Friday, February 27, 2009

American Power, Moderation, and me

Immoderate Monk X-Post

Reply to American Power: Moderating Comments

The thing of it is, having you moderate, shut down, shut up, or in any way change what you've been doing, has never been my intent.

I mean, I'm not perfectly behaved by a long-shot, but neither am I particularly abusive, either in language or in tone. When you post something, I reply to what you and/or your readership says, pretty much like any other person who comments here. The only difference I can see is, I don't stroke your ego, and don't expect a Donnie-treat ("You're so right (to agree with my every word). Thanks for posting!!") and a pat on the head in reply.

I don't wish to keep you quiet; I just wish to respond to that neocon/con/"traditionalist" vision of the world with a different perspective, and that's pretty much all I do when I comment here. While I haven't ever done a count, I'd guess that my comment frequency is not all that different from that of some of your other regulars, though I will admit that there have been particular posts where I've ended up in discussions with three or four people simultaneously, and am answering each of their comments with one of my own. On the other hand, there have also been posts where I haven't commented at all, so it all evens out...

While you claim to get e-mails from secret admirers expressing disgust for my wanton ways, one or two of your fellow conservatives have said publicly (some on this blog even, though I'll be damned if I can find any of them now) that they don't understand why you so dislike me. They think I'm as wrong as you do, but they don't see where I'm particularly mean or abusive like you claim I am. With a few exceptions (mostly return blows, rather than first strikes), I can agree with that assessment (except about that "being wrong" part, of course... 8>)

I understand that you prefer to see me as "one fruity yet obssessed, generally abusive moral relativist with an unhealthy addiction to trolling for 'gotchas' who has been commenting here", but I don't see what I do to you as being all that different from what you do yourself to other bloggers. The only difference between us is, I'm more apt to do it right here on your own blog, rather than cutting the lines to which I wish to reply from this "offending" blog, then scurrying back to my own & pasting it in, sharing my observations with my ideological peers, rather than you, the person who said the thing with which I so disagree. I have little interest in pats on the back or "a million hits" (Rule 3, is it?); I'm looking for a conversation and an exchange of ideas, and I've no problem walking into the lion's den to find it.

My American Nihilist blog is closer to what you do yourself, dealing with you & other bloggers and certain socio-political celebs with whom we disagree from afar, by link and quote. That place is built around your penchant for a particular word--rendered almost meaningless through misuse and inane repetition--that you fire off at commenter and far-off blogger or politico alike. Our blogroll is nothing more than a list of folks with blogs that you've called a "nihilist," for any reason or none, in the last 6-8 months. And like Doctor Biobrain commented at an AmNi post, I'm starting to wonder too, whether "it won't turn out that EVERYONE is a nihilist; excepting, of course, Associate Professor Donald Douglas, who is the one man of true principle in this world.", at least, if one were to ask you, anyway.

In any case, my point is, I bear you little ill will, and I certainly don't want to stop you from blogging. I would prefer that you take off the blinders and try to see the world (or at least one little tiny part of it) from another perspective, but I really don't expect you ever will. If you do, great. If not, you continue to serve as a bad example. Either way, I'm not attacking you, at least most of the time... I'm just commenting on your blog (and now, given your moderation & threats of mass deletions once you turn the moderation off, here, as well.) I'm sorry that my doing so so offends you, but I'd imagine that those you "hammer" and attempt to "take down" (assuming that they notice, given that you tend to do these things somewhat out of their sight) feel pretty much the same way about you...

The real problem is, you got caught with your proverbial pants down with that comment about gay marriage, bestiality, and the conservative penchant for linking the two, and alot of people saw your Superman underoos, and wanted to compliment you on how well you wear them. (Pam's blog is fairly large itself, and even from there, the story was caught by one or two liberal blog aggregators, spreading it yet wider.) I wouldn't like it if it happened to me, either... ...but then, I didn't make the foolish comment; I only replied to it..

Sent for approval February 27, 2009 12:54 AM (AmPow Blog Time)

Thursday, February 26, 2009

American Power, and Lies

Immoderate Monk X-Post

Reply to: American Power: Amanda Marcotte: "The Actual Values of the Country"

Donald said: "...since Pam Spaulding lied about American Power..."

To be taken seriously outside of your own little circle, you're going to have to explain the lie more clearly, Donald. Anyone who reads the original post (or the responses to it, either on my blog or Pam Spaulding's) sees that you were quoted fairly, and in context, saying the following:

"Actually, Pam Spaulding imputes things to the traditionalist side that are virtually unheard of outside of the radical left's fever swamps? Bestiality? I've been blogging about this issue for months, and I can't recall the word ever being used by conservatives, or anything close to it."

I can appreciate that maybe you were thinking only of conservatives making such "bestial" "attacks in the CURRENT DEBATE post-Proposition 8" in your mind, but that isn't what you said when you put your thoughts into words on your blog.

We couldn't read your mind. We could only read what you said, and what you said was "Bestiality? I've been blogging about this issue for months, and I can't recall the word ever being used by conservatives, or anything close to it."

No one lied about you or your blog, Donald.

While there's no proof of it, I'm willing to accept that you may've had something different in your mind than you put into words on your blog, but all anyone (except perhaps any neocon psychics in your readership) can go by is the words actually posted on your blog, and quoted elsewhere. Any/all posts & commentary since is in reaction & reply to those words...

Unless you can show something different, the only lie is the one you're trying to tell in response.

Comment sent: February 25, 2009 11:34 PM (AmPow blog time)

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Racist Music Just a Download Away on Mainstream Music Sites

See UPDATE, appended.
------------------

FOXNews.com - Racist Music Just a Download Away on Mainstream Music Sites

The relevant quotes:

You're unlikely to find CDs by groups like Skrewdriver and Brutal Attack sold alongside the latest hits from Rihanna and the Jonas Brothers at your local retailer.

But the white-power punk bands' ballads are just a click away online.
...
But there is a market for it — which leads to the question of whether online music retailers should screen what they sell, or if it should be up to the buyer to decide what's suitable.
...
"If you're going to be able to carry that hard-core Marxist stuff, what is the problem with someone saying, 'White pride, worldwide?'" Schoep asked.
...
Nora Flanagan, a spokeswoman for the activist group Turn It Down, which lobbies against objectionable music, said the companies have every right — and a social obligation — to remove the songs from being sold on their sites.
...
"It's absolutely their right to sell it," she said, "but it could be their choice not to — if they wanted to take a stand on it."
...
Chris Kennedy, director of the Cato Institute's Project on Criminal Justice, said the term censorship is "thrown around" too loosely.

"Censorship should only be applied when the government tries to censor someone," he said. "Otherwise, we're just talking about the choices that entrepreneurs and businesses make in a free society. When companies decide they're not going to accept their product, that's not censorship — that's just choices that they make."


First off, the last bit from the gentleman from the Cato Institute, reminds me of what I said back in April, 2007 about Free Speech, Imus, & the Free Market. It isn't censorship or a violation of anyone's free speech rights, unless it is done by a government entity. When a tv or radio station fires a member of their on air talent, or a music outlet chooses not to carry a particular group's music, no one is being censored--even if they do so because they object to something the on air person or musical group said. When the government comes in and arrests the on air talent for something s/he said, or confiscates the group's recordings because of lyrical content, THAT'S censorship.

I think online & brick & mortar music retailers ought to consider screening their offerings for content. I also think that if you believe they've mishandled an artist--either by offering the music when you think they should not, or by removing an artist you think should be available--you need to speak up, and be willing to shop elsewhere if they consistently don't see it your way. I've always been a big fan of shopping your values, and believe that when a lot of individuals are willing to write companies and buy products that in some way reflect the values of the society they want to live in, things can change.

The only thing that worries me is that music retailers will play it safe, and controversial music of any kind will be harder to find. While I agree with retailers removing Neo-Nazi white power music, I'd be quite sad if humorless Christianists were to scare them away from offering Monty Python's The Life of Brian, or the right complained about "commie folk singers" like Pete Seeger or something. Were things to really go bad, we could end up with nothing but a steady diet of the most vanilla pop stars, and if the Victorian era prudes had their way, even they would lose any hint of sexual appeal.

I have high hopes however, that there are enough heathens, Stalinist nihilists, and perverts--but not enough black/white/brown/??? racists [changed from "neo-Nazis" at UPDATE]--to curtail sales of the truly dangerous music being sold, but leave a little spice... But we should watch it, just in case...
--------
UPDATE: While a little odd, my first commenter -anonymous- makes a good point. It isn't only white power music that's racist or otherwise objectionable, even to me. If thug rap or socialist folk or Christian/anti-Christian music offends you, by all means speak up and refuse to do business with those outlets that continue to sell that offensive crap (whatever you determine "that offensive crap" to be).

Monday, February 23, 2009

Donald Douglas & Conservative Bestiality

American Nihilist X-Post

"Repsac3 has left a new comment on the American Power post "Reconciliation on Gay Marriage?" (only to have Donald Douglas quickly & quietly delete it from his blog for reasons that I leave for the readers to discern for themselves.)

After quoting Pam Spaulding's discussion of dishonest & disingenuous arguments some on the right offer against gay marriage, Donald says (with a straight face, as far as I can tell): "Bestiality? I've been blogging about this issue for months, and I can't recall the word ever being used by conservatives, or anything close to it."

I replied:

Um, Donald... You need to pay more attention to the things your conservative brethren are saying. There's 2 former Republican presidential candidates among the rightwing folks using that very analogy:

From Homosexual Marriage to Bestiality: "U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) touched off a media firestorm in 2003, when, in an interview with an AP reporter, he suggested that allowing same-sex marriage was a strategic descent down the slippery slope toward acceptance of other perversions, such as incest, pederasty, and bestiality."

Huckabee: Gay Marriage Could Lead To Pedophilia, Bestiality, Polygamy: "Well, I don’t think that’s a radical view to say we’re going to affirm marriage. I think the radical view is to say that we’re going to change the definition of marriage so that it can mean two men, two women, a man and three women, a man and a child, a man and animal. Again, once we change the definition, the door is open to change it again. I think the radical position is to make a change in what’s been historic."

Audio: We'll compare you to anything we want. And if you call us out on it, we'll compare you to "spinners": "Rev. Jerry Falwell Jr. makes the gay/brother-loving/sheep-schtupping connection, and Matt Barber defends it/ denounces anyone who would dare be offended by it:"

California Supreme Court Legalizes Gay Marriage, Polygamy, Polyamory, Man-Boy Love, Bestiality, Necrophilia . . . (The Virtual Abbey)

Kathyrn Jean Lopez: Gay Sex Is Like Bestiality | Oliver Willis: "National Review’s Kathryn Jean Lopez has a Rick Santorum moment and says the reason a bestiality case happened in Massachusetts is because of gay marriage. Conservatism and bigotry, their status as synonyms just hasn’t been officially recognized yet. By the way, Lopez is Mitt Romney’s biggest supporter at National Review, any surprise"

Race for Governor marred by bestiality comparisons: "The contest to become Governor of Colorado has been rocked by comments from a Republican candidate comparing gay marriage to bestiality."

States to Vote on Incest and Bestiality | Up My Own Ass
---

Not sure where I stand on the larger issue-- a New York Times Op-Ed - A Reconciliation on Gay Marriage , jointly authored by an opponent and a supporter of gay marriage... I suspect that the tide is turning anyway, and this compromise will be unnecessary soon, but there are folks being hurt by marriage bans right now... I'll probably wait until I get more facts & see more reaction to this compromise, for & against, before choosing a side on this...
---

Originally posted by repsac3 to Donald Douglas' American Power Blog on February 22, 2009 - 6:53 PM (and deleted without comment by him a short time later. Fucking coward.)

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Absolute statements and American Values

Wingnuts & Moonbats X-Post

(This piece is adapted from a comment I wrote in reply to an observation someone made about me.)

It's probably the liberal in me, but I don't go in much for the whole black/white, good/evil, with us/with the terrorists kinda thinkin'. I don't believe there are all that many absolutes, and I reject statements that speak in absolute terms. Just about all saints have sinned, and most sinners have performed good acts, too. All Americans (or Muslims) are not good. All Muslims (or Americans) are not evil. Not everyone who claims to be a faithful _______ (place religion/denomination of choice there) acts like one.

Just about anytime a person speaks of a whole group of people, whether chosen & denoted by their religion, their ethnicity, their country of origin, or any other factor, and speaks of them as though they are all one kinda person (whether all good, or all evil), one is almost certainly going to end up being factually incorrect in what one is saying about them. To group people together based on ethnicity, religion or country of origin, and then treat them all as one monolithic entity is the very definition of bigotry.

The same is true of me & politics. As a Green, I seldom agree with Conservative or Republican thought. (And contrary to what some have said about me, I'm generally not a big fan of Democratic thought, either.) Still, it's mighty rare to find me saying "Conservatives are evil" (or anything else, either), because I just don't think that way... Whatever issues and disagreements I have with individual conservatives or Republicans, wherever I may find them, they do not prove anything about ALL Conservatives, or Republicans, (or about any other groups to which such Conservatives or Republicans may belong, like "college professors," or "guys with hats," for instance...) Good or bad, whatever I'm saying about you, I'm saying it about you, alone.

I try to treat the people I meet as individuals, not as representatives of the groups they were either born into or chose to affiliate themselves with... Call me naive or crazy if you must, but I believe the more folks treat others as individuals, the better our personal & global relations with each other will be...

If you want (or want me) to condemn or praise individual people and / or individual acts, that's one thing... But chances are slim you'll ever get me to say all ________ are ____________, and I encourage everyone reading these words to give it a lot of thought before doing so yourselves. To my way of thinkin', it's neither intellectually or morally right to do so.

Yes, there is evil in the world, but it isn't "the Muslims," or "the conservatives," or "the non-believing nihilists" that are the cause of it. It's individual men & women murdering others, raping others, and treating others with disrespect and derision in a myriad of other ways large and small, that is at the heart of evil.

That's what I think, anyway...

The original version of this piece, and the comment to which I was replying, appear here, in case anyone's interested.

Saturday, February 21, 2009

Nihilist Musical

American Nihilist X-Post

Some ideas just tickle me... The thought of a nihilist musical--inspired by this review of a song on this woman's new album--is another of 'em...

movmnt | A Fine Frenzy:

This is followed by the topsy-turvy piano and biting strings of “The Minnow & the Trout”, which plays like some nihilist musical:

“Please, I know that we’re different / but we were one cell in the sea in the beginning / and what we’re made of was all the same once / we’re not that different after all.”


I guess it would be a place for all of us happy-go-lucky nihilists to bring our dates... ...as long as our wives don't find out.

In Reply: Inviting American Power Readers to Discuss Me with Me, For A Change

In reply to the following comment at the post: American Power: Jesus Christ: Dead Nihilist of the Week?:
Donald Douglas said...
Repsac3: I've blogged about this already. I get many e-mails from people who either do not blog or who do not want you and your hordes attacking them in the comment threads at their blogs.

You have a blog with all of your buddies. You link to it in my comment threads. I have a considerably large readership, and I ask permission before I post e-mails. Perhaps some folks will come out and confront you directly and reveal themselves as the authors of the e-mails. But that is not my decision to make, and this is a free-speech zone. The best ideas will win out, I'm sure, and your blogging hordes are certainly helping me the case for traditionalism.
February 20, 2009 5:12 PM
---
Donald, my comment was not directed at you, but at the very people who're contacting you privately...

While they have every right to write you privately and secretly to say nasty things (or in fact any thing) about me, and whether they do so because they do not blog or because they fear retribution/discussion/reply, I see nothing wrong with giving them a polite invitation to discuss "me" with "me," directly, rather than hiding behind a far worse anonymity--allowing their words to flow through you--than you attacked not all that long ago as cowardly. ("What's all very interesting here is that each and every one of my antagonists goes by an anonymous online handle. Now that's cowardly. And worthy of a little analytical consideration.") Analytical consideration, indeed... Who's more anonymous; a person with no name or voice at all, or one using a consistent pen name?

Regardless, my comment wasn't directed to you, so you've no need to defend yourself... I'm sure your super-secret readership will contact you if they have a reply for you to offer on their behalf.

February 21, 2009 7:56 AM

Friday, February 20, 2009

In reply: Are American Power Readers Really As Cowardly as Dr. Douglas Makes Them Out To Be?

In reply to: American Power: Jesus Christ: Dead Nihilist of the Week?, and in particular, Donald Douglas' quote of an "...e-mail from a reader commenting on Repsac3 and his fellow bloggers"
---

I invite Donald's anonymous pen pal to write me personally at repsac3blogs@gmail.com if s/he wishes to discuss my faith, as there's little chance Donald knows a thing about it, despite his being such a learned, learned man. (Just ask him...)

Barring that, I'd appreciate it if you folks who lack the courage to confront me directly, and who choose instead to chat about me behind my back, do what you can to keep your private conversations private, including asking those with whom you speak do the same...

While Donald seems to get some perverse thrill from repeating the words of these anonymous pen pals--this must be the 4th or 5th "reader e-mail" critical of a "nihilist" he's blogged about just in the year or so I've known him--he's making a good portion of his readership out to be cowards unwilling to stand up for their beliefs, which if true, would be a sad state of affairs.
And that assumes he's not just making these folks up out of whole cloth... While Donald seems to be what he claims, who can really say, for sure? As long as these critical "readers" of his remain anonymous and allow Donald to speak in their absence, they may just as well be disembodied voices in his head...
---

Posted February 20, 2009 4:20 PM

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Yes Donald...

With All Due Respect X-post

If you say stuff like this:

"Spencer's essay continues with an explanation of the intrinsic brutality among Muslim men, indicating that primordial violence against women is a central component to 'Islamic tradition.'"


or this:

"The notion that Asiya Hassan's husband was not in fact a moderate, and that he murdered his wife according to ancient Muslim culture and tradition, puts the lie to left's claims that Islam is just another religion - culturally equivalent - and that conservatives are 'racist' by identifying Muslims as a clear and present danger to national security on the basis of their beliefs. This backlash illustrates anti-Americanism through and through, and the left's pushback on this story just makes the entire case that much more significant for the debate over creeping Islamization of the West." (and dig the subtle defense of Geert Wilders, who wants to ban books, but whines about his fellow Dutchmen (& others) curtailing his own free speech)


...chances are pretty good that you're a racist (though perhaps, "religious/cultural bigot" would be more accurate). At the very least, you ought to get used to many of your fellow Americans saying you are... ...because they will.

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Reply to American Power: Nihilist Muzzies aren't the only ones punishing their wives...

American Nihilist X-Post

The comment: American Power: Muzzammil Hassan and Islamic Primordial Violence: Shoprat sez: "This is a religion whose leadership argues over how big of a stick the Koran allows a man to hit his wife with." February 18, 2009 11:16 AM

My reply (Before Donald deleted it, calling it "spam.": Christian Domestic Discipline - Loving Godly Christian Marriages

(I simply left the link. The rest was up to the reader.)

Further info (now that the Donald has forced me to turn my single comment into a blog post, with his weird, weird ways...):

(From the link)
This site is meant to be a haven for married couples who practice safe and consensual Christian Domestic Discipline, or for those who would like to learn more about it.

This site and the information presented here is intended for educational and entertainment purposes only.

This website is intended to provide a home for couples involved in a Christian Domestic Discipline marriage where they might find information and share fellowship with other CDD couples without having to wade through pornography, warped practices, or distorted ideals of what God created for marriage.

This site is not the typical "spanking" site that is prevalent on the web. This site focuses mainly on improving marital relationships by learning to follow God-given guidelines and roles, as listed in God's Word. God keeps His Word. When we obey His principles, blessings will follow.


Yet more info & comment: Spare the rod, spoil the wife - Broadsheet - Salon.com

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

In reply: "if you ever intend to "take me down," you're going to have to do better than that"

In reply to the following American Power blog comment at the post "(O)CT(O)PUS = CYBER-BULLY" (reprinted below):

The comment:
Donald Douglas said...
PrivatePigg:

Here's Repsac3:

"Donald posted his employer info himself. The college has a website, and anyone willing to look can find Donald's public page--or the public page of his department head."
Don't be fooled by this dodge. Repsac3's information is public:

W. James Casper

Repsac3 has no claim to anonymity. It took me a second to find it on Google, so what you're seeing here is Repsac3's evasion on the issue at hand.

This is a red herring, and moral cowardice, which is what we usually get from Reppy.

I'm not going around posting people's information in a campaign of intimidation. Indeed, the only reason I even used Repsac3's real name is to see how much he likes it, and apparently not so much. And therein lies your double standard.

Repsac3 and (O)CT(O)PUS are making explicit threats that if I don't stop blogging about their nihilism they'll contact my employees and initiate a lawsut. Obviously, this is the only sense of power they can have over me, since they're unable to make an argument more compelling than those I've made against them; they are so incapable of winning a battle of wits and ideas that they'll in fact seek to suppress those ideas. Naturally, I'm showing the world that these are just awful, horrible people, and Repsac3's defense of himself is pathetic. It's evasion and obfuscation.

Repsac3 built a blog to smear and snark and vilify me and American Power. Why? Because, like David Denby indicates, their goal is to attack and ridicule to cause pain and sow fear, even death. It's not a joke here or a laugh there. It's a project of diabolical vengeance. I'm being libeled right now, as a worthless lying dog, a right-wing freak, a cut-and-paste neocon robot.

I can handle debate like this, clearly, but this has gone on to harassment. The phone numbers for President Eloy Oakley or Executive VP of Academic Affairs Donald Berz are not on my department's website or on my personal information page. There's no reason to post them other than to intimidate me.

This is why you blog anonymously, PrivatePigg, and I don't blame you. But don't be fooled by Repsac3's attempt at moral equivalence. There isn't any. He's not an anonymous blogger, and he's said so himself above:

"For awhile I was very careful, but in the last year or so I've let my guard down a bit."
That's putting it mildly. He let down his guard all the way by posting his name online. Repsac3's a dishonest, vile man out to slander others and stifle debate. The current post is a record of their deeds in case of legal action. -= Donald Douglas - February 17, 2009, 3:26 AM comment (AmPow blog time)
---

And my reply:
Here's Repsac3:
"Donald posted his employer info himself. The college has a website, and anyone willing to look can find Donald's public page--or the public page of his department head."
Don't be fooled by this dodge. Repsac3's information is public.
I'm pretty sure I said as much, Donald... Both from older and newer info, one can find either of us if one looks... If you're now arguing that this makes it alright to offer such things maliciously, I'm not with you. It wasn't right for (O)ct(o) to do what he did, and it wasn't right for you to do what you did... It's one thing when one releases one's own information, but another when it is offered by a third party... That was my point. I still wonder what yours is...
Repsac3 has no claim to anonymity. It took me a second to find it on Google, so what you're seeing here is Repsac3's evasion on the issue at hand.
Neither of us has any claim to anonymity, Donald. Anonymity isn't the issue. Maliciousness is the issue. It isn't for (O)ct(o) or for you to decide how & where to release another person's info without their consent. And once one asks the question why either of you chose to do so, things get even more sticky.
This is a red herring, and moral cowardice, which is what we usually get from Reppy.
Pray tell, what is the red herring here, Donald? What is the issue I'm avoiding?
I'm not going around posting people's information in a campaign of intimidation. Indeed, the only reason I even used Repsac3's real name is to see how much he likes it, and apparently not so much. And therein lies your double standard.
Considering I said as much not two hours earlier, in a comment you pretty obviously read, your malicious little experiment might've easily been avoided, no? (And should I hunt on back into the archives for the previous time or two when you've done the same, or would you have a snappy answer explaining your reasoning behind those, as well?)
Repsac3 and (O)CT(O)PUS are making explicit threats that if I don't stop blogging about their nihilism they'll contact my employees and initiate a lawsut.
Donnie... Baby... You're lying. I have never made any such threat, and you know it.

Go ahead. Quote my threat. Link to it. Prove what you say, or admit you cannot. (as though you would ever do either...) You're making it up, Donald.

The closest thing to a threat I've ever made is to tell you that as long as you keep acting the fool, I was going to keep laughing at you. Neither of us have stopped, so far.
Obviously, this is the only sense of power they can have over me, since they're unable to make an argument more compelling than those I've made against them; they are so incapable of winning a battle of wits and ideas that they'll in fact seek to suppress those ideas.
Again with the tell... Never with the show... Stop claiming victory, and start showing the victories, Donald...
Naturally, I'm showing the world that these are just awful, horrible people, and Repsac3's defense of himself is pathetic. It's evasion and obfuscation.
It looks to me like alot of questioning from me, and no answers from you... But ymmv...
Repsac3 built a blog to smear and snark and vilify me and American Power. Why?
Because you're a funny character, Donald. You claim to "take down" all these "nihilists"--the definition of which appears to be "doesn't agree with me," based on common usage, here--and I got to wondering whether all these folks on your "enemies" list had anything in common, and whether any of them had ever gotten a straight answer out of you as to why they fit any definition of nihilist. (I know I certainly haven't--and I must've asked a good 25-30 times--between day one and today.)

Because of your constant use of the word and your equally constant refusal to coherently explain it, it's become a joke around the leftwing blogesphere. YOU have become a joke around the leftwing blogesphere. I intended for American Nihilist to be a one off joke on the silly "nihilist" meme you created. I sent invites to all the "nihilsts" I could find, thinking we'd all just have a quick laugh at the expense of the silly little meme, & that'd be it... But some of 'em wanted to sign up, and once they did, and started writing--in character--it became something better than the one off joke I intended... You've caused alot of people to want to laugh at you, Donald. You've not made many friends over here in "nihilist, enemy" territory...
Because, like David Denby indicates, their goal is to attack and ridicule to cause pain and sow fear, even death. It's not a joke here or a laugh there. It's a project of diabolical vengeance. I'm being libeled right now, as a worthless lying dog, a right-wing freak, a cut-and-paste neocon robot.
Gee... You really are a drama queen, aren't you?

You do tend to be a cut-n-paste neocon robot, but it's a part of your charm.
Donald, you're reaping what you've sewn. Everyone who writes for AmNi, and many of the people who read it, have been slandered by you here. Almost as many have had you over on their sites with one line versions of your schtick here. They're laughing because they get the joke, and they get the joke because they've seen you in action.
I can handle debate like this, clearly, but this has gone on to harassment. The phone numbers for President Eloy Oakley or Executive VP of Academic Affairs Donald Berz are not on my department's website or on my personal information page.
They are both on the website of the college though, aren't they? Doesn't that make them "public information," just like my name? Or do you want to have that cake & eat it, too... (It's wrong when (O)ct(o) posts public info, but fine when Donald posts public info... Mmmm... Yummy double standard icing...)
There's no reason to post them other than to intimidate me.
No, I'm pretty sure the college wasn't thinking of you at all when it posted them, Donald...

Now, (O)ct(o). on the other hand... (But then, one might say the same about you... Pot, meet kettle.) I say both of you were wrong... What say you, Donald?
This is why you blog anonymously, PrivatePigg, and I don't blame you. But don't be fooled by Repsac3's attempt at moral equivalence. There isn't any. He's not an anonymous blogger, and he's said so himself above:
"For awhile I was very careful, but in the last year or so I've let my guard down a bit."
I never said I was an anonymous blogger, Donald. (In fact, I'm pretty sure that was you who said that, in your original post.) I said I prefer not to use my real name on blogs. Then--& I submit, BASED on my saying that--you chose to use it... Not good, Donnie. Too much of your character showing through, there...
That's putting it mildly. He let down his guard all the way by posting his name online.
If that is your standard, then you have nothing to complain about as regards these guys from your college. Just like my name, the information is on a public website where anyone can find it.

Personally, I think you should set the bar higher, and say that individuals have the right to disclose or hide their own information as they see fit, but that third parties do not, but to do so, you'd have to admit personal fault, and I've never seen you do any such thing.
Repsac3's a dishonest, vile man out to slander others and stifle debate.
The fact that I keep coming here asking the same unanswered questions is evidence of the lie in those words... Man up, Donald. Stop telling people what to think about me, and start providing evidence of your allegations. If childish names & unsubstantiated labels and theories about my motivations is all you have, fine. But if you ever intend to "take me down," you're going to have to do better than that...
---

Comment posted February 17, 2009 4:59 AM (AmPow blog time)

In reply: "Even if you buy into 'an eye for an eye,' I'm not the guy... It's not my eye."

In reply to the following comment from PrivatePigg, posted at AmPow on February 16, 2009, 9:47 PM (reposted below):
Repsac3 - I can say openly that Dr. D should not post your name, but I'll admit I might be compelled to do as much if someone posted my personal information and employer info. I don't know all of your and Dr D's history. In any event, it would not be right of me to do it.

That said, posting simply a name is not even remotely as egregious as posting specific employer info. Whatever your name is, I'm sure I could put it in to google and never find you, your family, your employer, or anyone related to you in this big country of ours. I have a pretty uncommon name, but have found people all over the country with the exact same name, and even some guy who has registered "my" name and uses it as his personal website/business. Considering the size of the US, ones actual name ("John Anderson") without accompanying info. would probably leave one as anonymous as any clever moniker. There is not a high probability that anyone will find you based on simply your name. So Dr. D's listing of your name, with nothing else, in these comments does not aid me if I wished to harass you.

However, posting Dr. D's employer, including phone and address, obviously allows people to intimately interfere in the Doctor's life, going so far as to permit me to disrupt this man's ability to earn a living (which, truthfully, can be the only point in publishing such information).

Again, personal information should be off limits, but some personal information is worse than others.

---

I'll admit I might be compelled to do as much if someone posted my personal information and employer info.

Hmmm... I didn't see you as a two wrongs make a right kinda guy...

Second, Donald posted his employer info himself. The college has a website, and anyone willing to look can find Donald's public page--or the public page of his department head.

Also, you understand that I am not the "someone" who posted any of Donald's info, right? (O)ct(o)pus writes on several blogs, including one I created, but he isn't me.

Even if one does buy into that stupid "eye for an eye" thing, I'm not the guy... I'm not the eye.

For all your clever defense of Donald's posting of my real name, it isn't about the effectiveness (or ineffectiveness) of his doing so, but about his doing so in the first place. Why do you suppose our fair associate professor posted my name here less than two hours after I agreed with you about the benefits of using a nom de keyboard? Personally, I think he threw a petulant little fit of maliciousness, but you're free to draw your own conclusions. (It isn't hard to find the info in question, PPigg... Just go back & read Donald's 10:43am comment in this thread. It's one or two comments down from my initial reply to you...)

One more time, I agree that (O)ct(o)pus shouldn've repeated the info he found on the Long Beach City College- History & Political Science Department website. He did so for the express purpose of doing harm to Donald. But I'm not (O)ct(o)pus, and fail to see why anyone's beef in that regard should be with me, or why any action some other blogger took should justify Donald's outing of my real world name in anyone's eyes...

Everyone who posts or comments at American Nihilist is responsible for their own words and ideas, and I've no intention of editing or censoring the posts of others, whatever I may think of what they have to say. They're all big boys, and can all defend themselves... I understand that Donald and some others of his ilk like to lump folks together, and hold every _____ (Democrat, liberal, "nihilist," ???) responsible for the bad acts of the one _____, (Check out Donald's posts blaming Kos as a whole for any racist/antisemitic comment, or every homosexual marriage protester for the few reported individual acts of prop 8 violence or bigotry) but I refuse to be held to such silly, sweeping generalization standards. I'm willing to accept my own credit or blame, but I've no use for anyone else's...
---
Posted to the American Power blog post"(O)CT(O)PUS = CYBER-BULLY" on/at February 16, 2009, 11:30 PM (AmPow blog time)

Monday, February 16, 2009

In reply: "Right or left, leave the personal information out of it. It's wrong every time"

In reply to PrivatePigg's February 16, 2009, 6:34 PM comment at American Power: (O)CT(O)PUS = CYBER-BULLY (Quoted below):
repsac3: "Do I think Octo's wrong for getting your job involved?
Yeah, probably....

Really? Only probably? I don't need to read your blog or anyone else's to be able to draw a line like that...It's wrong.

When I was at Libery Pundit with Brian the guys from Iowa Liberal would always respond to Brian with personal attacks, talking about his wife, even going so far as to do a criminal records / personal records search and posting the contents (maybe there was a past divorce they posted, I forget). They were doing that prior to our move to LP, too, so I learned early to keep private info. close to the vest. It's a disgusting practice, to say the least.

Divulging personal information is never relevant unless the post is specifically about that. You should be able to debate by using the poster's or commenter's words alone. There should never be a time and a place for mentioning personal information, or asking people to harass an employer. I might go so far as to say that interfering with one's employment, simply because of an online debate, is un-American. To each his own to earn a living, eh? Even Obama got himself all pissy when his girls were mentioned, even though he's the damn President and his girls are paraded before the cameras! Funny, I remember how Obama smeared Joe the Plumber's personal reputation after being exposed as a socialist...Well, with role models like that...

Anyway, right or left, leave the personal information out of it. It's wrong every time (unless someone makes their own personal information the actual subject of their own post). Even if you disagree with Donald, even you should recognize his personal information is completely irrelevant, no?

---
Even if you disagree with Donald, even you should recognize his personal information is completely irrelevant, no?
If that's the whole of your response, PPigg, I'm good with that. While you are free to play with the affect I put on my response ("Yeah, probably..."), I do agree that Octo was wrong to do as he did.

As I've said several times, it isn't something I would do (or anything I did do, contrary to the "blame game" distributive properties with which Donald likes to play), but I still maintain that the guy who was responsible for posting that publicly-found info is a big boy who can stand up for & defend himself and his actions... ...or do you think I should've removed his post (or that portion of it), simply because I had the power to do so?

I'll refrain from asking you to publicly repudiate Donald's mention of my given name here on this blog less than two hours after my explaining why--perhaps like the phone number of his department chair--I prefer to keep it out of the public realm.

Having read some of your stuff here & on your own blog, I believe you are intellectually honest, and do repudiate Donald's action as strongly as you do Octo's, though perhaps just a tad bit more quietly... It's cool... That final paragraph was clear enough for most of us here to understand, even if you weren't so willing to spell it all out...
Posted February 16, 2009, 7:48 PM (AmPow blog time)

In reply: "To blame Peter for the words of Paul always was stupid..."

In reply to Donald Douglas' February 16, 2009 3:13 PM comment at the American Power blog post "(O)CT(O)PUS = CYBER-BULLY," I offered the following:
---
repsac3 said: "I trust that those who read these exchanges are intelligent enough to decide for themselves..."
I trust so as well,...
If that were true, you wouldn't claim victory over others as often as you do. I don't believe you trust the readers to decide for themselves at all...
...especially on the fact that you refuse to address the subtantive points that others have raised, like your eminently "bad" behavior at American Nihilist that "sort of speaks louder than your words ... "
I'm pretty sure I did address any and all of my behaviors at American Nihilist, as well as here. I have a blog that mocks you. If PPigg thinks that says I'm not a nice guy, he's welcome to feel that way... If you want to blame me for every word any blogger on my site posts, you're welcome to do that, too.

To PPigg, I can only urge him to visit the site & see for himself what is & isn't posted there.

To you, I will again say that to blame Peter for the words of Paul always was stupid, & ever shall be so. I don't know what did or did not happen between you and Octo, but I've seen you "shade" truth far more often than I have him. (Tell me again about Fogg threatening the FoxNews people with death, by saying that if the ratings & finances don't improve, "heads will roll." That's classic Donald...)

Do I think Octo's wrong for getting your job involved?
Yeah, probably....
But does that mean I'm going to censor his post? No, of course it doesn't.

Octo's a big boy. He can defend his post as he sees fit, assuming you ever stop trying to place the blame for his (mis)deeds on any/all other "nihilists," and deal with Octo, directly...
Again, as usual, that's called avoidance, prevarication, and moral cowardice.
Avoidance of what, exactly?
Prevarication about what?
Cowardice? You're dreaming, Donald.
Just keep it up. I'm sure it makes you feel good that you can play dodge ball all day, and all the while real moral clarity consistently alludes you.
I'll simply again point out who is dodging the questions here... I've repeatedly asked for quotes of anything I've said or done to warrant all these silly names and adjectives Donald has used in reference to me. I invite anyone here (but especially the man, himself) to point out Donald's substantive reply(s) to my queries...
---
Posted February 16, 2009 3:53 PM (AmPow blog time)

IRT: "...pure scab of shame"

In reply to the following comment at American Power: (O)CT(O)PUS = CYBER-BULLY:
------
Repsac3: I need to point you back to what Private Pigg said above:

" ... if you do have a blog dedicated to mocking a blogger with whom you disagree...well, that sort of speaks louder than your words ... "

The evidence for what you seek is in the mirror, Repsac3. You are not a good, decent man. And you're intellectually capable of argument or truth.

You started American Nihilist because I repudiated you so completely and unequivocally in my post, "About the Comments," from Januay 18th.

You're a dying to find a way to get out from under the diabolical plague afflicting you but you cannot, because you have no goodness or sense of right or wrong, and what the people are posting at your blog is not debate or ideas, but personal, rank, ad hominem attacks and threats to me and my employer.

I just wrote a post, and this fits you perfectly, you pure scab of shame:

"You must realize the Left's effort is not to gain the moral high ground, it is only to squat and defile that land once they have tricked you into leaving it. Make no mistake, their intention is not to act morally or enact decent policies or truly help the individual. It is to take the moral high ground from you so you will have no place to stand."

If Leftists can successfully make you feel as though they will take care of the moral needs of this nation (do you realize how absurd that sounds?), then you will stop daring to interfere, they hope. And when you stop interfering, when you retreat, the Left's own hypocritical inaction guarantees this nation will be condemned by their god of nihilism, narcissism, and self-hate.
- Donald Douglas - February 16, 2009, 1:13 PM
---
Yes, Donald, I have created a blog that mocks your incessant and unprovoked use of the word nihilist... If that is the hook on which you choose to hang your whole "evil," "nihilist," "denialist," "demonic" hat, I guess you've got me, bud...

I still maintain that you're making ridiculous charges and refusing to back them with actual facts (and that the remainder of your latest comment is just more of the same... Lotta you talking, but no substance in support of your words--If you want, I can prove that my AmNi blog predates your "About the comments" post by about a week, though I suspect if I did, that'd only cause you check back in your archives for some other post where you "repudiated me, completely and unequivocally" (whatever the hell that means)--but you go ahead & declare your victory, if it helps you sleep better. You're always welcome to your own delusions.

As usual, I feel no need to tell folks who "won" or "lost" anything... I trust that those who read these exchanges are intelligent enough to decide for themselves...
---
Posted February 16, 2009 2:23 PM (AmPow blog time)

IRT: "YOU MAKE THREATS! YOUR BLOG MAKES THREATS!"

In reply to the following comment at American Power: (O)CT(O)PUS = CYBER-BULLY:
Repsac3: No, it's not goose for the gander, because I do not threaten your livelihood or place of employment. YOU MAKE THREATS! YOUR BLOG MAKES THREATS! THEN YOU BLAME ME FOR NOT BEING CAREFUL ENOUGH! HAVE YOU NO SHRED OF DECENCY, SIR!

That is what your blog is about, and your ideology itself is all about destruction, of morality and traditionalism. You cannot rebut arguments with reason, so you deny any argument exists, and continually ask for evidence of your own perfidy and moral bankruptcy. That's called postmodern denialism.

This post is about all of you at American Nihilist. Yes, that's what you are. You have no values, no truth, and no God.
- Donald Douglas - February 16, 2009, 12:40 PM
---
We are all our brother's keeper.

What any "nihilist" / conservative / Democrat / Catholic / demonist / black / white person does, EVERY white / black / demonist / Catholic / Democrat / conservative / "nihilist" person is responsible for.

Donald's "distributive law of nihilism" at work.

I ask for evidence Donald, because you fail to offer any on your own... You accuse and accuse, and show nothing that would substantiate your charges...

I invite anyone to look at what Donald does and does not say in his last comment (or if you prefer, the one before, or the one before that), and decide for yourself whether there's any there in there, or whether it's just a bunch of spurious noise that anyone or his brother could post about anyone else.
---

Posted February 16, 2009, 12:59 PM (AmPow blog time)

IRT: Donald makes many hysterical charges...

In reply to the following comments at American Power: (O)CT(O)PUS = CYBER-BULLY:
Donald Douglas - February 16, 2009, 10:43 AM
PrivatePigg - February 16, 2009, 10:44 AM
PrivatePigg - February 16, 2009, 10:47 AM
Donald Douglas - February 16, 2009, 11:01 AM
-----

Donald makes many hysterical charges, but is hard-pressed to back them with much of anything of substance...

I could ask Donald to put up some post or comment of mine in furtherance of this nebulous "destruction" he's on about, but I already know he won't, if for no other reason than he can't. There is no such post or comment.

I could ask him to point out any lie I've told, but again, I know he won't.

I could even ask him, as I have so very many times before, to show how anything I've written fits any definition of nihilism published in any mainstream non-partisan source. Donald never has; Donald probably never will...

I really don't wish to silence anyone. I have a blog that exposes Donald's incessant cries of "nihilist!" "nihilist!" for what they are... The calls of a bird unwilling to back such ad hominem namecalling with actual fact. I intended it to be a place where the many bloggers who've been attacked by Donald Douglas on their own blogs and his could get together & post what they chose to an audience of like minds. The snarky humor of the thing took off, and it has become a satire of what we all think Donald just may mean by this whole "nihilist" meme of his...

No, PP, I have never personally posted any information about Donald or anyone else that the person in question did not reveal on their own. (Of course, thru the new math of Donald's "distributive properties of nihilism," if anyone did so on a blog with which I am associated, that means I did, too... In that case, I guess I'm guilty.)

But I will point out that in his first comment in reply to me, Donald did choose to reveal something about me that I just stated I preferred remain private, for reasons I can only allow you to surmise for yourselves. (Yep, that is my name, Donald... You must be so proud as having ferreted it out for broadcast.)

I am not hiding anything... My blogs are available for any/all to see and read... Donald (and everyone else) is free to attack, defend, laugh, cry, or react in any other way he chooses, here, there or anywhere else... No one's stopping him. No one even wants to stop him. Most of us think he's quite funny, and we're all too glad to point it out as often as we can.

Quite simply, Donald has been claiming to "take down" other bloggers (frequently by calling them nihilists, strangely enough) for a long time. What's good for we "nihilist" gooses is certainly good enough for the glandular gander that is Donald.
---

Posted February 16, 2009 12:22 PM (AmPow blog time)

Memery - Sheila - Tommy Roe

1. Put Your itunes/ipod on Shuffle
2. For each question, press the next button, and the title of that song is your answer.
3. YOU MUST WRITE THAT SONG NAME DOWN NO MATTER HOW SILLY IT SOUNDS
4. Put any comments in (brackets) after the song name
5. Tag those to finish the survey as well
-----------------------------------

1) Describe yourself
Moonlight Sonata - Beethoven

2) What do people feel when they're around you?
Eubie's Classical Rag - Eubie Blake

3) Describe your current relationship?
Zip-a-dee-doo-dah - Aly & AJ

4) Where would you like to be right now?
In the Beginning (Radio Edit) - 2 Souls & Bari Koral

5) How do you feel about love?
I Tawt I Taw Ol' Tanty Cwaus - Mel Blanc (as Tweety Bird)

6) What is your life like?
The Central Scrutinizer - Frank Zappa

7) What would you wish for if you only had one wish?
Silence - Gomez

8) Say something wise
The Other Side Of The World - Dishwalla

9) How would you describe yourself?
Lord, I Used To Know 150 Songs By Heart...And Waterbound - Dirk Powell

10) What do you look for in a girl?
Shriner's Park - Melissa Etheridge

11) How do you feel today?
Stairway to Heaven - Neil Pepper

12) What's your life's purpose?
Zombie - Nellie McKay

13) What is your motto?
Rastaman Chant - Bob Marley, Busta Rhymes & Flipmode Squad

14) What do your friends think of you?
You Vote Does Count Skit - P.Diddy

15) What do you think of your parents?
You Can't Always Get What You Want - Luther Allison

16) What do you think about very often?
The Dick Van Dyke Show Theme - The Dick Van Dyke Show

17) What do you think of your best friend?
Sink, Florida, Sink (Electric) - Against Me!

18) What do you think of the person you like?
Life in a Northern Town - The Dream Academy

19) What is your life story?
Ill Angel - Jeb Loy Nichols

20) What do you want to be when you grow up?
Herbei, Oh Ihr Glaubigen (O Come All Ye Faithful) - Mannheim Steamroller

21) What do you think of when you see the person you like?
Didi Tera Devar Deewana - Lata Mangeshkar & S.P.Balasubhramaniam

22) What will you dance to at your wedding?
Cornflake Girl - Tori Amos

23) What will play at your funeral?
Jamie's Crying - Jajuya

24) Biggest fear?
Odds And Ends - Dionne Warwick

25) Biggest secret?
Frankie and Johnny - Tuts Washington

26) What will you post this as?
Sheila - Tommy Roe
----------------

Used my whole iTunes music section (all 43,274 items) on this... Not that impressed, for the most part. I'm a firm believer that the answers are right there in front of you, most times--just concentrate on a problem, then open a random book to a random page, and your answer will be there, if you read it right--but I'm guessing there wasn't enough concentration for this to work as well as it could have...

Fun, nevertheless... 8>)

Monday, February 09, 2009

Memery - That High School Meme

Fill this out about your high school experience or SENIOR year! The longer ago it was, the more fun the answers will be!! Thought you all who knew me back then might get a laugh out of some memories! Share yours!

1. Did you date someone from your school?: Yes

2. Did you marry someone from your high school?: No

3. Did you car pool to school?: I almost always walked, but did get a ride occasionally. (More rides home after school, though...)

4. What kind of car did you have?: I had no car in high school.

5. What kind of car do you have now?: 2006 Saturn SL1

6. Its Friday night...where were you?: Woks (work) then Mr. Dees Pizza (play)

7. It is Friday night... where are you now?: Home

8. What kind of job did you have in high school?: Woks - Dishwasher/Busboy

9. What kind of job do you do now?: Retail Management

10. Were you a party animal?: Not really, though I think people thought so...

11. Were you considered a flirt?: More'n'likely... The majority of my friends were pretty girls, and they were hard to resist...

12. Were you in band, orchestra, or choir?: I was in "Voices of Walt Whitman," the select chorus.

13. Were you a nerd?: I don't think so... I talked like one sometimes, but was a bit more cool...

14. Did you get suspended or expelled?: I know I was in detention, a bit... I don't think I was ever suspended, though... (but there was "in-school suspension," & I don't remember if there was a difference between that & "detention.")

15. Can you sing the fight song?: Not a note.

16. Who was/were your favorite teacher(s): Mr Peskar (Nature of Language), Mr Tripp (Voices, & faculty advisor for stage crew)

17. Where did you sit during lunch?: I think I had two lunch periods that year (because I dropped--that is, stopped attending--a class) I know I was in the North Cafeteria, but (if this is the year I did that) I spent my "other lunch period" in the South...

18. What was your school's full name?: Walt Whitman High School

19. When did you graduate?: 1982

20. What was your school mascot?: Wildcat

21. If you could go back and do it again, would you?: Only if everyone else came back with me... I'd hate to go through it all again with new people, and I'd love seeing some of the old ones again, particularly the one or two who've died since...

22. Did you have fun at Prom?: I did not go to my prom, but I did attend the 1984 prom. I think that my date enjoyed it more than I did, but it wasn't bad.

23. Do you still talk to the person you went to Prom with?: We had a falling out, but I'd like to repair it, if I can find her.

24. Are you planning on going to your next reunion?: Nope... I really wasn't all that close with many of the people in my graduating class (most of those pretty girls were older or younger, and the few friends I did have were/are not "reunion people." Besides, they charge a small fortune...

25. Do you still talk to people from school?: Not too many, but there are a few...

Friday, February 06, 2009

Born Again American

Watch the video. If it moves you, go to the site. If you agree with the message, get involved. There's been enough negativity and tearing down. It's time we build ourselves, each other, and our country up.



"Born Again American is committed to the rebirth and re-expression of citizenship through informed and thoughtful activism. It is an initiative of Declare Yourself, a national non-partisan, non-profit (501(c)3) organization dedicated to increasing young voter participation and civic involvement. Declare Yourself’s on-line voter registration tool has been used by almost four million people since 2004. Declare Yourself grew out of the 2003’s Declaration of Independence Road Trip that toured an original 1776 copy of the Declaration to schools, town halls, and other locations all over the country." - Born Again American

h/t to my friend Barrie, a "coo-coo for Christ" crazy christian (& Sarah Palin supporting) lover of America, for letting me know about this. (If she has a public blog or website, I don't know about it... But if she does and wants some traffic, I'll gladly post a link here.)

(Wingnuts & Moonbats x-post)

Wednesday, February 04, 2009

Memery - 25 Things

In Facebook, I'm only tagging the folks who tagged me and the people I mention. On the blog, I'm not tagging anyone.
I invite any/everyone who reads these words to play (particularly if you haven't yet--It can be enlightening), but the choice is yours. If you do choose to play because you read this here (wherever "here" is for you), I would like a tag back, however...
---------------------------------

Rules: Once you've been tagged, you are supposed to write a note with 25 random things, facts, habits or goals about you. At the end, choose 25 people to be tagged. You have to tag the person who tagged you. If I tagged you, it's because I want to know more about you.

(To do this, go to “notes” under tabs on your profile page, paste these instructions in the body of the note, type your 25 random things, tag 25 people - in the right hand corner of the app - then click publish.) DON'T FORGET TO TAG ME!

1) I am a packrat. If it’s not rotting or actually in pieces, I probably still have it… somewhere.

2) The roads to most of my personal hells are paved with good intentions and actions never taken.

3) I have at least a thousand records, and just as many CDs, and I’ve listened to every one.

4) I am much less fortunate book-wise. While I probably have 400-500, I have read very few of them. (I do try, but tend to doze off.)

5) I walked to school from kindergarten through twelfth grade. I could’ve ridden the school bus to high school (& maybe jr. high, too) but I preferred the open air.

6) I’m seldom right on time. Usually, I’m late for stuff, but because I know that, I sometimes overcompensate & show up way too early. (That prolly had something to do with my not taking the bus to school, too.)

7) I miss everyone who isn’t in my life anymore, but I’m not so good at keeping in touch with the people who are.

8) I consider myself a Unitarian Universalist, but I seldom attend fellowship.

9) I miss my old Honda Accord hatchback. I liked having the ability to fit small pieces of furniture in my car on a whim.

10) I haven’t been clean-shaven since 1984. (Even then, I left an almost indiscernible soul patch.)

11) I sleep about 5-6 hours in any 24. If I fall asleep early, I wake up in the middle of the night. (It’s 4am as I peck this out.)

12) When I get involved in something, I forget to stop and eat. I’ve gone whole days without food, and not even noticed.

13) My dad, my cousin Lee, and my friend Andy have had the most influence on my taste in music. All of ‘em were & are willing to explore new sounds.

14) My wife, doesn’t know how much I love her. I’m to blame for much of that because I don’t express it nearly enough, but then, I’m not sure she’d believe me anyway…

15) We do own too many cats for our home & lifestyle. (We have 7 of ‘em.)

16) While I’m very organized at work, I’m a mess at home. Some of it has to do with that packrat thing, but it’s also because I don’t set the same “everything in it’s place” rules at home.

17) I seldom drink anything but water, anymore.

18) I don’t carry a realistic image of myself in my mind. I see myself as that thin guy I was in my 20’s or so, and am kinda surprised every time I see myself in a mirror or current photograph.

19) The opposite happens with my dad. Every time I see him, I’m amazed at how much thinner he is than I thought he was (& actually used to be.)

20) When it comes to women (& most men, as well) though, unless you’re very large, very small, or have changed a whole lot since the last time I saw you (& I can actually remember what you looked like the last time I saw you), I don’t really notice your weight.

21) I have a pretty good memory for song lyrics, plot lines, and general trivia, but I have a whole lotta trouble with proper nouns. Too many conversations go “It’s like that movie—I can’t remember the name--where the guy—nope, can’t recall the actor, but he was the same guy in—you know, that movie we watched last spring, with the monster eating the town… It was called… Oh, nevermind.”

22) I prefer the temperature to be about 65 when I’m working, and just slightly higher when I’m at rest.

23) One day, I hope to earn enough to keep us from worrying about money. (I’d settle for “winning” or “being left” enough, but I really would prefer to earn it.)

24) I have an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in my chest.

25) Like most folks who’ve done this thing, I had a tough time coming up with 25 things to say, and like most, I end this list by saying so.

Nerd Score (Do nerds score?)