The Child Is Here, and the Tomb Is Empty!

…and I just now posted my final… post… at BlogSpot:

Where's the Empty Tomb? Where's Aging Child?

I'm now right next door; stop on by – no need to wipe your feet, even… but do please keep your alcohol, tobacco, and firearms outdoors; thank you.

More to come…

Update: Now Up to Date!

Good evening, reader(s?): as of almost 11:00 PM in my local time zone, January 27, 2017, I've finished moving all of my old WordPress blog posts to their new, more-easily-formatted home at BlogSpot… and am ready to start posting in real time… heh; all in good time.

"In good time" indeed – my first posting at WordPress was ten years ago tomorrow!

It wasn't a mere superficial exercise in vanity; reading and reformatting each posting – was a worthwhile effort for me, because I was able to view the inner Aging Child… at an earlier age. And I remet old friends I haven't seen or even heard from in years, and even had a good strong look at who I myself was, back then.

I posted this same text at WordPress, and added the text of my previous posting here as well, which had included:

As of this evening, I've relocated and spruced up two-hundred old postings, leaving just fifty-some more [...] – another week or two should do it.

Heh; I certainly overestimated how long it would take me to get fifty-some blog postings… re-blogposted: just two days; not bad!

And of course I've changed, since 2008-or-so… less the occasional cliché and all, such as that one. If any – i.e., either – of my old readers wanders back here, and somehow finds the interest to visit the Empty Tomb's new home, they may well see some of those changes. That's not why I'll write, or even what I'll write. And I'll be doing some recapping, I suppose… but I'd like to keep eyes more forward now.

This will likely be my next-to-last WordPress posting; I'm now just next door to that old locale, so stop on by anytime you're bored. And feel free to nudge or prod!

Real Time... Coming Up!

Among plenty of other things I've been doing, these last few weeks, has been the transferal of my blog from its old site at WordPress to its new host here at BlogSpot – mostly to give me the kind of text formatting WordPress no longer provides, and which I have to have – you know I'm very visual, and need to be able to switch fonts and text colors (even sizes) in mid-posting.

There's no handy tool or app that would let me bulk-move the whole thing, as I explained a couple months ago. So I've had to transfer each old posting, one at a time. But… this has allowed me to catch and correct ancient typos that had slipped by, various other errata, and to update hyperlinks (which I've done only in some instances… come on, guys – a lot of it is… old stuff!! )

As of this evening, I've relocated and spruced up two-hundred old postings, leaving just fifty-some more, and then the job is done, done-done-done dunnnn.

As I expected, I also found plenty of loose ends (besides dead links), and sketches of postings I'd hoped to write up and get out there… all those years ago. Some I may still do; we'll see. In the meantime, it's back to work – another week or two should do it; whew!

After that, yes, there'll be back-and-fill even while I move forward. Most of that I'll drop in, when I do, simply as background – stage props to strengthen the context and depth of what's here and now… and where we're headed.

Till then… ciao!

Moving Day for the Aging Child

Copied over from my prior blog site and host:

Good afternoon, loyal reader!

(…"loyal reader", meaning "sole reader"…)

Last week, I set up this blog's successor – well, transplantee might be a better term. For now, I'll mostly be moving over into it this old site's postings, until maybe just this single page remains here.

That'll take a while; I may drop new foolscap in here regularly as well.

This where to find me: http://1MT2mb.BlogSpot.com/.

See you next door!

Regards,

A. Gene Childe

"It's Only a Day Away"

Copied over from my prior blog site and host:

December starts tomorrow! So remember:

Yow! Ad Orientem, too!

Steps Forward

Copied over from my prior blog site and host:

I've begun moving this blog, one posting at a time, over to Blogger. (I can't move it all there at once.) Just my first sixteen posts have made it over thus far... leaving two-hundred-twenty-some. Well, [shrug], so I'll be busy with that awhile.

I'll try to keep this front end going, even while trimming off the backside, so to speak. I'm still busy with plenty of other things, including some backfill from The Missing Years.

I write first for me, not for both my readers... so it's more like the cat watching its tail twitch, than jumping onstage and capering around. In some profound ways, I'm not the same person who was writing here regularly, most of a decade ago - pardon the cliché. And likely you're far different from who you were back then as well.

A chunk of where I've grown different is in politics... or rather, what's been guiding me in how I engage political and social issues - which came to a head most recently in the national election earlier this almost-over month. I'll drop some more about that at some point, hopefully soon.

My faith remains strong, my longing for the monastery is undimmed, my commitment and devotion to those I love is unwavering... so in many ways, I'm still me, too. Yet I feel... deeper, and a bit less wishy in my washy; you'll see - or just maybe you've seen already.

Cheers, folks!

The Missing Years

Copied over from my prior blog site and host:

Catching Up, and Moving Onward

First Sunday of Advent (November 27, for the Gregorian secular), 2016:

I've blown the dust off this old blog and am pulling it back out onto the road. It's been mostly dormant since early 2009, but it's surprisingly roadworthy still; ditto the driver. I'm planning to transplant the engine and transmission and seats into a Blogger site, at some not-distant point. (For one thing, the formatting there is loads easier - plus fewer ads and fewer hands out.)

Life's been busy, demanding, rewarding… and no-less-so now, today. The world and my little corner of it have changed tremendously, and I'll be filling in some of the 2009-2016 blank areas of the map with backdated content. Pretty much anything here from early 2009 to late November of 2016 is backfill… or filler – or landfill.

On we go – and welcome back, my two readers! Still on board? Hello? Hello?

Watch This Space!

Copied over from my prior blog site and host:

More to come shortly!

 

Here… From THERE

Just another brief one, folks: all's well, and getting better…

…in particular my mother. More on her progress as soon as tomorrow. Just in brief: the tracheostomy she received some weeks ago at her previous facility (a major East-coast hospital; more on that soon) has been removed and closed up — she's breathing and eating on her own (I'm not sure, though, whether her feeding tube has been removed for good), speech at times rather understandable… although the speech, eating, and walking/standing do still need more work.

Lesser importance: most likely out of catharsis, I've finished the first section (just under ninety pages) of a possible novel — a work I've mentioned here before, but sadly can't quote or detail here, given the ease with which one may, bluntly, steal someone else's labors (something of which, I confess, I'm not entirely guiltless). It's been fun, funny, a delight… and I actually found tears in my eyes as I wound down that section, given that the characters I'd gotten to know and laugh with/at were also crying. (Occasional reader and contributor Spartacus has read some of it, and responded favorably; per his suggestion, I sent a copy each to my two daughters, tasking them with seeing about publishing it if anything should waylay me for good before I can do so.)

I did manage to get three weeks of honest work, last month, and am still nailing and pasting my résumé all around the greater area. Keep those thoughts and prayers coming, folks!

In the Church, today is the feast day (i.e., life-celebration) of my most favorite modern-day saint — Thérèse of Lisieux. She is a stunning, touching role model of trust, devotion, love, and humility… all traits sorely lacking in the modern wo/man. I want to reflect more on her soon, too.

I'm expecting to resume this blog with some regularity again — there's just too much going on that I can't stand by and only watch it happen, follow? I want to bring out some articles on religion and politics (always fun subjects) you've likely missed, and I'm ludicrously overdue in both completing my castigation of a particular Church-hater, and my defense of His Holiness Pope Pius XII (this last more than a year overdue).

With a new month begun, my mind zeroes in on transitions: winding down of the warmer weather, blushing of the trees, new school year (daughter Portia off to her university far away from here… with an angel of mine, and a large piece of my heart)… and upcoming election — for which I do plan to take my gloves off. (E.g., very much a feminist, it pains me to beat on a woman… but Sarah Palin is frightening.)

This all, all, boils down to five simple words:

How is it October already?

 

Let Us Prey, Part 7b: Still Half-Baked

Okay, okay, folks; I hear you loud and clear: back to John Wojnowski, or prey-er versus pray-er.

Yesterday afternoon, I received a comment on one of the posts I'd put up in a still-unfinished series (under the too-apt title of "Let Us Prey") where I've been responding to some particularly hateful things being said about the Catholic Church.

This comment was strong and harsh enough that I decided not to delete it (i.e., not spam or garbage), but rather respond to it, and post his and my words here as well. WordPress, which kindly (or perhaps foolishly) hosts my Empty Tomb blog, requires all people commenting on a posting to leave their email address and (if possible/applicable) their own website.

So besides first name, I had the fellow's email address (and IP address/WhoIs, etc.), and so could email him directly (and did). The webpage URL he provided was to John Wojnowski's own website, which largely reproduces his vicious diatribe, and goes even further.

Caveat lector: to protect the gentleman's privacy, I've changed his name and email address – this will also protect him from the spammers whose webcrawlers are constantly harvesting these addresses for their own nefarious purposes. And I've slightly redirected the URL in that comment section to take you to a Washington Post article on Wojnowski's campaign. His website is easy enough to find anyway, but I didn't want a link to it on my blog. So sue me, Eric.

No, I take that last sentence back; that was rude and petty. Let me also repeat now what I've taken pains to stress throughout this "Let Us Prey" series: that I have no issue with Wojnowski's claim – totally credible, even if not fully substantiated – of abuse by a priest, and having his personal buck passed somewhere into oblivion by some of the hierarchy. I support him morally and spiritually in his quest for redress, and also don't buy into the cold-hearted claim of "statute of limitations" he claims to have been handed.

My problem is that his objective seems to go far beyond seeking redress, and he appears – by his own words at his site, and on at least one handout – to be trying to pull down the entire Church through cheap shots, warmed-over old rumors, and outright lies, slander, and bitter innuendo.

Yes; failings of trusted members of the hierarchy – whether to heed their own vows of chastity (including against children, and members of their own gender), or to support and empathize with suffering members of their flock – have indeed sullied the Church.

This does not change the fact that the Church was founded by Jesus Christ himself, sustained and spread by his Apostles, and comes down to us today through the direct line of authority and responsibility Jesus first laid on Peter and his fellows.

What it does do is show how far short some of us fall in how we are called to live and share Jesus' message. I'm not talking about John Wojnowski there; I really do mean some of the less-than-exemplary members of Christ's mystical body, the Church.

John – I assume – suffers still from wounds inflicted on him by one of these men some fifty years ago, and for this that (now-deceased) priest, and others, bear the blame, and the shame. I agree with him that – regardless of the time intervening since his molestation – he deserves both a genuine, sincere, contrite apology, and a reasonable settlement.

What he doesn't get from me is an ounce of sympathy, let alone empathy, in his assault on the Church itself, her history, her doctrines, and her mission. That kind of cowardly, spiteful malice is unbecoming of a mature, intelligent man, John, and does your genuine objective a terrible disservice.

Enough; here's the comment that came in:

-----Original Message-----
From: eric [mailto:EricIdol@YouWho.com]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 1:09 PM
To: AGeneChilde@YouWho.com
Subject: [MT2mb] Comment: "Let Us Prey, Part 7: The Half-Baked Scheme"

New comment on your post #416 "Let Us Prey, Part 7: The Half-Baked Scheme"

Author: eric (IP: [yadda-yadda] )

Comment:

You're a spiteful and, indeed, petty apologist with absolutely no defense for the catholic mafia's legacy of brutality.

Yikes! as my dad used to say. I took a while to simmer down, reflected a bit, then began my response:

-----Original Message-----
From: AGeneChilde@YouWho.com
To: EricIdol@YouWho.com
Subject: Half-Baked?
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 16:08:23 -0400

Hmm… those are pretty heavy words, friend Eric. Let's look for a moment at what you've happened on:

What I'm doing in addressing Wojnowski's diatribe is showing how the fellow – suffering as he may be from the old scars of abuse at the hands of a priest (and some unforgivable cold-shouldering by the priest's superiors) – uses no genuine evidence, and employs apparently deliberate misdirection, selective emotion-laden words, and old-old long-disproven charges that a little research (even by a non-Catholic, or an atheist) will readily scuttle. This reveals an extreme, biased attitude of hatred against the Church, and a determination to draw others – strangers, the gullible, the scandal-hungry – into his twisted outlook.

Let's do the same here, you and me. How about you back up your words:

1)  Where have I been spiteful?

2)  Where in my apologetics have I been petty? (You do understand the difference between "apology" and "apologetics", right?)

3)  In what way have I failed in this particular defense of my Church?

4)  What do you mean by "Catholic mafia"? On what solid evidence (hearsay will not be accepted; sorry if you're a fan of Dan Brown) do you use this term?

5)  Cite proven examples of brutality by the Church – brutality by members of the Church (e.g., Pizarro) will not be accepted. Otherwise, that kind of wide tarbrushing would say that all Americans are domestic terrorists, since the American Timothy McVeigh – a Gulf War veteran, by the way (and Catholic-born, for that matter) – murdered some 165 fellow Americans in Oklahoma City, using a truck bomb, in 1995; victims included nineteen children in a day-care center.

6) Sub to question/request 5): Having proven (this should be interesting) brutality by the Church herself, and not by misguided members, show next where that would be an actual legacy. Or are you referring to a legacy of charges? That's not news; that goes back to the First Century, when Catholics were accused of murdering babies (I think).

You see, my friend, anybody can use weighted words and accuse anyone – an individual, family, association, country – of all kinds of things. (E.g., I could state that everyone named "Eric" is a cold-blooded murderer, and offer Eric Harris as a clear example.) But accusations are not evidence, nor proof, except of either misunderstanding, resentment, or an agenda; I'm assuming you simply misunderstand.

What say you?

Kind regards,

A. Gene Childe

No word back yet – and those times (just two, I think; no, three) that a posting of mine received a harsh comment from a truly rare reader, I never heard back again after responding. This is disappointing; if someone feels so strongly about something, s/he really should be able to engage in at least a modicum of debate.

(In fact, I have done that once before here, though I was actually airing a series of emails between me and an ultra-ultra rightist friend of my own friend, Anon E. Mouse. That was engaging – i.e., quite enjoyable and challenging. Intellectual fun.)

This "Eric" person… on further reflection, I believe he's one of John Wojnowski's blinded supporters (as opposed to a rational one)… or possibly John himself. Let's see what happens… but don't hold your breath, everybody.

Followup: Eric responded, removing his mask:

phosphoro6 Jun 30, 2008

I’ve emailed my response to you and look forward to further discussing the issues at hand.

-“Eric”

Write On!

Okay, I need to beg off one more day, everybody.

I went to bed after finishing last night's blog. Read some more of a very challenging 1940s German science fiction novel my dad had recommended decades ago (Spartacus, fourteen cents says you know the author, but not the work. Want to bet? See my "Bedside Bookshelf" tab, once I finally update it. Click on it, Sparks, and you've lost the bet. Heh-heh.), switched off the light...

And the heated dialog the kids were foolishly eavesdropping on when I'd quit my story before blogging... started writing itself in my head. Two senior citizens fuming, three forty-somethings alternately soothing and provoking more fulmination. And the kids just outside the window, crouching out of sight, were in 'way over their heads.

I hate making children cry, even if they're my own fictional creation.

I got up, hit the light again, switched the computer back on, and turned my keyboard over to the poor sobbing kids. They wrote themselves back out of that terribly uncomfortable situation, then they walked off, still sniffling, to a... cemetery.

Much better. And I shut down and went to sleep; by that time, I could hear birds chirping outside.

Today before lunch I returned to the fictitious cemetery, gave those kids my keyboard again, and watched. Younger kid (boy) turned himself into a zebra (totally unanticipated by me... and it resolved a bunch of things building up), which cheered his cousin (girl) back up. Back home. There the old-woman relative woke up, apologized sincerely, and proceeded to nearly break three of the boy's ribs. Five to ten hours' keying and tweaking, polishing. Done; finished. End Chapter One.

That really is a summary of what went on... and it was nothing like that. It's an absolute hoot, funny, even while not written as humor or sitcom per se. Twenty-six pages in this same font – twenty of these pages just since yesterday morning. This big first part of the whole story (and a much later part that Sparky kindly reviewed for me) is straight fiction. I've plotted out the time-travel middle, of course, and just need to tighten the nuts and bolts on the mechanism, then push the big green button.

So I'm putting the story away again for now, unless I decide to retrieve both turtle and sombrero (which got left behind somewhere), and will return to defending the Church tomorrow. Besides great fun writing this (and, uh, neglecting a load of housework), it's been quite the refreshment.

John Wojnowski, look out. See you tomorrow.

The Write Thing

Folks, I'd really planned this evening to resume my shredding of John Wojnowski's attack on the Church. But just now I'm neck-deep in what I have to call a creative fog.

Thanks to a suggestion a couple years ago from newly-eighteen, soon-to-graduate daughter-two Portia, and a request from an Azerbaijani coworker a couple months ago, I've taken back up a story I first wrote in brief back in college in 1979, fell in love with, but scrapped immediately...

And now find I've been able to untie all the bad knots, and lay out some fresh, new, good ones. This can make a very readable novel, a great movie, if I choose to take it that far. And I may not. But I need to keep writing it now.

Anyone who's written anything that's seized them (rather than vice-versa) knows that there are times where it's got to be written/keyed this instant, or lost for good. I don't want that! I've lost too much good verse, music, engaging tales, great theories, over the years… through not recording them.

A few weeks ago, I took some of the characters from that original story, cranked them back to their childhood (reviving one from the dead into a delightful feistiness I hadn't expected), set them on the electronic page, and let them write their own story. Really! It was fun, a total riot, and they had me giggling most of the time.

Some stories you need to plot out in detail (and this one I have, portions of it), research intensely (still need to in some crucial areas... and in fields and geographic areas I know nothing about). Write, sweat, curse, rewrite.

Not just now. I mean it; I dropped these guys on the page, and they started moving around and talking. They took off! And I can't share any of this with you folks; sorry! I've already seen my rants, raves, and riddles snatched up and dumped into other blogs. (Boy, some people are really desperate for material, or camouflage!). But this just may yet see light of day. Even if not, I'm still having great fun.

(Actually, I did send a fresh chunk over to patient Spartacus last week; he was far more impressed than I'd expected, offered a suggestion I integrated; and he traded back with an early draft of a story of heartbreak and disintegration he's been working on lately. I then tossed another idea or two his way, and could picture him nodding sagely in his concrete bunker. I think his will hit the bookstores before mine... might have to race him. Hmm...)

The backstory, the character buildups I'm working on right now, keep taking turns I hadn't anticipated — while providentially setting up situations I'll be able to make great use of later on. I hadn't meant for the sombrero to take center stage, but one of my characters (re)solved that all on her own.

Why did they get to discussing palindromes and boustropheda over chicken dinner? How does Kojak fit in? What about Pago-Pago? Why did the delightful eighty-year-old woman storm off? A little bit ago, a box turtle showed up, and just now I have a teen and pre-teen squatting under a window, listening in where they shouldn't be.

I've been at this since early this afternoon, and it's now approaching midnight. It is a total blast!

But I'll be back blasting Wojnowski as soon as tomorrow evening... just let me run with this one.

Grin and Bear It

Okay, okay --

I'm back on line here, having just yesterday given my home internet connection ( = wireless card, drivers, etc.) the aspiring geek's equivalent of a solid thwack. Working fine now... other than the fact that I'm still trying to persuade Outlook 2002 to shake hands with GMail. Worked before on my last antiquated 'pute-box, but this time they'd still rather snub one another. Oy vey, Maria.

I'll figure it out; till then, my blog-formatting is going to be a problem again. And I'm left here with quite a load of things long-since promised, and in hefty need of catching-up on... not the least of which is the crew of the Enterprise, stranded on Thyatira lo these many months. Incredibly, word's gotten back to yours truly that some folks were actually reading that serial, and have become a bit antsy about resolving Archer's plight -- not the least of whom is the scriptwriter herself, the incredibly patient Chuckles.

Peace, people -- see this spot tomorrow.

I offer no apologies for my long absence here... although I hope a sheepish blush will suffice. No? Well, let me welcome both my readers back with something else un (uh...) bearable.

Seems this large grizzly shambled into a bar one day (parked his unicycle outside the swinging doors, no doubt), stood up and leaned on the bar, which creaked ominously. "Bartender," said fine furry fellow, friendly-fashion: "I'd like.............................................

.............................. a beer."

'Tender tapped out a large, frosty mug of his finest. "Sure thing, pal -- here. But... why the big pause there?"

Grizzly raised his hands -- fur, claws, and pads -- and looked them over, turning and flexing them. "I don't know," he admitted. "I've always had them."

 

Writers' Wednesday -- special programming

Our weekly feature here, "Writers' Wednesday", has been rescheduled to next week, owing to technical difficulties: in particular the funeral this morning of our pastor... and also the embarrassing fact that yours truly blew out his motherboard a week and a half ago, and is currently working to establish internet and LAN connections on his replacement computer, which thus far have failed.

We apologize for any inconvenience.

Pain in the Compass

Okay, Blue Dog's already checked back in: he's not going to give the Political Compass another spin. I'm disappointed a bit, though I suspected (hoping differently) he'd so answer, that he was uninterested in approaching anew that site's series of social-political statements. I was also afraid I might have ruffled that dog's feathers a bit, but that's not the case. Let's put him back on the soapbox – c'mon, boy; up!

Perhaps you misunderstand my answers. I see no second set of answers possible in responding to these questions.

Let us look at [Republican] Ron Paul (not my candidate by the way, just an example). He is utterly opposes abortion. Nevertheless, he also takes the position that as a matter of the United States Constitution, abortion as a matter of law is a non-federal issue left to the states. If you examine Ron Paul's stated positions, I expect that you will find he falls much further toward the libertarian side of the graph than is reflected by his actual placed position among the 2008 Presidential candidates.

Now if you ask me whether abortion, when the woman's life is not threatened, should always be illegal, I say yes. I see no other possible answer given my belief that human life is sacred and that a fetus is a human life. This statement may simplify my position, but after struggling with the issue, I see no other possible response.

(I told Dog in my response to this email that I intend to address this specific issue, and how I as a very liberal, feminist male – yet fully obedient, submissive son of the Church – come down. Likely I'll do so in January… though I may just jump in sooner.)

As another example, your own position places you quite near Gandhi. But ask yourself if someone were to examine your life, would they place you next to Gandhi on the chart. And I do not ask this question in an attempt to question your answers to the questions or the way you live your life.

Dog, my friend, the tool/test does not attempt to graphically place people by overall lifestyle. Rather, it's a look at the person's placement strictly along their social/political/economic outlook. Spiritual-practice-wise, I'd fall more closely to Pope Benedict than to Mahatma-ji. But if we each filled out political ballots (yes, I'd let him go first), I doubt we'd vote in the same slate of candidates.

Now, let us look at your friend Spartacus. He's as socially aware as Gandhi and deep into anarchist territory. I have no problem with his answers. I do not challenge the sincerity of his response. But if the person who put together this test wanted to place him on the chart without first having him take the test, how would this person accomplish that task?

Does Spartacus have a job? Does he pay his taxes? Does he obey most traffic laws? Is he married? Does he support his children? How much does he give away to charities? Has he accumulated any wealth? Does he live the life of an ascetic?

What I am saying is this test judges the world leaders by outside, objective standards. How does Hillary Clinton vote in the Senate? Then it judges us by how we answer the questions on this test.

Of course the big figures in their results-matrix did not take the test themselves, so the authors had to do some conjecture… but are not doing this placement uneducatedly. As they explain on the result-page, "A diverse professional team has assessed the words and actions of internationally known contemporary leaders to give you an idea of how they relate to each other on the political compass." Again, this is political placement, not overall lifestyle; this is political analysis. Oh, well; say on.

Do any of us really live the life of Gandhi? To be honest, I suspect that you may be closer than I to Gandhi. [Gee, thanks, Blue – but you've never seen me in a dhoti.] And I don't know Spartacus well enough to judge. But I know that I have not devoted my life to the poor. I'm your basic businessman who is raising two children, hitting church on Sundays, going to California Coastal Cleanup Day tomorrow with a bunch from my church, working a carwash later in the day for the Church Middle School Group, meeting a young man tomorrow to talk about his future, the kind of mundane, routine things we all do in this life. I give what I can, do what I can, but I definitely do not make the sort of choices in life that would have a neutral third-party put me next to the Dalai Lama or Gandhi after examining my life.

On another note, I suspect most Democratic candidates actually, as they have stated, bitterly oppose to the war. Yet time and again they have voted to fund the war. If a anti-war individual took this test, their answers would reflect their anti-war values. But we would judge Hillary Clinton, etc., on their votes? Or would we judge them on their stated position?

Good point.

What I think is much more interesting is where they place the parties. We see a much deeper spread. For example, the UK Green party cuddles up to Dalai Lama territory. Why? They place the parties on the scale based on their written, articulated positions.

Now, let us examine George W. Bush. With respect to the removal of life support from patients in a persistent vegetative state, his stated position is strongly opposed (and presumably this would track his test answers). But in 1999, he signed Texas legislation permitting doctors to remove life support from such patients regardless of the wishes of the family. Do we go by the stated position of George W. Bush (as we do with our own answers) or do we judge George W. Bush by his actions?

If we look at the historical record, how many figures do we actually find in the Libertarian/Left Quadrant? We find Dalai Llama, Gandhi, (Christ, I suspect, though they do not place him), and Nelson Mandela.

If we asked Nelson Mandela where he stood on economic globalization, I suspect he would favor people over corporations. But when he talks about blood diamonds in the context of that recent film and says, "...it would be deeply regrettable if the making of the film inadvertently obscured the truth, and, as a result, led the world to believe that an appropriate response might be to cease buying mined diamonds from Africa.... We hope that the desire to tell a gripping and important real life historical story will not result in the destabilization of African diamond producing countries, and ultimately their peoples." If we argue that his statement is because lost revenue hurts the diamond mine economy, can we not make that argument in every instance?

In the end, it is an interesting test. But I don't have the same level of faith in it. I need to see if I can find some old threads on it. As I recall, pretty much everyone taking the test ends up at one extreme or another.

No, I didn't end up at any kind of extreme. Given the layout of their matrix, I think "extreme" would be any individual at the far end, left/right or up/down, one of the axes: i.e., not embracing anything beyond a total authoritarian/anarchistic social focus, or/and a total left/right economic focus. These individuals are rare even among demagogs, I'll bet.

The matrix shows that Pope Benedict and I fall differently in terms of authoritarianism – but it's Stalin who's at a far end of the matrix; and overall His Holiness is placed more closely to the middle than I am, in fact; not a surprise to me. And everybody's favorite acephalic chimpanzee, George II, is at an extreme… but at Stalin's opposite? Well, okay; for Uncle Joe the State was supreme, whereas W seems to favor a smaller state… thereby corporations run free, wild, and unhindered.

I responded to Blue Dog, with hopes he and his own people will have at the concept further at his own blog; they a lot more capable and experienced:

Well… I misunderstood your explanation of how you approached the questions/statements. Though your skepticism runs strongly on Political Compass's tool, could you consider maybe dropping it in on one of your own bloggings, and see how your own readers (far more of them than mine, and a good deal less flaky [pardon me there, Spartacus], in all likelihood) fare with the questions, both in how the results paint them, and how they feel about it?

If you take up the topic (and I think it would be a shame if you don't), do please not hold back on expressing your feelings on its accuracy and usefulness, short of preprogramming your keen masses out there in advance of their trying it out themselves.

You're quite free, of course, to quote or reference Empty Tomb in any way you might need – though I doubt it would raise the level of dialog on Blue Dog Thoughts! While I'm muttering to myself in a corner, you're sitting at a long, well-lit table, with organized stations of notepads, water pitchers, and attentive attendees, and dressed in a smart suit and speaking clearly and resonantly. There are no Frisbees.

Likely, as with all tools, this one's not for every mechanic. I can put impressive holes in the drywall with a good drop-forged steel chisel, the next person will carve out a "David", and the next yet will use it to mug a passing grandmother, and yet another lay it on the desk as a paperweight.

Regards,

AgingChild

We'll see how the Compass fares there; ditto, I'll have Mouse's take, when and if. Now, back to Pius.

A Backward Glance

Just because I've been away from this blog for the past few weeks, kids, doesn't mean I haven't been busy! I've been meeting with a number of staffing agencies of late, looking for their assist in getting my foot and tuchis in the door. One new, local firm that looks like an especially nice prospect (name withheld to stave off the attorneys) is based in Germany… where until just a few years ago I had (dual) citizenship. We'll see.

I did detour unneedfully a few days into my belly-button. Friend Spartacus caught me in the act, paused a moment while herding goats around the neighbors' yards to nudge me. Heh; he used his still-polished USAF-issue jump boots to kick in the door just before knocking, and made sure all was well. He lugs what might well be a pair of 13 double-E's (compared to my 8D penny loafers), so his inquiries generally receive prompt and courteous response.

Nothing major is amiss, folks! I'd just turned from the blogging for a bit to plow into mass-mailing my résumé around the staffing agencies and larger firms, plus to get some more order on household stuff needing attention. The belly-button part, though, was my taking a bit long in assessing the occasionally errant academic, career, and personal moves I've made over the last few decades. I do need to keep aimed forward a bit better; the weekends may well be better for looking back and plotting new courses.

But speaking of milestones: Yesterday would have been our twenty-fifth wedding anniversary, had the good wife and I not lost the stars in our youthful eyes and divorced just three years in. As a young gal – not even quite out of her teens when we married – my wife was utterly beautiful:

Beej and Babe: the sweet good wife, way back when (1984), and baby Shellie.

…a sweet gentle spirit; a slim, lean figure; lovely, dark, thick waist-length hair; easy laugh and smile. At just over five feet tall in size-one jeans, she was a dream, and could make me howl and whimper with the most innocent of glances.

And innocent we both were, of course. We fell hard for each other at a very vulnerable stage in our lives, stepping into our marriage with hopes, dreams, and sweetness… none of which, come the tough times, were enough to sustain it all – even with all the motivation a toddler ought to've brought us. We really did try, very hard, in our four years together, beginning to end, not giving up easily (in fact, I threw in the proverbial towel first).

Time since has been much kinder to her figure than to mine (our daughter says that Mom still can wear her Ones), and the hurt she and I both weathered then (and since) shows only in her eyes, sometimes. She's done okay, thank God: remarried, had two more daughters – and any bitterness left over from the legal battles has long since evaporated.

We all wonder and vow over what we'd have done Then, knowing Now, and I'm no exception. A little less stupidity and inflexibility on my part back then, and we'd have been drinking toasts (or at least buttering them!) together in our name yesterday.

That's okay; it took the hurt and mistakes to bring me, and her, and our lovely daughter, here today, in our own homes.

Let me raise a metaphorical glass (I still have one from the prom we went to!): here's to you, Beej. Cheers!

Handshakes, and Hand Raised

While I'm backfilling and following up on recent posts…

Last week, while we were all delightedly shaking hands and patting each other's back, a couple more emails were passed along behind the scenes. After putting up last week's piece that had served to acquaint both my occasional readers to Blue Dog's blog; I detailed myself a bit further to him. Blue had mentioned earlier some familiarity with Arabic, so of course I had to offer the proper salutation:

Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 1:26 PM

Salaam aleikum, BlueDog! Or, as it is still is out on the West Coast, sabah al-kheir! ["sabah al-kheir" in Arabic is equivalent to "good morning!"]

Thanks for your permission to quote your email and your blog; these are in the latest entry. And I've added a link to your blog in my "Hopping Mad" category, in a place of honor ahead of the leftist "Buck Fush" folks. Please note that I was selective in quoting your email, leaving out your given name, and details of your background (beyond correcting my misstatement on your USAF status) and work history / current employment.

For obvious reasons of privacy, no one who shows up in my blog (other than public and/or historical figures) does so under their own name. This also allows me to write a bit more freely about them, of course – though I steer away from the negative, other than hopping-mad issues of faith, politics, and general human stupidity.

Re politics: myself, I've only ever voted for two Republicans – one, the mother of a friend (to the County Commission), and the other the boss of another friend (to the School Board). Beyond that, I vote Democrat when in doubt, though I've pulled the metaphorical lever for a Green candidate once (she didn't make it, but… well, being half-German, I was proud to have been among her supporters!). So I'm more Dem than independent.

And, at least on my blog, I'm frustratingly broad, where you're enviably deep and well-honed. So I'll veer across a wider swath of issues, such as genealogy (I dig around my family's roots… haven't found the truffles yet, though), language, family, writing, and particularly religion/faith. Plus I've got an embarrassing delight in horrid puns, and can't resist posting some of those I am struck by (or stuck with).

Having just finished four stressful years with [a large, world-spanning firm] (never identified in name or clear location on the blog), I’m currently sweating out a span of unemployment while handing out my résumé on street-corners and sailing them as paper airplanes into open office-windows.

Longer-term, I hope to be allowed to study for the Catholic priesthood, or at least be accepted into a professed religious order, once my younger daughter (17) is in college. But while firmly obedient to Rome in the big things, I do grumble from the left about the little stuff, especially when I find myself concurring (NB: not "agreeing") with the conservatives on issues such as abortion and immigration.

Anyway, take care, sir. ;-)

Salaam!

And of course he didn't bat an e-lash at my Arabic when he answered:

Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 5:58 PM

Wa aleikum al Sallam,

You wrote a wonderful introduction to my blog. I was very pleased. I tend to focus on those areas where I hope both conservatives and liberals can see eye to eye. I often get both sides of the fence complimenting me on some post or the other. I try to lay out both sides of an argument as fairly as I can, but then explain why I come down on one side or the other.

But in the end, except in the areas of racism, I am comfortable as long as people are making informed decisions. We seem so polarized as Americans these days. And I find that disturbing. I hold a lot of liberal beliefs and a few conservative one.

I am a devout Christian. Of course, having said that, we would need to talk to figure out exactly what that means. We have so many different factions and sects, etc. But my believes shape many of my attitudes. I cannot bring myself to be pro-choice. On that issue, I must vote my conscience. On the other hand, I have no problem with the state recognizing same-sex marriage.

I just started this blogging fairly recently. It's a way to let off some of my frustrations with the direction our country is heading. At first, I was pretty much just blogging to myself. Now I have six people checking out my bluedogthoughts blog and maybe 16 or 17 checking out my Myspace version. The two are basically the same, it's sort of a back up and I tend to update the bluedogthoughts more often, because I get a lot of comments on the myspace version.

Ancestry? I am basically German/Scotch/Irish with a Cherokee great great grandmotther (which is a few drops and not much more). [...] I am Church of Christ and while I don't quite agree one hundred percent on all of their positions, they are my family and I will stick with them.

Good luck on your job hunt. I've been there and it can be frustrating. When I first got out of [college], I ended up working with [someone well-established in the field] for free just to get experience. I think it took me over a year to finally get a decent position.

As for the Catholic priesthood, I can only wish you the best with that. We (and I speak broadly) need good dedicated men in the religious field.

Take care and always feel to write,

Blue Dog

The next day I put up a posting that finally allowed Spartacus to get a foot in edgewise, and he gave Blue Dog's paw a friendly shake, and while he was at it he tossed out a bone (viz., the interstate highway system) that I want to gnaw on soon.

Blue Dog saw me and Spartacus playing in the back yard, and watched the bone sail past:

Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:23 PM

AC,

Lovely to read your Out of the Blue Part 3. I do need to track down your friend [Spartacus]'s blogs and give them a read. Do you have a link? I would love to comment on something other than politics.

As to whether I am centrist or liberal. Have you noticed how both liberals and conservatives love to claim J.F.K. these days? I can show you the posts if necessary. But I would gladly claim the liberal mantle, because in truth, my social views are very liberal, if JFK is our model liberal.

But these days, if you claim to be a conservative, or you claim to be a liberal, those views have become so extreme, that you really cannot tell what baggage you bring along with those labels. [...]

I have a lot of fun [with my bluedogthoughts blog], because these posts allow me to let off steam in between works. The one area where I get fired up and feel some genuine anger is whenever I run into blatant racism and ugly intolerance.

Ah well, my family is gathering. Time to be a dad.

Thanks again and I look forward to more conversations with you and your friend. And yes, I'm a liberal if we go with Kennedy's definition. I'm also a fiscal conservative, because while I admire the good intentions of government, we often get it wrong. Finally, enjoy your Interstate Highway System even as you grumble while driving on it!

Blue Dog

I did get a note out to the Dog at last, this evening, that Spartacus doesn't have his own blog, but does shove me off my soapbox occasionally to express some of his own views on the current world, generally topical of my own subject at the moment, though not always. I'll get the two talking; there's enough fundamental political difference between them (despite similar backgrounds) that this should make for some interesting reading.

The second part of that blog-posting dealt with my ongoing job-hunt, and what had come of my interview with the awesome faith-based non-profit. One more detail there, too: the outbound executive assistant sent a wonderful, further note in answer to my offer to volunteer and assist their efforts:

Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 5:04 PM

Hi AgingChild,

[The president] was delighted that you offered your time on behalf of [our non-profit]. He mentioned that he might be interested in utilizing your skills in an office capacity, if you are still interested.

[She detailed the kind of work needed in the office itself, having to do with document management]

There are always back-up support projects on hold, so if you feel that you might like to try one of these ventures, let us know and give us an idea of when you might be available and we can go from there.

Thanks again for the generosity of your kind offer to volunteer your time and talents! Enjoy your weekend.

Best regards,

[name]

I spent next-to-no time on my personal email this past week, and so have yet <embarrassed blush> to get a response to her. Work around the office?? I'd expected to be called on to meet some of their folks with a hammer and apron, one weekend-dawn, and help (re)build someone's house!

So… sure; I'd be glad to help out there – it keeps my skills (and versatility) sharp, and of course allows the firm a continued look at me in action. I'm hoping this will be workable over a couple afternoon-hours, two or three times a week, which I can still spare for now.

If you have something to say, say it. Be ready to follow through when the teacher sees your hand up, and calls on you.