So I have started a fun reading project!

There have been 44 US Presidents, there are 56 signatures on the US Declaration of Independence (56+44=100) 100 Biographies to read!

Now, there are a couple names on both lists! The 2nd President, John Adams (3/4/1797-3/4/1801) and the 3rd President Thomas Jefferson (3/4/1801-3/4/1809) were both signers of the Declaration of Independence.  To make up for the 99 and 100 spot on the list I am adding Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Paine both of whom were crucial to the development of and prosecution of American Independence.  

However, there are a number of other individuals who should and need to be mentioned and I will add those names to the list as it develops.

I wrote to the first author I read, John Ferling who wrote "The Ascent of George Washington" an Email and he actually responded very promptly.  I was looking for advice and names of authors or books on the subject as there are thousands of books about many of the individuals on my list and he was more than helpful!  I intend to write each author I can and will keep this post updated!  

So far I have these done!

George Washington: "The Ascent of George Washington" by John Ferling

John Adams: "John Adams" by David McCullough

Thomas Jefferson: "Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History" by Fawn M Brodie

I gotta pipe in here...

I been seeing a lot of conversation on the net regarding Nancy Pelosi, Sandra Fluke and of course Rush's reaction.... 
A friend of mine made some posts on the subject that were so off base that they didn't even get the right people saying anything remotely like what was spoken.  


On the subject of the hearing organized by Nancy Pelosi:
The "hearing" was organized after women were denied the opportunity to speak before the House Oversight Committee hearing on women's reproductive health. Instead, an all-male panel of religious leaders testified on why they should be allowed to deny women contraceptive coverage. WOMEN WERE DENIED THE RIGHT TO SPEAK ON THE SUBJECT OF WOMEN'S REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH because "the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception but instead about the Administration’s actions as they relate to freedom of religion and conscience" (Elijah Cummings, D-MD)
... 
in essence a hearing on women's reproductive health was turned into a hearing on religion and conscience, while the two are not and do not have to be mutually exclusive, the hearing was turned into an argument to choose to publicly support private bureaucratic power over the very people who pay for those services.

here is a link to the transcript of that hearing, I encourage anyone and everyone to read it, there is no discussion supporting pregnancy or STD prevention in it.. In addition, there is no call for public funding or subsidizing. She is not asking for anyone else to pay for these services, only to make the services available to be paid for by an insurance that people are paying for.  “We expected that when 94% of students oppose the policy the university would respect our choices regarding insurance students pay for – completely unsubsidized by the university."
http://tinyurl.com/7k3aflm 

Its my Birthday!

Holy COW,

At this moment it is 3:49am on October 11th, my 36th Birthday.  I just listened to some of the most epic story telling, a sad and profound oration.  Recently I have taken to listening to audio books, many many hours listening.  I have a few feelings about it and want to share them with the one or two potential readers here.

A good writer does not make a good reader... I have listened to a lot of different books and have figured out that unless the writer is also a professional performer most often they shouldn't be reading their own books.  My grandfather was a great story teller, and an amusing writer, he read his own audio book and I have a deep appreciation for the work. However, I am sure having something remaining of him, the ability to hear his voice nearly 20 years after his passing, taints my perspective.  

Authors like Neil Gaiman are also good readers and writers.  While I appreciate his oration, I find that when professional readers perform a piece, the step away and performance add a great deal to the piece.  But... let writers like Steve Martin perform at the whim!

collection of links

I am intending this entry to be a way of sharing some links to conversations that I find amazing!

They are in no particular order... You might notice several of them are from TED.com if you haven't been to the site, stop reading this and go there now. Explore the site for a while and enjoy.

Mick Ebeling: The Invention that Unlocked a Locked-In Artist
Eye recognition technology on the cheep (free) that allows people to communicate and express themselves!

Roger Ebert: Remaking My Voice
Newest favorite quote: "We are born into a box of time and space, we use words and communication to brake out of it and to reach out to others"

Randy Pausch: Last lecture, Achieving Your Childhood Dreams
Just amazing and inspired.  This guy has some amazing advice, his approach toward life and living is uplifting to say the least.

Tim Minchin's Storm, a nine minute beat poem
This reminds me of Penn Jillette's This I believe essay only with rhythm and poetry... Oooh that will be next 

This I Believe: Penn Jillette
I have loved this ever since I heard it air, for those of you who have not had the pleasure of listening to the NPR series look it up, some great stuff in there!


This is of course to be expanded apon... gotta dig up some old links!

Gamma Girls Mockumentry

About a year ago I had the chance opportunity to work on a small film short, it was an odd yet fun experience and tonight I happened to run across it on the YouTubes.  I felt it was important to share my time!

Here is an article write up about it, somehow I was briefly quoted!


 

Living with fear on a daily basis

My wife and I live with fear on a daily basis, as I've mentioned before she has systemic stage four breast cancer that has metastasized to her brain and lungs.  So every day we give thanks for each passed minute she has "good health" and we plan for fun and adventure as much as are able.  She has suffered what are called Jacksonian Seizures as a result of pressure to her brain from the many tumors there so any time unusual muscle twitching, head aches, or severe anxiety occur our collective blood pressure rises and fear begins to muscle its way in to our lives...

Uusually every day or so, we have our moments of panic (to which I am apparently well adapted to) but otherwise we are such old hands at this that the day to day life we live is otherwise rich and rewarding.  Today was a test of our mettle as Katie had to go to the ER. It turned out to be a very long day, 9 hours at the hospital ended with bad news.  I wont go into details or specifics, we are still learning what everything means.  We have more hardships to hurdle apparently, we are pushed everyday yet still we find time to sing a song, make a joke and count our blessings.

If you are reading this, I mentioned I wouldn't use this blog to complain about how hard things are so know it's not my intention with this entry.  This entry is to tell everyone, there is always light, there is always hope, there is always a reason (no matter how hard it might be to find it) to keep on smiling.

My wife and I smile every day even though we have real and reasonable fear; death, pain, stress and loss are just a part of the whole experience even if they seem like the whole. Be realistic, look at everything and don't focus on parts to the detriment of life!

Why I do not believe in Civil Unions!

Or rather, "Why I believe Civil Unions will save us all!"

OK, hot topic, barreling strait at it!

So I have had a problem with the current discussion over same-sex marriage.  To me it is really a viewpoint and perspective breakdown and seems simple but is currently over complicating political dialog so I wish to propose a simple, fair and reasonable solution.

If

• Their is a sepparation of church and state
• Marriage is defined by god/religion
• We want equal rights for all
• We don't want to see a repeat of Separate but Equal rights

Then

• Why are we having a discussion about something called same-sex marriage?
• Can we protect one subculture from another?
• Will we face up to inequality and fix it?
• Can we maintain that sacred separation of church and state?

YES!

Some religious/conservatives would like to ensure that a religious definition of marriage is constitutionally protected and that wording is friendly to their view point.  Whether State or Federally controlled these people are messing up our sacred church-state relationship by being shortsighted in their solution.

Some activists for equal rights have proposed the Civil Union as an alternative (which creeps me out). One subculture asking for the same rights as another subculture shouldn't even be a question but if it is, changing what you call it doesn't create equality, it hinders.  I understand those who argue "one step at a time" the solution put forth approaches, but lets call a duck a duck and a goose a goose.  Lets pretend for a moment those who are fighting for equal rights and those who are trying to protect their ideology are on the same side, because they should be.

I know there are several examples of cross over in the above but I don't want to be writing for the next several hours.

There should be no governmental definition or control over marriage! The legal rights of couples who wish to be recognized as "legally unified" should be governed over, we'll call that Civil Union and gender/sexuality isn't even a part of its process.  You and your chosen/significant other go to a governing office (such as a courthouse) and you file your legal documents and pay what ever fees are required and there is some form of governmental approval or not and you are recognized as a Civil Union or not.  

It protects the Church from the state as well!  The government doesn't get to tell the church who is married or not (cause right now you can go to a courthouse in most areas and get married rather than stand before the church).  If you want to be married you have to go before those people who should be governing such things, a religious/spiritual leader/organization.  Whether before or after or instead of or aside of,   you go before (and for simplicity and shortening my typing I am just going to say church instead of all the other words that could replace it) your church and you follow what ever guidelines they require and tithe in what ever way they require and the marriage is sanctified by them.

The short: Civil Unions are governmental and should fall under government over-site, Marriage is spiritual and should fall under spiritual over-site.  You can have one or the other or both, but keep the two separate and quit putting religion into legal structure and vice a versa.

Ask a minority in the south prior to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 how they feel about Separate but Equal solutions and then look at how you are trying to move forward.  No matter which side you are on, it is dirty and hurtful at some point unless you are looking at equality for the future!