batteries altogether. We need to build power sources or portals to supply unending power and there are many advances in that area. There are some major changes coming. Changes that will not elimiate the petroleum industry as we still make more products out of oil than you know about. But the energy companies, may simply disappear. So I've been investing in energy companies. Why? Because they are working toward better batteries and better energy systems. Although it is quite possible the true advance may come from an unforeseen sector, much like robotics has made great strides through toy companies and the military (though that isn't such a big surprise).

Here is a video about this. Don't believe any of it if you don't want to. That's not the point in my sharing it with you. Thinking in this direction, however, is. Check out: "Tesla The race to zero point free energy. I've known for decades what a raw deal Nikola Tesla (and the American and World public) got. The powers that be really put the screws to us in wanting to charge money and become rich at the expense of the public. Many, or even most of the things shown in this video may be just hype or at least not what they are professed to be, but it does prove the point that there are other ways of looking at energy production.

...these features chiefly interest the scientific man, the thinker and reasoner. There is another feature which affords us still more satisfaction and enjoyment, and which is of still more universal interest, chiefly because of its bearing upon the welfare of mankind. Gentlemen, there is an influence which is getting strong and stronger day by day, which shows itself more and more in all departments of human activity, and influence most fruitful and beneficial—the influence of the artist. It was a happy day for the mass of humanity when the artist felt the desire of becoming a physician, an electrician, an engineer or mechanician or—whatnot—a mathematician or a financier; for it was he who wrought all these wonders and grandeur we are witnessing. It was he who abolished that small, pedantic, narrow-grooved school teaching which made of an aspiring student a galley-slave, and he who allowed freedom in the choice of subject of study according to one's pleasure and inclination, and so facilitated development.” Nikola Tesla

Just possibly there are ways we can eliminate our current ways of energy production that are so detrimental to our world and our lifestyles. We need to support these, even if they lead no where at times. We not only need to think outside the box, we need to throw the box away.

...the idea gradually took hold of me that the earth might be used in place of the wire, thus dispensing with artificial conductors altogether. The immensity of the globe seemed an unsurmountable obstacle but after a prolonged study of the subject I became satisfied that the undertaking was rational...” Nikola Tesla

Maybe Tesla didn't have all the answers, but had we gone his direction with Humanity at mind and not the bottom dollar, had the US Government perhaps funded these types of things toward making them free, had we not been so capitalistically minded, and had the heads of industry not been so greedy and money minded, if we had just suffered through it a bit longer way back when, perhaps we would now have free energy. I know the over $200/mo I spend alone for myself for energy could easily go to other things far more interesting to me.

But we shall not satisfy ourselves simply with improving steam and explosive engines or inventing new batteries; we have something much better to work for, a greater task to fulfill. We have to evolve means for obtaining energy from stores which are forever inexhaustible, to perfect methods which do not imply consumption and waste of any material whatever.” Nikola Tesla

We really don't need to be paying our money every month and so much of it, to Public (or private) utility departments for energy, PUDs need to disappear. Power should be free. So should healthcare but that's another issue. If we're going to try at all to move toward the utopian society exemplified in Star Trek (and why shouldn't we?), we need to be able to use all we want, to be power users to the utmost sense, without it destroying the planet. We have embarked on the information age and passed that. It is powered by electricity and maybe that too is primitive. But for now we need to have all the energy we need and then some, free, and without polluting either our environment or life forms.

Think about it.

Sunday, July 29, 2012

Two new Psychology articles free through August

Just to share, today I finished two non fiction ebook articles to be online very soon:

Some Notes on Field Theory, Albert's Mind, and the Status Quo: The Necessity of Contextualism in Psychology

and

Psycho-neurologically Approaching a Field Theory Understanding of Schizophrenia via Research of a Non-normative, Non-pathological Syndrome: Synesthesia, and the need for more information

I know, you probably didn't expect that, right? But I do have a degree in Psychology from Western Washington University in their Awareness and Reasoning Division for Phenomenology, and mental processes and systems.

I now have them up on Smashwords. Oh, my God, what a pain that was! Now I know why I usually hae someone doing this for me (Zilyon Publishing).

Anyway, in celebration of my bithday month (August 30th being the day) here is the URL and coupon code (SY75X) for the double ebook Good through August:

https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/209495

It says it is pending review right now, but I believe it's available. It's pretty bare though, after all it's more a scientific journal article than any kind of popular reading. I took five hours yesterday finalizing editing on them toward making them ebooks and I just spent over three frustrating hours processing them on Smashwords, the first time for my actually getting something up online on my own after having it fail repeatedly all morning.

So, the info is all there, but not all pretty with graphs and special formatting (some of which was there when I started). eBooks kind of suck for fomatting to begin with and have a long with to go if you ask me.

Anyway finally now on to other things....

Monday, July 23, 2012

What is your Passion? Your Life? Or your Religion?

I follow the "Buddha Dharma ",as it is said. That is different than being a "Buddhist" in my view.

But my passion in that realm is, Life. Something that many seem not to understand or agree with.

You see, to focus too much on one's beliefs is or certainly can be, missing the point. When the religion becomes the end all of one's focus, something has gotten lost in the translation. But then, that's a point of view from someone following Buddha Dharma and therein lay a difference perhaps, between someone like that (me) and a, "Buddhist".

People think I just get down on Western Religions, but that's simply not true. I tend to get down on religions or things that turn into a religion. I've met many "Buddhists" who haven't exactly "lost the point" of it all, but rather, they never really knew it in the first place. This can easily happen to people who were born into a religion. Not that "Buddhism" is a religion, it's really more of a mind discipline and some people or groups have tried to turn it into a religion. Humans seem to be perdisposed to turn anything into a kind of "religion".

Live your Life. Practice your beliefs within your Life. Don't make your beliefs your Life. It's a subtle, but important, difference.

A therapist I was seeing years ago told me one day that her son wanted to move into a Monastery in order to be a good "Buddhist". She told him, "No, you have to practice your beliefs within your Life, not leaves your life to practice your beliefs from without. That's harder, but it's where you need to do it. To do so within a protected environment (such as focusing only or even too much, on your beliefs in Life) isn't really following your beliefs, because then the beliefs become the focus and not the Life and it can turn into a kind of "spiritual masturbation". Beliefs are there to guide you through your Life. Not to become your life. Not to take your Life over completely. To hijack it. Something that has happened all too frequently. Why? Because we are lazy, basically.

I think, maybe, we do need those who are fanatics (Nuns, Priests, etc.). But we have to remember, they are so immersed themselves that we have to take what they say with a grain of understanding, outside of what they are telling us. As I said, we tend to be lazy in Life and take what we're told and just do it. Why think about it when it's much easier to just simply do what we're told is right to do. But we need to think, to decide and act. Not just act. Love Life. It was a gift. A gift from whom? See?

No?

Understand that those who do live in a monestery, have access to "levelers" and moderators to their beliefs. These are their teachers, appropriate books, the other more knowledgeable people who surround them on a daily basis. People on the outside trying to do practice this kind of intensity, tend to get lost and don't have the checks and balances these othes do. That's why there are so many nuts out here who believe such really weird things about their religion or beliefs. No real checks and balances are watching them, honing them to refined thought and understanding.

The same can happen with people who are readers. You have to read, yes, but you have to read the "right stuff". If you read everything, especially if you believe it all, then you can easily get lost. Once you start off on a trail that is incorrect, you begin to enforce those wrong beliefs with more nonsense. I've known many people like that.

Reading requires you to have critical thinking involved. Critical thinking as well as cross checking. I've always tried to use the old journalist's method, three basic sources to verify what I will accept to believe and even then I try to be aware and ready to update my beliefs with even more correct information. But even then you can be wrong. Still living in that way is far better than someone who simply reads and believes without using critical thinking. Just accepting someone as an "authority" isn't always enough. The people at "Jonestown" had simply accepted their leader, Jim Jones, as their "authority" next only to God. And most of them are now dead.

So learn as you can, think critically about what you believe. This is something that fits well into even a deeply involved religious person. Because if someone feeds you nonsense, you have to be able to tell between nonsense and what is considered "real" within your religion. Too many Theists simply believe what they are told. No "God" wants that. Any "God" would want their people to believe what that "God" wants them to believe toward appropriate worship. Therein lay another issue, "Worship". It seems to require non critical thought, just acceptance. But if you are being told incorrect information, you are not following what you think you are following or wanting to be following.

So use your brian that "God" gave you.

What is your Passion then? Your Life? Or, your Religion?

At least be sure what you are passionate about is what you are wanting to be passionate about. But even beyond that, consider that first and foremost you are meant to live your life and the rules, dictates and religion that you choose to believe in and follow (or are born into or in some cases forced to believe in) are really and fundementally there to help you do just that. They are not however there to hijack you into focusing solely on those rules, dictates or religion.

Life is good, don't ruin it by thinking you were meant to be a mental slave. No good "God" would ever require that and when people start to tell you that, allow the warning sign to explode in your brain. Begin to look at them more critically and take back your life. The problem at that point is usually that you would have to make major changes to your life and lifestyle and we are, after all, rather lazy as beings and hate change.

Live your Life, love your Life and when you find you aren't living and loving your Life, look at the reasons for that change or conditions and make the necessary changes to bring back the joy in your Life that everyone deserves to have.

Sunday, July 22, 2012

Picketing Grief events - Westboro Bastards, I mean, Church, strikes again

The Westboro "Church" is at it again. These people are truly God's worst pond scum. Remember them? They like to picket the funerals of US Serviceman who were gay. I'm sure their "God" is so proud. Let's set the tone here....


From The Examiner.com:
The Westboro Church plans to picket the Aurora shooting memorial service

Now they want to picket the memorial service of people killed in the Aurora "Batman" shootings. Really?

These are the same people who like to make anyone grieving, grieve more for things they had nothing to do with.

From Huffington Post:

Sage Stallone Death: Westboro Baptist Church Plans To Picket Actor's Funeral

Really, religious people? Really?

There is hope in all this however, also from Huffington Post:

Texas A&M Students Form Human Wall To Block Westboro Baptist Church Protestors From Soldier Roy Tisdale's Funeral

Hear hear!

I really think, and there may be issues I don't see here that need to be addressed, I do admit that, but in the initial consideration it sounds great, wouldn't it be great if we had a new Federal Law (yes, Federal, not State, as some States will undeniably wimp out on this for whatever reason... Texas), to block anyone from picketing any grief service, funeral or memorial service. And you can't just call anything that. I'm talking honest to "God" funerals, that would be burying someone, or their funeral/memorial service.

Even the families of serial killers deserve to be able to lay their once, loved one, to rest. The family of these people are not criminals? They are doubly in grief. A loved one died, and they know the loved one had done horrible things. But they don't know that person as that kind of person, they know that person as the cute kid they raised or grew up with. So, back off on them.

The thought that people who are devestated, who are laying to rest their loved ones, no matter who they are or what the deceased has done, the thought of their being further attacked (because I'm sure it would feel like that to people at that time and in that state of mind), is criminal and should be illegal. It is immoral, unetheical, and sick, so why shouldn't it also be illegal?

I also think (obviously) that any "church" or "religion" that allows this kind of thing, or thinks this way, should be sent to prison, one at a time, or en masse. Especially if they can be sent to a prison containing a family member of one of the deceased whom they have picketed. Let them have an extended period of time wherein they can "discuss" this situation and their "beliefs" with them in an environment that enhances "discourse" and reconsideration.

The Westboro "Church". Right. A Church. Give me a break.

Update: I'm very happy to note that at least for the family of Military personnel, something is being done about all this. "Westboro Baptist Church protesters will soon be severely limited in their ability to disrupt military funerals, after Congress passed a sweeping veterans bill this week that includes restrictions on such demonstrations."

Friday, July 20, 2012

Dark Knight Rises public shooting and the missing shooter

The "Dark Knight Rises" Colorado shooting was and still is, a nightmare. It is now being called the largest public killing of this type in American history. James Holmes walked into a theater and started randomly killing people. It's a typical, if also unusual story. Man walks into a public area full of people and starts killing. But this time, this one came armed for bear, for a bear that might shoot back.

Here is another view on this topic "If only someone else had a gun".

That blogger ended by saying:

[If you think:] "If someone with a concealed weapon was there, they could have stopped this man."
"No, you have it all wrong wrong. The problem is not that there should have been more firearms at Cafe Racer. The problem is that Stawicki had one."

He was talking about a different public killing situation. I would argue that it wasn't that James Holmes today, had one at all. It's what he was doing with it. It's an old argument, but a valid one. He died his hair red, told police he was the "Joker", I'm thinking mental illness. It's always mental illness. You cannot protect yourself against it in this area of guns and killings. So this is outside of the law. He is reported as a highly intelligent student of a university, even though he was withdrawing. So he would have been fully capable of building a weapon of mass destruction, rather than just buying one.

But I wanted to take a different tact and point a few things out. Things we need to consider for this situation, especially if you think someone with a gun, some citizen, could have stopped things. This is not about bravado, but reality. It's easy to say, "I would have shot the bastard!" Another thing to live through it and act on it.

If someone were there who had a gun, maybe they could have stopped this from happening. That is true.

Maybe, if there were at least an off duty cop, or a military type off duty and carrying, or a Special Agent of some sort (FBI, CIA, DEA, whatever). They could have stopped it.

But when something like this happens, what would you do? It's quite possible someone was in there and they did have a gun with them. But do you pull it and use it? If you are well trained, the answer is most likely, yes.

But if you are someone who owned a gun, with little or no real training in this kind of situation, what do you do? If you pull and fire and it was a joke, or a promotional for the movie, you could be in serious trouble and anyone with a sense of sanity will be aware of that (where are the George Zimmerman's of the world at times like these and would he have had the balls to stand up against someone like this who wasn't a teenager with no apparrent scary weaponry?).

When someone walks in like this and throws a gas grenade of some sort and starts shooting and you can't tell if it's real, as it's kind of dark, it's an entertainment venue, there is shooting on screen, it's an action movie, it's pretty damn hard to tell what to do, and what is right to do.

I can only consider how I would view what I would do in a similar situation.

First I would have to notice it, second I would have to evaluate the situation, this all takes time. As he started shooting, I would have to see that they weren't blanks. Is it worth it to take a chance and shoot someone shooting blanks and later find out you murdered someone?

So I would actually have to wait to see someone killed, most likely. I could say, "Well, I would see a gun pulled, pull mine and kill him."

But would it happen like that? Most likely not, in reality.

UPDATE: NPR Article 1/29/2013 - Armed 'Good Guys' And The Realities Of Facing A Gunman

I would need concrete proof that this was a threat that wasn't going to stop, who was harming people, who was a homicidal threat and who needed to be stopped or killed. IN this situation shooting to disable isn't a great idea, shoot for center of mass, maybe a head shot, but not until after a center of mass shot. If you hit them in the center, wearing a flak jacket, it won't be a killing shot. Hopefully a stun shot only, giving you time to aim for the head. You have to be aware of what or who is behind him and where the bullet might ricochet off of. All this in what, a few seconds? That's plenty of time for him to kill and maim others. And all this through fog and possibly some kind of tear gas.

So you have to first notice what is really happening, for real. You have to draw your weapon. Now, do you yell a warning like they do in the movies and like police are usually required to do? Do you let him know, "Hey pal? I'm here, I have lethal force, I'm going to kill you if you don't stop!"

Do you take time to say all that? Give him a chance to stop?

No! You kill him. Better he dies not knowing you exist. If he shoots, and lays down his arms, then you are done, you yell your warning, you get him on the ground, stay away from him so you don't become a victim. Now you have to worry about the police coming in and seeing you with a gun. Where can that lead? Do they shoot you? Will you die at the hands of law enforcement when you are doing a heroic thing and maybe he will just go to jail?

The other side of this coin is the complaints about gun laws. If no one had guns, this couldn't happen.

Wrong. This wouldn't happen so frequently. Guns will always be around. I could make a gun in my garage.

So that really isn't an argument and we come back around to, if someone were there with a gun, it could have been stopped.

Again, that might be true, if there were someone there and armed, if they pulled the gun, if they made all the right observations and conclusions, if they performed well under the situation of intense combat and up against a well-armed and defended attacker, if they got off a shot that stopped or killed the attacker, if they didn't shoot him in the flak jacket merely alerting the terrorist to another attacker and then the "hero" gets shot and killed in the end and then he goes back to killing indiscriminately.

That's a lot of ifs.

ban guns! i'm so tired of the fact that this is still a debate in this country. change the fucking gun laws. i want the right to NOT bear arms!

We have to be careful about these kinds of knee jerk reactions to things that happen like this. It could have been a lot worse. Holmes rigged his apartment with bombs. He is smart. If he couldn't get access to guns, he could build bombs. Could? He did! He could have brought them to the theater. Consider that guns kill people one at a time, one shot at a time. Some can kill many people one after another. It's all about what kind of cartridge, the type of firearm and magazines, the number of shooters. But think, suicide bomber. If he couldn't have gotten firearms, he could have brought bombs, dropped them every so often all over the theater.

He could have used incindieary bombs. Rather than his killer as many as he did, he could have killed everyone in that room, at once. They could have died in  an explosion followed up by fire, very, very hot fire. People in other theater rooms could have died. Be careful what you wish for, because mentally unbalanced people who want to kill, will.

And guns have nothing to do with it. They just seem easier to us. But there are more very much more effective ways to kill. Guns give you the "pleasure" of killing yourself. A bomb is much more effective, though you only get the rush from killing after the fact, unless you really are a suicide bomber. I would rather be shot, with a chance at getting out than blown up, and burned to death with no chance.

So think about yelling how bad guns are. Because althought the NRA will talk about our rights to own guns, they also limit people in how many people they can kill. One good bomb can far outweigh anything any gun can do.

So, if there were a lot of people in there with guns,maybe he would have been stopped. There was a bank in Texas that was getting robbed a lot, friend of mine told me today, and the bank posted for people to bring guns to the bank with them and the robberies stopped. Sounds like an urban myth to me, but it does prove a point. Like nuclear deterrence, if everyone has something, it's stupid to pull a gun, or you just get killed if you do.

So do we need more guns at the theaters or metal detectors or full body scanners? Is that how we want to live? How often does this happen? Really? Not very often, so don't start panicking.

This all sounds to me that were there a few more people there with guns, IF they had proper training, this wouldn't have been so horrendous an event. We may never be able to stop this kind of thing completely, but we can certainly take steps to alleviate how disastrous it can be. People who do have guns legally, need to be better trained if they are carrying them in public. Because if they are carrying them to use them, then they need to be ready and able to pull them, and use them properly. Because it's not all about the guns existing in the location, it's all about how they are used and how fast they are used effectively and appropriately.

I like to think if I were there and armed, I could have taken in what was happening and reacted, pulling, aiming and firing. Double tap to the mid torso, one higher and a third slower shot at the head. I'm lucky. I tend not to shake in intense situations, but not everyone can say that. Shooting is all about accuracy and intimidation. But I'll take accuracy over intimidation anytime.

So in the end is the issue that the killer had a gun in the first place? No. Because there are several fail points in this situation and no one consideration really explains it or solves it.

My best thoughts go out to the family and friends and those slain and shot. I wish them well, as I'm sure we all do.

For more, the Daily Herald article.

"FAIRFAX, VA—In the wake of last evening's horrific shooting that killed 12 in a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, representatives from the National Rifle Association asked all Americans to please try, in this moment of sadness and grief, to remember the myriad great and indispensable things that guns do for us every day. "While the events of last night are truly tragic, I sincerely hope that no one at any point forgets how truly terrific guns are, and how they enrich all of our lives on a regular basis," said NRA executive vice president Wayne LaPierre, adding that the nation's citizens must open up their hearts in this time of mourning and realize how simply unlivable a life without gun ownership would be. "From hunting, to protecting one's home from prowlers, to target practice, why, there is practically no end to the ways in which guns are constantly improving our lives every moment of every day. As awful as this shooting was, none of us should ever forget that." LaPierre then closed his remarks with a direct plea to the people of Aurora, asking them to try and imagine where they would be today without the citizen's right to bear arms."

This is an anomaly, there are no answers. Now we will have to suffer through people and their agendas about guns for how long? But this isn't a decision making kind of situation. Obviously to me, he's mentally unbalanced. For the NRA to be speaking and saying these things at this time, is ludicrous and crass.

Someone told me this:

"Asked about the connection, the film's director Christopher Nolan said: "I'm not sure how to address something that bizarre, to be honest. I really don't have an answer for it, it's a very peculiar comment to make."

Please. It's a movie. Leave the director and artists alone. I'm sure they feel bad enough, but they have nothing to do with a mentally unbalanced individual who has chosen to be destructive. The film has no real bearing on the situation. He could have just as easily gone to shoot up a Disney film showing. Just be glad he didn't, or there would be masses of young childred dead. Count your blessings.

From EW.comhttp://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/07/20/christopher-nolan-dark-knight-rises-shooting-statement/:

Christopher Nolan has released a statement following the tragic events in Colorado in the early hours of July 20 — when a gunman opened fire at midnight screening of The Dark Knight Rises. “Speaking on behalf of the cast and crew of The Dark Knight Rises, I would like to express our profound sorrow at the senseless tragedy that has befallen the entire Aurora community. I would not presume to know anything about the victims of the shooting, but that they were there last night to watch a movie. I believe movies are one of the great American art forms and the shared experience of watching a story unfold on screen is an important and joyful pastime. The movie theatre is my home, and the idea that someone would violate that innocent and hopeful place in such an unbearably savage way is devastating to me. Nothing any of us can say could ever adequately express our feelings for the innocent victims of this appalling crime, but our thoughts are with them and their families,” the director said.

More on the shooting from MSNBC

Monday, July 16, 2012

American? Watch this Bill Moyer's and Company Episode

Every American should watch this episode of Bill Moyer's and Company with Khalil Gibran Mohammad. PhD, a native of Chicago’s South Side, is the Director of the Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture, The New York Public Library. Muhammad is a former professor of African-American history at Indiana University.


After Khalil started talking, I was a little stunned. I started to assume he was another radical and at first, I was turning off to him. Then I listened more closer and suddenly I got what he was saying; and he was making sense.

What he had to say smacked to me as absolutely true. I realized that I had never considered what he was saying before, in such a clear mind. His issue is initially African American, but as he says, it's really more than that. It goes into this country being founded not so much on freedom, but freedom to make money.

I was somewhat horrified at first, in a way, but the more I listened, the more sense he made and the more things I've known for years, suddenly came clear into focus. And "Blacks" back in the 1700s are part and parcel of the founding of the entire thing. They were considered property, "chattel".

You have to see things as the Founding Fathers did, back then. Which I can do quite well. That is, I have a good capability of seeing things from how others do in the past, partially because I've read so much from ancient days gone by, going back to Aristotle when I was in sixth grade. I get where they were coming from. It has nothing to do with agreeing with them, but in a kind of academic empathy.

In a way I don't think we can judge them by our views of morality today. They were more moral than we are now a days, yet they were less moral than we are now a days; and as we will be to our descendants.

This all makes more sense related to how unbalanced our government is now and how and why corporations are so much in control now. I thought for a long time that this was a recent thing, in the last 100 years. But it goes back further than that.

If we realize that our ecomomic problems now come from a fundemental structuring of our entire society that goes back to the beginning, then we will be more rational in our decisions of what needs to be done to fix things. And I am not sure we can fix things in the way we have been going about it. We have been trying to fix things from a view that our issues are more recent and therefore, patching things together can fix them.

But if they stem from the origins of our country, then we will need to make some fundemental changes to our laws and bylaws. I don't think that the Founding Fathers had the information they needed in the ensuing years after their original documents were formed and ratified to be able to see where they would end up. Which means we need to make a new constitution.


Yet, that is a fearful thing when you consider the people who are in charge of our country, the "voices" that are speaking out for change, to bend the path of our Country to their will, and not the will of the  people. They tended to see the "People" as white Christians. Maybe it was that way in the beginning (though in reality it wasn't, considering we had more African "American" slaves back then than there were whites), but it certainly isn't that way now.

This is a nation of immigrants. If you don't think so, deal with it, because it is. And now we have many more African Americans, Asians, Latinos and others than were at issue back in the late 1700s. As of 2010, 72% of Americans are white. Of the nation's children in 2050 however, 62% are expected to be of a minority ethnicity. Either we start working this out now, or it won't be long before we find ourselves in a position of some kind of Apartheid.

But perhaps this isn't the time to rewrite the Constitution, but to merely continue to patch it until it becomes even more disfunctional. Enough to allow the government driving by corporations and self interest, and religious right wing groups to push even more irrational considerations to a point that the Constitution becomes truly broken. Then it really will finally need to be completely rewritten.

Maybe. Though that won't be able to happen yet for another five, ten, twenty, fifty, or even one hundred years. Sad, don't you think? Wouldn't it be nice, if the constitution ever needed restructuring, to know that there would always be enough educated and intelligent (and selfless) people available in our government that it could be masterfully and rewitten at any time? But if that were truly the case, we would probably never need for it to be rewritten. I surmise that the Founding Fathers thought they had structured a good enough document that along with rational judgement, we could successfullly govern ourselves for a long, long time. Well, it has been now, a long, long time.
Anyway, the point of this topic was that something needs to be done. But first you have to understand where we are are how we got here. Nothing is going to be effective until we rethink how we consider what actually is going on, what is wrong with things, and how to fix it. There is simply too much ignorance and self interest out there now.

We need to consider the sign one great statesman, Harry S. Truman, used to keep on his desk in the in the oval office. It said, "The Buck Stops Here". But along with that there needs to be a subtext beneath it, "And it will be handled intelligently".

Monday, July 9, 2012

Mitt Romney, as David Lynch

I had the weirdest dream last night in a long time. Prepare yourself....
It's still American, we're all still welcome to believe whatever we like about the unproveable.
It was one of those dreams that are so real, like 3D, High Def. When I woke up from it, I couldn't have been happier to finally be awake again. I was out somewhere, like a cross between a shopping mall and a community college and I ran into a filming of a Mitt Romney TV holiday special show.


"Liz Lemon", Tina Fey's character from "30 Rock", was there.


Danny Devito was there. Actually it was a cross between Danny and another short person but I can't figure out who.

Chuy Bravo and Chelsea Handler
Maybe Chuy from Chelsea Handler's show, "Chelsea Lately". Other famous actors were there.

So I knew I just had to try and insert myself into the crew so I could watch this insantiy. Which in reality I have actually done before.

Mitt, I have to say, was horrible, as one might expect. This entire production was an extremely bad idea, but everyone was praising their work; basically trying to kiss up to Mitt. People where there supporting Mitt who just don't make any sense in their being there. Liberals, Democrats, it was nuts.

I started trying to secretly tweet what was going on but security was high and I couldn't get a tweet out or a place to hide to do it; and what was going on, was really weird. It begged to be announced.

When I got there, they were just starting to make Danny dance in very little, weird clothing and perform in a way that could only be described as homo erotic. And Mitt was loving it. I was stunned watching this nightmare. I walked around the perimeter of the external set in a daze.

Mitt was pretty much gleeful about it and was directing everything on stage from the edge. Everyone was focused only in making whatever he wanted work as well as possible on screen. They were all being very professional... just insane.

I ended up by end of day watching from an alcove, out of the way but with a very good view. Liz walked over by me. I felt her charisma and wanted to get closer to her, to talk to her, maybe even get to know her a little. But she was very focused on the show and you could see she was planning in her head. Planning something. Somehow we stared talking, not much, just a few words. We stood there for a while. In talking to Liz and I had to find out if she knew what she was doing, what it meant, what was going on. So I made a sarcastic comment, leading her to respond, allowing her an opportunity to bond with me, to admit that she fully got it, that it was unbelieveble for her to be there, supporting Mitt of all people.

But instead, she really liked what she took as my suggestion for the show, which was meant as a sarcastic joke. A joke that I thought she would get, but she just didn't. It was like everyone had been co-opted, mezmerized by Mitt. As if he were some mad magician, some insane, evil hypnotist.


David Lynch with Michael J. Anderson on set of "Twin Peaks"
It was all as if I had stumbled into a (David) Lynchian, "Twin Peaks" kind of nightmare.

I was stunned at the idiocy of what they were doing. But she had really liked the idea and said, "So, do you like getting up at 5 or 6AM?" It was as if she were saying that tomorrow, their last day of shooting, she wanted me to be involved. She seemed to be the top dog in what was going on, which considering the sureality of her show "30 Rock" could make some kind of sense; but in the end, I wasn't on the crew. They had no way of knowing me, or contacting me. Would they be shooting here tomorrow?

I felt I needed to be involved though, to do whatever I could to make this monstrosity fail. Though I was sure it really didn't need my help in any of this in that respect. Still I felt I needed to be there to assure it happening.

Now, understand that I am a Horror writer. I've very worked hard to be able to dream up truly unsettling scenarios for my stories, books and screenplays, and from all accounts, I do very well at that. Thank you very much. I offer my book, "Death of Heaven" as a prime example of how twisted a tale I can weave, of a really twisted account of Human History and how we have entirely misperceieved our created reality. I like Horror stories and films. They are fun. Like a roller coaster ride where, in the end, you are entirelly safe. Except for what you carry away with you, in your mind.
But I really don't need to ever, have another nightmare like this... never again! Please.

Saturday, July 7, 2012

Horror novella, Andrew, FREE last day on Amazon Kindle July 6-7th

My Horror novella, Andrew, is FREE to download today, the last day, on Amazon Kindle July 7th.

Cover - "Andrew's Last Battlefield Vision" by Hannah Hayes 
Andrew is the story of a very young boy, the child of a very brilliant married couple who were also rather unusual scientists. It is a horror story about how Andrew tries to deal with an event more traumatic than anyone should ever have to experience, no matter what age they are. Juxtaposed with how he learns to deal with it as an adult, we are able to see who he developed into by that point in his life, and where his parent's efforts end him up. Everyone seems to want a piece of him. Those who once "loved" him cannot protect him, even from themselves. No one, except one.

Yes, there is certainly a lot going on. This is horror in its most dark and fantastical. Not, for the light of heart or easily offended, yet done with a deft hand.
Also available on Amazon in paper/ebook and Smashwords
"Andrew" sets up my epic Horror book, Death of Heaven, called a "story of stories" by one artist. You might find it more entertaining to read Death of Heaven first (also in paperback) as they are intimately interlinked, but in markedly different (and myriad) ways.

I'll say this again differently, if you are a Stephen King fan, you might want to skip these works. If you loved Clive Barker's "Books of Blood", then these are right up your alley. I'm not trying to compare these to Clive's works, but they contain a similar intensity in Horror elements. I'm also not comparing Andrew (which is a bit "lighter" in nature) to Death of Heaven which is a complexity of notions and a skewed reality across all of history.

Cheers!

Friday, July 6, 2012

Horror novella, Andrew, FREE today on Amazon Kindle July 6-7th.

My Horror novella, Andrew, will be FREE to download today and tomorrow only, on Amazon Kindle July 6-7th.
Cover - "Andrew's Last Battlefield Vision" by Hannah
               
Andrew is the story of a very young boy, the child of a very brilliant married couple who were also rather unusual scientists. It is a horror story about how Andrew tries to deal with an event more traumatic than anyone should ever have to experience, no matter what age they are. Juxtaposed with how he learns to deal with it as an adult, we are able to see who he developed into by that point in his life, and where his parent's efforts end him up. Everyone seems to want a piece of him. Those who once "loved" him cannot protect him, even from themselves. No one, except one.

Yes, there is certainly a lot going on. This is horror in its most dark and fantastical. Not, for the light of heart or easily offended, yet done with a deft hand.
Also available on Amazon in paper/ebook and Smashwords
"Andrew" sets up my epic Horror book, Death of Heaven, called a "story of stories" by one artist. You might find it more entertaining to read Death of Heaven first (also in paperback) as they are intimately interlinked, but in markedly different (and myriad) ways.

I'll say this again differently, if you are a Stephen King fan, you might want to skip these works. If you loved Clive Barker's "Books of Blood", then these are right up your alley. I'm not trying to compare these to Clive's works, but they contain a similar intensity in Horror elements. I'm also not comparing Andrew (which is a bit "lighter" in nature) to Death of Heaven which is a complexity of notions and a skewed reality across all of history.

Cheers!

Thursday, July 5, 2012

Horror novella, Andrew, FREE to download on Amazon Kindle July 6-7th

My Horror novella, Andrew, will be FREE to download on Amazon Kindle July 6-7th.

Cover - "Andrew's Last Battlefield Vision" by Hannah
               
Andrew is the story of a very young boy, the child of a very brilliant married couple who were also rather unusual scientists. It is a horror story about how Andrew tries to deal with an event more traumatic than anyone should ever have to experience, no matter what age they are. Juxtaposed with how he learns to deal with it as an adult, we are able to see who he developed into by that point in his life, and where his parent's efforts end him up. Everyone seems to want a piece of him. Those who once "loved" him cannot protect him, from themselves. No one, except one. Yes, there is certainly a lot more than that going on. This is horror in its most dark and fantastical. Not, for the light of heart or easily offended.

Andrew sets up my epic Horror book, Death of Heaven, a "story of stories". You might find it more entertaining however to read Death of Heaven first (also in paperback) as they are intimately interlinked, but in markedly different (and many) ways.

I'll say this again differently, if you are a Stephen King fan, you might want to skip these works. If you loved Clive Barker's "Books of Blood", then these are right up your alley. I'm not trying to compare these to Clive's works, but they contain a similar intensity in Horror elements. I'm also not comparing Andrew (which is a bit "lighter" in nature) to Death of Heaven.

Andrew, a Horror Novella free Friday on Amazon Kindle

My Horror novella, Andrew, will be FREE to download on Amazon Kindle July 6-7th.


Cover - "Andrew's Last Battlefield Vision" by Hannah
               
Andrew is the story of a very young boy, the child of a very brilliant married couple who were also rather unusual scientists. It is a horror story about how Andrew tries to deal with an event more traumatic than anyone should ever have to experience, no matter what age they are. Juxtaposed with how he learns to deal with it as an adult, we are able to see who he developed into by that point in his life, and where his parent's efforts end him up. Everyone seems to want a piece of him. Those who once "loved" him cannot protect him, from themselves. No one, except one. Yes, there is certainly a lot more than that going on. This is horror in its most dark and fantastical. Not, for the light of heart or easily offended.

Andrew sets up my epic Horror book, Death of Heaven, a "story of stories". You might find it more entertaining however to read Death of Heaven first (also in paperback) as they are intimately interlinked, but in markedly different (and many) ways.

I'll say this again differently, if you are a Stephen King fan, you might want to skip these works. If you loved Clive Barker's "Books of Blood", then these are right up your alley. I'm not trying to compare these to Clive's works, but they contain a similar intensity in Horror elements. I'm also not comparing Andrew (which is a bit "lighter" in nature) to Death of Heaven.

Monday, July 2, 2012

Cannabis and Apple Pie

I found a video on The Power of Raw Cannabis that I found very interesting. It talks about using Cannabis as raw food, as a vegetable with medical qualities far exceeding almost anything we have seen to date. They say that once you burn it, you get a different quality out of Cannabis, which should make those phobic about it feel all warm and fuzzy. But they are taking a different tact in their research by juicing Cannabis and using it as an actual natural remedy for disease.

From The Power Of Raw Cannabis
Now watch this video, especially if you are fully anti Cannabis. This is not hype, it's very reasonable in what it has to say and it has a very good point. If Cannabis had never been heard of and was today discovered in the Amazon river basin, it would be called out as a miracle medicine and hailed around the world.

But Cannabis is as American as apple pie. Albeit a rather abused American, on multiple levels and for multiple reasons.

All this made me look for some interesting and famous quotes and images on hemp and cannabis and this is what I found. I broke out some photos for you that I will comment on, and at the bottom is a link to the actual video which includes fifty and some comments at the end of it. Here are some of my favorites, for various reasons. I've done my best to vet them at least to some degree. Let's start at the beginning.


It's well known that Washington was a hemp farmer and it was actually illegal not to grow hemp if you had a farm. However it was mostly for it's other qualities such as rope, clothes, paper, etc. Still, it's hard to believe there would be an active hemp market and no one knew about smoking it. Have you ever, as a kid, "smoked" on a piece of tall grass?

Typically you didn't inhale as it was harsh, but it's reasonable that someone figured it out back in the slaves days as slaves were made to work closely with hemp. Still, did any of the founding fathers smoke pot? Probably not though it would make a great case for modern pro Cannabis individuals. Napoleon brought hashish to France when his army returned from the Egyptian campaign (1798-1801). America had emmisaries in France over the years, so it's possible some of them tried hash. Hash comes from Cannabis, which was all over the United States. These were smart guys, so it's possible they put two and two together.


This would be great except that Lincoln wasn't known to be a smoker, although I know many people who smoke cannabis but wouldn't touch a ciggarette or pipe, otherwise. It is however plausible that Lincoln had a harmonica.


I would say it's reasonable Lincoln said that one. Abraham Lincoln (1809-65), U.S. President.
Speech, 18 Dec. 1840, to Illinois House of Representatives.

 

"In the mid-19th century, French writers including Baudelaire and Dumas met regularly to use cannabis. In this extract from his new book, Jonathon Green describes the Club des Hachichins." From an article in the Guardian UK.


I can find nothing to back this up, and he doesn't actually mention "hemp", other than a reference around the internet of a "Dr. Burke" with the "American Historical Reference Society" who doesn't seem to have a presence on the internet.

So you have to be careful about some of these kinds of quotes and references. Since they Founding Father's either left no record of smoking hemp or hash that I can find, it still has very good qualities for production and use in so many other areas. Lately we have been discovering that officially, that being by scientists and medical researchers not under the thumb of government relgulations or the American judicial systems, so that is mostly outside America but also inside prestigeous American institutions, there are incredible uses for Cannabis as you could see in the video above.

So we need to look at other things. Just like with a black hole out in space, if you can't see it, you can tell it exists by circumstantial evidence. In this case, it would be in the areas of prohibition and the "War on Drugs" (and U.S. citizens).


Leave it to a rational and logical thinker (so not a politician or law enforcer), to think, uh, rationally and logically.


So prohitition seems like not a smart thing? I wonder if the Alcohol Prohibition years support that claim at all?


Well, that pretty much jumps right to the point of things. Did Carl say this? Well, he has spoken out about it and there is video to prove it where he asks, "Is it rational, to [keep dying patients in discomfort, from it]."


"Village Voice jazz critic and Crosby biographer Gary Giddins says that Louis Armstrong's influence on Crosby "extended to his love of marijuana." Crosby smoked it during his early career when it was still legal, and "surprised interviewers" in the 1960s and 1970s by advocating its decriminalization." - Wikipedia


I think that pretty much speaks for itself. Now from a couple of politicians.


"Nuff' said" there.


This may hurt the President in some ways, but what would you pay for an honest politician? Well, it would seem we got one, at least to some point.


It's been alleged that British commissioner in India, Mr. J.M. Campell in "Note on the Religion of Hemp, British Indian Hemp Drugs Commission Report 1839-1894" was the one to actually say this. Considering the format of the words, I would say this would sound more like Campell than Carter.

What he HAS said was this:

"In a message to Congress in 1977, I said the country should decriminalize the possession of less than an ounce of marijuana, with a full program of treatment for addicts," Carter wrote. "I also cautioned against filling our prisons with young people who were no threat to society, and summarized by saying: 'Penalties against possession of a drug should not be more damaging to an individual than the use of the drug itself.' "
"Those ideas were widely accepted at the time," Carter wrote. "But in the 1980s President Ronald Reagan and Congress began to shift from balanced drug policies, including the treatment and rehabilitation of addicts, toward futile efforts to control drug imports from foreign countries."
"One result has been a terrible escalation in drug-related violence, corruption and gross violations of human rights in a growing number of Latin American countries," Carter wrote.
"Maybe the increased tax burden on wealthy citizens necessary to pay for the war on drugs will help bring about a reform of America's drug policies," Carter wrote. "At least the recommendations of the Global Commission will give some cover to political leaders who wish to do what is right."
Okay, enough already. Let's hear what some other entertainers have to say. Right?
Okay, did Arnold really say that? It would seem so: Mail Online UK October 2007.
Kind of shoots downn that highly addictive thing, don't you think?


This from a woman who is pretty productive in her life and doesn't seem to be drawing attention to herself because she's out of control or a drug addict.


Nice to hear someone just spit it out how he reallys sees it.


That my friends, is a very viable point. It's the type of comment I have heard from many people over the years. They didn't like the harsh drugs their doctor gave them, with the side effects, when they could just use cannabis as it was lighter on their systems, cheaper, and seemed to do a far better job in many cases without the side effects which in some cases, are actually, death.


Obviously we had a couple of indivduals who simply had to be mentioned here. Willie, of course, but also....


I've been saying for years that I cannot understand how Cannabis can be illegal for an entertainment drug when you have things out there that are legal like Lord King, Alcohol. Makes you wonder doesn't it (it should). When you consider the size and money involved in the alcohol industry and they size of their lobby, how is it cannabis is still illegal? Alcohol is very similar in affect to cocaine, it numbs you out, you can easily overdose on it, it leaves you feeling like crap after using it and especially over using it, it can put people into a rage where they hurt or kill people, you can't drive very well on it and it can kill you simply by using it.


Let's jus point out that the Declaration of Indepence is written on parchment which is treated animal skin. However, the drafts I believe were very likely written on hemp paper.


Hmmm... is there an echo in here?


The "War on Drugs" is an embarrassment and should be wiped off the face of the judicial branch. Even if you consider it now dead, which many don't, it is still being enforced under the Obama Administration and has been a shameful effort perpetrated on the American people by the judicial branch for decades now and have caused many indivduals and their families great pain and suffering.

And finally....


We should be listening to the man holding the highest office in the United States when even he thinks this. See the full quote at Reuters April 2012.

There is no doubt that we need to rethink and reinstitue our laws on Cannabis. No matter how you view the subject, if you are pro, question if you should be such an advocate; if you are against cannabis, question if you should be so against it. Ask yourself why you feel how you do and if you know everything to be as sure of yourself as you are. No one knows everything. America has made legislative mistakes before. What makes America great is when we see our mistakes, and do some thing to change them. To make our country greater, to make our citizens not just happier, but better off. Sometimes what makes our life better, makes us unhapy, until we see just how wrong we had been.

Have an open mind. Educate yourself. Then, make an informed decision and share it with those who used to look at things how you used to. Don't let America be ignorant, but more so, seek out that ignorance and help remove it.

Video with full run of photos and audio.

To finish up, here is another video of a very good argument for legalizing Cannabis, given by a Judge! If you are anti Cannabis, at least listen to this Judge making his plea to help the citizens of his state.

We can make things better, one step, one state at a time. But it all starts with removing the ignorance that is running rampant around our country, by making ourselves more informed and seeking out changing our opinions when necessary. Especially if your feel adamant that you are right about something, really vet it, check it out. Things change. Maybe you were right once. But new information is in. People are different today than in, say the 1960s. Don't listen only to people who agree with you.

America is a great country, but not as great as we once thought we were. We can again be that Greatest nation in the world. But we need more education, understanding, compassion and action.

Let me leave you with this last, scary quote and think about this for a moment. This man, in charge of police, is talking not just about people who use drugs, but American citizens. That seems to be something we forget in these talks about who is right or wrong. The subjects of these things are people. Consider too by the definition used for cannabis usage, having a drink after work is also a casual drug use, having a cigarette is a casul drug use, and even some would argue coffee or tea as caffeine could be therefore considered a drug. How would you like those people in charge of who should be charged with casual drug us, or as Daryl says:


Finally, if you really found that too depressing, watch a nice little history of "Marijuana".