I get about as far as "One Mississi" before the flashing cursor reappears.  And that's all I've.  I think it is time to go back to something I have already written.  Something unfinished.  Looking forward to continuing a story I long abandoned-- Thank You, Robot.  A tentative title for a story hardly about robots, but rather dealing in fathers, snow, and the restaurant business.

Look forward to it, as it is a sort of addition to Sink at Sunset, my favorite and probably best piece.

Edit: Perhaps, in fact, this will be a four part series.  Sink being in Summer, a skipped(for now) Fall piece, Winter(which I am writing), and Spring.

Love has a nasty habit of disappearing over night.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/party_foul_tea_partiers_eat_their_own_in_bitter_in.php?ref=fpb

TPMMuckraker

Party Foul! Tea Partiers Eat Their Own In Bitter Internal Feud

Zachary Roth | November 12, 2009, 5:08PM

The Tea Party movement is being ripped apart by bitter internal rancor, highlighted by a lawsuit against a former leader, vituperative name-calling, and charges of financial mismanagement and corruption.

As we told you this morning, board members for the Tea Party Patriots (TPP) this week filed suit against Amy Kremer, a former TPP leader who fell out with the group over her involvement with a rival Tea Party faction, the Tea Party Express. And on Tuesday, a judge granted a preliminary injunction, ordering Kremer to return control of the TPP websites to the board, and to stop representing herself as a TPP spokeswoman.

But that's just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the Tea Partiers' internecine strife. Emails obtained by TPMmuckraker detail how a rogue faction of Tea Party Patriots is lashing out at the board for going ahead with the suit against Kremer, and challenging the board's financial management, triggering a state of acrimony that appears serious enough to threaten the upstart movement's ability to continue to mount an effective grassroots challenge to the Obama agenda -- just days after the House passed the health-care-reform bill that the Tea Partiers view as socialism.

In an email to fellow TPPers sent Wednesday, Gerald Merits called the lawsuit "the single most insane act of self destruction I have witnessed since this country elected Obama," and asked "how much donor money is being spent of (sic) suing Amy?"

For the rest of the day, the email list was consumed with charges and counter charges. In response to Merits, Josh Parker, a supporter of the board, wrote: "Amy created a situation where TPP couldn't do anything BUT sue her, then she goes on with her poor me crap. She brings this on herself and all the rest of us."

At the root of the dispute is the acrimony between TPP and the Tea Party Express, a newer group formed by a team of GOP consultants. Many TPPers sees TPE as inauthentic, calling it the "Astoturf Express," and deriding it as a "Republican front organization." But others -- including Merits -- have flirted with TPE, apparently out of frustration with the TPP's sprawling structure and unwieldy decision-making process. On Wednesday, David McKalip, the Florida neurosurgeon and one-time Tea Party Patriot activist, who found himself in hot water after we published an email he sent showing President Obama as a witch doctor -- addressed a Tea Party Express rally in Orlando.

In Wednesday's email exchange, several other TPPers sided with Merits in raising concerns about the lawsuit. And one, Jack Staver, raised a separate charge against the board, suggesting that board members were being insufficiently transparent about the organization's finances.

Wrote Staver:

How much money does TPP have? How much did we make in DC? Where are the financial statements? Do board members get paid and if so who? Who signs the checks? Where does our money go?

Merits echoed that theme. "Why are the financial records not public knowledge?" he asked. "Show me the money!"

Eventually a Tea Party Patriots loyalist couldn't take it anymore. "Why are you intentionally trying to destroy this movement??" he demanded.

Charges of lax book-keeping -- and worse -- appear to be breaking out across the Tea Party movement. In a separate email written Wednesday and obtained by TPMmuckraker, Matt Perdue, the president of a San Antonio Tea Party group, ripped into the group's treasurer, her husband, and their supporters for conducting a "mass redirection campaign," apparently to line their own pockets using Tea Party donations.

"Where has all this money gone?" asks Perdue. "If there is nothing wrong going on, why has there not been one single piece of paper produced to back up why people got checks, some for $3,000, $7,400+, $4,000, $10,400+??? Where is the documentation? Why isn't the cash deposited like it should be? Why did it take more than two weeks to deposit cash from the meetings?"

Meanwhile, other Tea Party factions are trying to distance themselves from the dispute between Kremer and TPP -- and position themselves to benefit. Darla Dawald, the leader of the Patriotic Resistance, a far-right grassroots group, wrote in a message on the TPP email list that her organization has "not supported any lawsuit or fighting ... but I felt obligated to inform our base what is happening so that you could make an educated decision about your support of the Group called the Tea Party Patriots." Dawald has been a key participant in the bus tour organized by the Tea Party Express -- an effort shunned by TPP.

And Eric Odom, the founder of the Tax Day Tea Party events, wrote in his own message that the acrimony "presents a dangerous situation for the movement as a whole," and urged TPPers to return to "defeating the socialist thugs who seek to destroy our country, not fellow patriots who seek to stop them." We reported that Odom this week launched a political action committee designed to channel Tea Party activism toward an electoral goal.

As Wednesday wore on, the TPP internal email list degenerated into name-calling, sarcasm, and personal attacks. "Jack, you REALLY look clueless right now," Parker wrote to Staver at one point. Parker also ripped Merits for "your usual pissing and moaning without knowing nothing." And Staver deemed Parker "not worthy of a response."

Some TPPers expressed concern that the acrimony could damage the movement if exposed. "Daily Kos and other left wing interest groups are going to love running with this story," wrote one.

Merits appeared to share that concern. "This will go public if we let it drag on long enough and if you don't think this will have a chilling effect on all Tea Party movements raising funds you are living in a world of fairy dust and gingerbread houses," he wrote. "Read my previous emails. If this goes on long enough, we all go down - NOT just TPP and TPE - ALL OF US."

Eli G.
I had a really strange and far- reaching dream last night.  In one of the scenes of this cheese and dip party, which was in a series of snow-covered trailers, you and your dad put on an opera act.  And you sang really well, but your dad stole the act by belting out the most amazing notes ever.  Everyone was really impressed and you stood there nodding.

Sorry this has nothing to do with your status.

Erin M.
You approached me in the main trailer, which was actually a large estate with a gorgeous mahogany interior.  You handed me a magazine which had a cover shot of you, from below your bust line to your face.  The name of the magazine: Seduction.  I congratulated you on your new career and told you I would catch up to you after I got rid of a disc of porn.  I headed outside after tossing the disc into a trashbin and caught up to the crowd standing in the snow.  We were about to here opera. 

Laura M.
We sat in pews, many rows apart.  I leaned to a friend or my mother(I cannot recall) and asked if she has read The Heart Is A Lonely Hunter.  At this you turn and look with vacant eyes.  I get up and leave.  Later, outside the opera bound trailer, I am putting down a video game console controller of some sort as I see you riding a hideously painted bicycle through a snowy parking lot.  You hardly looked back but once.  In that moment I felt the finality of the dream approaching, like a vast black cone closing around me. 

I had the misfortune to watch this movie last night. I was so looking forward to it.  Apparently I like torturing myself.

How do these movies get made? How do they persuade talent to do them?  They're not even funny.

Here are my beefs.

1) It's always tight-ass, neurotic, cat-loving, super controlling women who are stunningly good looking but incapable of finding a man. Inevitably because their standards are 'just too high', [a] and they are just plain desperate because its been [insert time period] since they've had good sex.  The woman, though intelligent and educated is always extremely naive when it comes to 'how to get a guy' and has to enlist the help of all kinds of jaded or sex deprived friends to help her land a good one.

     This is just plain ridiculous.  Don't knock standards, they can be very helpful and protective, and can often be a sign that someone knows themselves, and what works for them, well. Also, Sex isn't the be all or the end all, nor is it the most important thing in a relationship. The single woman/cat lover cliche is SO VERY OLD! In this movie the main female character was portrayed in being so wrapped up in her ideals of a man and so desperate to catch him that she allowed herself to do all kinds of hi-jinks that were so anti her thoughtful and controlled character. Granted we all do stupid things from time to time, but you can't sell me on the idea that a T.V. producer who can make split second decisions on which camera to go to, and the best thing to say in a situation would not find an excuse to visit the powder room and remove her climax inducing panties before a business dinner, or feel the need to Cyrano de Bergerac her way through a baseball game date with earpieces, sounding to all the world like someone suffering from acute Turrets Syndrome.
2) It's always guys [b] who are the lowest common denominators of maleness.  Sex is the most important thing, and the more you get of it the better a "man" you are.  Men only put up with relationships for the sake of getting sex.  They think with their penis and as rude and crass as they want to be.

     Seriously.  Grow up! If this is all that you are going to be, we're well shot of you! Men take responsibility, Men give and receive, Guys take and callously use others. In this movie the main character not only disparages women who are lonely on a regular basis, but he repeatedly ignored his supervisors instructions on air, and basically only did what he wanted to do. Every once and a while you see a glimpse of a relationship with a young boy and his 'responsibility' to the kid, so you're led to believe that there is more to this man than you can see. COME ON!  The Diamond-in-the-rough guy is all played out.  There is something to be said for seeing the true person, but this is so far from that.  The guy likes who he is.  He hides the responsibility as if it is a  weakness, or something of less value.

3) The Guy helps the Crazy lady catch a Man by playing all sorts of mind games.

    This is the worst part of the romantic comedy for me. 

Just so we're clear.  I think relationships that come about by manipulation of the things you think will titillate your partner and obfuscation of who you really are, so that only the characteristics and traits he/she would like appear, for the sake of securing him/her are wasted time. 
I will never play games with someones affection, and I would walk away from anyone who does.  It isn't romantic to me.  It isn't funny.  It's cruel, and it will never build a relationship that lasts.  It ends.  Always. Either in an apology (if you have some character) or just walking away  after you've taken what you wanted (as witnessed by the main guy's answering machine messages in this movie).

What makes it even more frustrating for me is that I frequently work with teen girls who have seen this over and over and think that this is the way they're supposed to behave, or the behavior they're supposed to put up with.  They just get their hearts crushed in the process.

As you may have guessed I thought this movie was Drivel, plain and simple.  I just want to be able to watch one romantic comedy that doesn't make me want to curse.  They're just not funny.  They're just cruel and callous. I think I need to watch Wall-e to cleanse my palate.  At least robot's understand :)

Can I rate a movie with negative stars?

a) and sometimes they are just absolutely ridiculous ideals, I'll grant you that. They're so over the top. Tolstoy reading, Austen loving, long walks on the beach, love all animals but cats the best, etc.
b) guys are not men.  Guys are men in age only.  They live life as one big game, enjoying all they can get, never taking responsibility, expecting the world to revolve around them, consequences be dammed, etc.

This from the preceding post:

And Dr Collins sees no problem with where aliens might fit in with the belief that man was created in God's image.

"Every creature reflects the goodness and the creativity of God. Humankind, we certainly would argue that we represent that most fully and most completely," he said.

"But all of creation represents God's creativity. So any extraterrestrial being would certainly represent that creativity as well and may be or may not be more developed than we are."

I've long thought that humans make a fundamental mistake in that they arrogantly assume that the universe is all about us. That is why stupid statements like the above are made. We see God as some super human who created a stupendous universe for us to run around sinning in. And, what's more, we are supposedly made in God's image. All the other creatures on this Earth apparently weren't. Only us. Yeah, right. God must be delighted with that one. Think Hitler.

We weren't even around for most of the Earth's history. The first life appeared 4,000 million years ago. Something resembling us (and supposedly God) appeared on the scene 60 thousand years ago. Why did God take so long you may ask? And just when did we acquire a soul? One would think such questions could be easily answered by the men who point to a book written 2,000 years ago for answers. Of course they can't. So I do wonder why they pontificate at such length with such inane garbage that can be easily disproved by anyone who cares to exercise a few brain cells.

Do they really think we're that stupid? Apparently so. I think I need another drink. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/13/2742484.htm?section=justin

Alien life is possible: Vatican

By Barney Porter for The World Today

Posted 1 hour 35 minutes ago

The Pope's chief astronomer has conceded other intelligent beings could exist in outer space.

The conclusion has been drawn by scientific experts called in by the Vatican to study the possibility of extraterrestrial life and its implications for the Church.

It has been four centuries since the Catholic Church locked up Galileo for challenging the belief that the Earth was at the centre of the universe.

The Vatican's five-day conference attracted 30 astronomers, physicists and biologists, including non-Catholics.

It was led by Jesuit priest Father Jose Gabriel Funes, an astronomer and director of the Vatican Observatory.

Father Funes says the possibility of alien life raises "many philosophical and theological implications" but that the gathering was mainly focused on the scientific perspective.

One of the organisers was Chris Impey, a professor of astronomy at the University of Arizona.

He says the aim was to assess the most recent research in the burgeoning field of astrobiology - the study of life in the universe.

"And also getting a sense of when you know the vital breakthrough is going to be made, which is the discovery of life elsewhere," he said.

"Because even though we're looking hard we still only know one planet anywhere with life and that's this one."

Breakthrough coming soon

He says that major breakthrough may be just around the corner.

"If you were going to take a set of bets of the 30 scientists gathered for that meeting, I think most of them would have said on about a time scale of 10 years maybe," he said.

That's a guess from the scientists involved and it could come from either of two directions - it could come from a planetary mission within the solar system that looks at one of the most hospitable places for life nearby which is probably Titan, Europa or Mars.

"Or it could come from telescopic observations of planets that we're finding in increasing numbers around distant stars."

But before one starts looking at the concept through Hollywood eyes, professor Impey has another observation.

"I think there's a big distinction between the finding of microbial life, bacteria or something like that which is actually the most likely form of life to discover initially, and intelligent life - sentient beings with technology, and that's a different strategy," he said.

"So I think on the former, on microbial life it's not likely to challenge the world's major religions - but if we find creatures that rival us or exceed us in intelligence, then I think that's going to be very interesting."

Church's positive response

But perhaps not too interesting, according to Dr Paul Collins, a former priest and now Church historian and Catholic commentator.

He says a belief in extraterrestrial life does not necessarily contradict any basic tenets of the Catholic religion.

"I would think that our response would be a positive one," he said.

"I'm not infallible on this of course, but the reality is that I don't think it does contradict anything within Catholicism.

"Essentially what the Christian faith generally is saying and certainly Catholicism specifically is saying is that God is the ultimate source of life, the ultimate source of reality."

The views of the Catholic Church have shifted radically since the Italian philosopher Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake as a heretic in 1600 for speculating other worlds could be inhabited.

The Vatican Observatory has been at the forefront of efforts to bridge the gap between religion and science and today senior clergy openly endorse scientific ideas such as the big bang theory and evolution.

And Dr Collins sees no problem with where aliens might fit in with the belief that man was created in God's image.

"Every creature reflects the goodness and the creativity of God. Humankind, we certainly would argue that we represent that most fully and most completely," he said.

"But all of creation represents God's creativity. So any extraterrestrial being would certainly represent that creativity as well and may be or may not be more developed than we are."