ONLINE OR IN-PERSON

I have recently signed-up for an online dating service. Wow, that's really embarrassing to admit, but there you go. I have reached a point in my dating mentality that I just can't see going through the silliness that I've been through in the past, and I am trying to find a way to change that. I haven't really dated anybody for about six months, and while being alone kind of sucks, I am finding that I rather be alone than be with someone that I'm not crazy about. I've never done the "online" thing before, but I figure that there has to be something better than the whole meet-in-a-bar scenario. First off, I work in a bar, so the sheen is kind of off that apple. As interesting as I think a guy might be, in the back of my head I'm thinking "Wow, is this all a line, like the hundreds of lines I hear thrown out by guys every night at work?" Gee, that's pretty cynical of me, but perhaps a little cynicism is what I've been lacking in my past relationships. I tend to "fall" too hard, and then look back and realize that I hadn't really fallen at all, but had told myself I had because of a need to feel a part of something.

I guess I am just making some major changes in my life, becoming a better me, and while that is all in process, the "dating" me is out of commission for a while. Bummer.


READER POLL OF THE DAY

Does anybody know of anyone that the whole "dating service" thing has actually worked for?

HOW TO COME HOME

That is the question these days, isn't it? How to bring our brave soldiers home? I wish I had perfect answers for you on that. The reality is that the region is significantly more unstable now than when we went in, and to leave the situation would just allow some other fundamentalist regime to take hold and wage more terror on the US. You think the Saudis hate us (and they do), imagine a post war Iraqi people that have watched hundreds of thousands of their people die; their homes destroyed and their cities demolished. Imagine if, say, Germany had won the war, had become the super-power, and had just recently rolled into America to "liberate" us from the crushing influence of democracy. Say they killed half of our people, demolished Boston, New York, LA, Chicago, etc., and were still hanging around to battle the small bands of our resistance forces. Then, say, they left. Imagine the thoughts of revenge and demand for justice that would be called in the streets. The same will happen in Iraq. The sad fact is, we've made our mistake, and now we have to live with the results of what we've done. We're going to have to set-up bases there, and be a presence there for a long time to come. Believe me, I wish that weren't the case, but this entire war was botched from start to finish, and to pull-out now would be a mistake, I want nothing more than for our brave men and women to come home. I want them to be safe and return home safe; and I'd like them to return home to families that aren't living on food-stamps.

The bigger issue for me here is; When will this administration finally be held accountable for the lies perpetrated to get us into war? When will it occur to the American people that Clinton was impeached for lying about sexual relations, and Bush has yet to be held accountable for lying and costing the lives of thousands of American soldiers, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people? Clinton lied about getting a BJ. Bush lied to get us into war!!! Impeach President Bush; that's what I am calling for. Make him accountable for the lives that have been lost. This is your president; he represents your to the rest of the world, and the rest of the world thinks he's Satan incarnate. Doesn't that bother you? That our leader is viewed as a modern day Hitler? And worse than Hitler, for Hitler was just crazy, but Bush is in this for the money. That's beyond sick, it's cruel.

I would think that Republicans would have the biggest objection to this man representing their political views. In twenty years, I think he'll be viewed as on of the worst leaders in history. The economy has suffered horribly, unemployment is at an all-time high, we're close to a recession, we're reviled by much of the world, and we're in a war we can't get out of. We're being lied to day after day, and the majority of Americans are falling for it because A; it's easier, and B; their religious fears are blinding them to the truth. To let a man stay in office on the main point that he will vote their way on issues of homosexuality, is sad and scary. But that's a whole other issue.

DO THIS OF THE DAY

I tend bar to pay the rent, and every time a service man or woman hands me their military ID when I ask for age verification, I buy that person a drink. It's the least I can do for someone that willingly puts themselves on the line for our country.

FOR JON, PAULA, AND SEAN

Okay guys, here goes. I understand that you guys are generally new to reading my blog and were obviously not around during election time, so I can imagine that my sudden launch into political talk is a bit of a jolt to you. But this is who I am, and if my liberal/pacifist views are going to offend you, then a blog change might be necessary.

To Sean; why haven't we heard about it? Are you kidding? Are you completely unaware of the level of misinformation that occurs in the news media and the gross cover-ups that are perpetrated every day by this administration? And in case you didn't quite absorb the jist of my last point, I was bringing up the outrage of the fact that we HAVEN'T heard about memo, and why isn't it a big story in the media? If your "stick to the funny and not stupid stuff" comment was meant in any of the same vein as "Women are meant to be seen and not heard", I highly recommend you adjust your ideologies, for this is in fact NOT the 50's. I only make statements based on an informed point of view. Google "Downing Street Memo". Tony Blair doesn't deny it's existence; he even answered questions about it at a recent press conference on American soil.

To Jon; I am sorry, but I just can't ever condone acts of war. Besides that, the "job" that Bush senior didn't finish was to plow straight through to Baghdad and remove Saddam. Why didn't we? Wasn't cost effective, and he wasn't interested in carrying the war that far. We implored the Iraqi people to stand-up to the dictator, that we would back a revolution and support their cause; but instead we went home and lent no assistance, and Hussein squashed their resistance with more cruelty. The sanctions and inspections worked, Saddam had no weapons program. What Saddam had was what looked to be an easily toppled regime, and a prime access point into the lucrative middle-eastern energy market. We aren't there to "Liberate" a people, we aren't there to collect WMD's, we aren't there to remove an evil regime from power; we're there to have a greater hold on the oil-market. We're no where near being able to pull-out (and they aren't planning on doing so for a very long time) and we're losing more of our brave soldiers every day, not to mention the over 100,000 Iraqis that have lost their lives so far. We were lied to to get us in there, and we're lied to every day as to the state of affairs over there. As an American and a patriot I'm outraged that war is being waged in my name for these purposes.

To Paula;
Iran is a far less threat than say, Saudi Arabia (you know, the country where 19 of the 20 high-jackers hailed from), or North Korea, where they have a much more developed nuclear program, and a much less stable leader ready to use them. But we have political affiliations with Saudi Arabia (well, Bush and his family do) and we seem to be taking the "Don't Ask, Don't Ask" approach with NK. Golden.

BACKTRACK OF THE DAY

I don't mean to purposely offend anyone with my political views, but this is a web log, a diary of my life, and the issued of the day are a big part of my life. I am going to speak my mind, as is my right, and you can choose not to read if you don't like the things I have to say, as is your right. But I would hope that divergent views would spark healthy debate, and not automatic disdain.

IS ANYBODY LISTENING

Please tell me you've heard of and are familiar with the contents of the Downing Street Memo. If you aren't, and you've never even heard of it, you should be outraged and stomp you feet and scream, "Why is the wool being pulled over my eyes!?". The Downing Street Memo, (we'll call it the DSM) is basically minutes of a meeting recorded between Pres. Bush and Prime Minister of England, Tony Blair. In this meeting, which took place in early 2002, the basic plans to engage a war in Iraq were discussed. Bear in mind, this was almost a year before all of the WMD nonsense. So, to sum up, the decision to go to war with Iraq was made long before any evidence to support that decision was presented.

This memo was leaked on April 28th of this year. This story is HUGE. Bigger than Watergate. And what was the leading story for the next two weeks?? The Runaway Bride. Lucky for the Republicans, eh?

What happened to journalists? What ever happened to a desire for the public to know the truth. When did the news media get bought? A news story like this should be the kind of thing to bring a presidency to it's knees, and unless more of an uproar is made about it's existence, it will be swept under the rug and out of minds by meaningless fluff like an insecure woman whom didn't want to get married. Is that story really more important than finding out the leaders of two of the most powerful nations in the world conspired to wage war under false pretenses? Should CNN and MSNBC be replaced by 24 hour Access Hollywood? Who needs the New York Times; we can just get a larger version of US Weekly.

Get outraged about this, my friends. This is your government, too. This summer, we're going to go to war on Iran and many more lives will be lost. Where are they going to get the troops to wage this war? How old is YOUR son? Drafting age, maybe.

Go to therandirhodesshow.com and sign the petition to get our questions about the DSM answered. If we keep shouting, they can't ignore us forever.


OUTRAGE OF THE DAY

The superintendent of a local high-desert school district has just been awarded an $80,000.00 pay increase, which brings his salary up to $250,000.00 dollars a year, plus a $200,000.00 signing bonus and lifetime health and dental for him and his wife. This elementary school district has a total of 6,000 students in 18 schools, 17 of which are performing below state levels. Does it seem right to you that this man now makes more than the governer?