BTW - this is what a morel is s'posed to look like. We didn't have that kind of luck.
BTW - this is what a morel is s'posed to look like. We didn't have that kind of luck.


What is your word? Really.Here's a list of news stories I just don't know how to respond to.
(In other words: I'm sick of hearing about them and the spin that goes along with them.)
I will now take a couple of minutes and give my brief, crass (& in most cases uninformed) opinion of them.
Anna Nicole Smith - My final opinion: Who cares?! Tragic? Yes. Feel sorry for the kid.
The Alberto Gonzales hearing - My opinion: Huh?
Here's my opinion based on what little I know about it. All we have is hearsay from the accusers. Most people don't know enough or haven't paid attention enough (myself included) to care. In my opinion, this doesn't look like revenge on political enemies, but if so, so what? Like it didn't happen in other administrations? I know that wouldn't make it right - but to me it seems like they are just trying to play "gotchya" again. (Remember Scooter Libby?)
Imus Get's Canned - As I see it: Dunno, don't care!
Actually, my biggest concern with this one is that he got lumped in with "conservative" talk show hosts who supposedly say racist, bigoted, sexist things all the time and seemingly get away with it. (huh?) I do listen to "conservative" talk radio occasionally and haven't heard anything like what Imus said - even in jest! As for Imus - I don't think he'll be missed.
The Virginia Tech Shooting - This was a nightmare!!!
However, now the way the media is playing it, we're somehow supposed to feel sorry for this clown because of his isolated upbringing. And, of course this tragedy is being used (by the left) as another case for gun control. Leave it alone whydontchya! If a bad guy wants to get a gun - he's going to get a gun! If this clown hadn't gotten his gun legally - he would have gotten it illegally. I could easily walk out my door right now, go about 5 blocks and procure a weapon within a couple of hours, just by asking a few people. I know this for a fact. When I lived in Pasadena, I was offered all kinds of unbelievable stuff at least on a weekly basis. What good will it do to pass more laws? At the end of the day, we'll feel better about ourselves I guess.
That's all I've got to say about that.

One of our favorite commedians put it this way - it's no longer in vogue to call yourself an athiest - instead you say, "I'm an agnostic, and you're stupid."
However unpopular, athiests still don't seem to be in such short supply .
In a recent article in Newsweek, Rabbi Marc Gelman (here) comments on a recent debate between Rick Warren (Pastor of Saddleback Community Church) and "Devout Athiest" (my term) Sam Harris on whether we can know that God is real. Dr. Gelman (in addition to being a trained Rabbi he holds a Ph.D. in Philosophy) says that the two are missing the point - that the existance or reality of God is a "Mystery" and is born out in how we live our lives. For him (if I understand the article correctly) not only is this the wrong question, but it is also unanswerable and completely subjective. He goes so far as to wish that Rick Warren could be less exclusive in his belief.
This (to me) is disturbing for at least a couple of reasons.
God's existance is not dependent upon my thoughts or feelings about him. To say that God may be real to one person in such and such a way, and not to another person and that's O.K., is to render God subject to OUR will and whim. If He is God - by nature He stands outside of creation - all of creation must be subject to Him. We seem to have this backwards. He is God whether or not I acknowledge Him.
As well, it would seem for Rabbi Gelman that, since he is so willing to let everyone have their cake and eat it too (just read the article) he may not be among those who would acknowledge the existance of a "real" God. I cannot in fairness speak for him - but his language (and inclusiveness) are strong clues. True, God's essence may be beyond our grasp. However, the question still stands: Does He or does He not exist? This may be a continuation of the previous point - but it bears repeating: He would exist - or not exist apart from my belief, if He is indeed God.
Thirdly - and this is a very common argument (read: worn-out and over-simplified). Can the true athiest even exist? An athiest by definition is one who believes that God does not exist. However, can he "prove" that God does not. He can appeal to nature (natural disasters, etc...). He can appeal to man's nature (his cruelty and such). He can appeal to logic - ("Is there impirical evidence that God does exist?"). These are all examples which would question the existence of a "just" God. True, they are good questions, but can the athiest "Prove" that God does not exist? Can he claim to know everything? He would have to know everything about the entire universe to know that there isn't a God hiding somewhere in some far off corner. Logically then, the athiest cannot honestly claim to know everything - and so, the athiest vanishes forever in a small simple puff of logic.