I love him with all of my heart and soul.
It's much more than him being biologically connected. We are so alike, so on each other's frequency, that there are many times I find myself talking to the other half of me. In eleven days, I'll be celebrating my eightieth birthday while he is three months away from turning forty-five. And, yet, there is no age barrier. Just the opposite, in fact. His thought process is so fast that I sometimes have to hang on to maintain the pace, lest he lose me.
He's quicker than me and smarter than me. I spent many years as a stand-up comic and am told was pretty good. He forayed into the business as a rock-and-roller, the lead vocalist of his own bands----THE DUCKTAPE MESSIAHS AND THE STANDING HAMPTONS. They did covers and swung their own songs, as well. Thus, we have both been bitten by the incurable showbiz bug, and although that accounts for some of our homogenization, there's much more involved here.
Yesterday, we went shopping, more in the spirit of a social activity than a chore, and what a wonderful, gloriously unanticipated day it turned out to be. He kept breaking me up-I mean bent over in hysterics- because his humor was so out there, so on the money, so mentally quick that he wowed me over and over again. But it was more than just a laughing experience, it was the opening of a door to past--flashbacks of so many indelible images which permeate my mind in repose.
Watching him perform on stage, all the way from a local drinking pub, to a more significant level of Downtown Boston clubs where he changed his art style to THE GREAT AMERICAN SONGBOOK, backed by a trio of able and hip musicians, hand-picked by him. And, then, when the Wynn Hotel opened in Vegas, he headlined the Parasol Lounge with an even more talented group of players with whom he became so musically tight, that they would read his every next move in advance, to the point where they were having more of a ball than the happy dancers, swinging and singing along. And there I sat, at a front row table, courtesy of him, of course, and just watched, marveled and submersed in pride at how talented he was with a second-to-only Sinatra voice and the ability to charm his audience with inner-soul repartee. These sunshine memories are mine forever, collected as the treasures of life which they so surely are.
They always occupy center stage when I'm with him, for they are integral to understanding the perpetual permeation of my soul with love for him.
Humor is the key, never letting emotions get corny, but rather allowing us to converse in half-completed sentences because we each know where the other is going after the first word or two.
To laugh with someone you love and be invigorated by his quick acuity, is the rejuvenation of all available endorphins.
He gave me an unscripted day of love and kindness.
My younger clone.
It was in the wee small hours of the morning when we said goodnight, after spending three hours sharing love with his darling toy fox terrier (Bridgette), and I fell asleep at the crack of dawn. Woke up early, still psyched, and rushed to get this all down.
My son gave me a wonderful day and it was apparent that he dug it too.
That's something money can't buy.
That smacks of the Hand of God.
I'm a blessed and lucky man.
My love for my son is limitless. Ain't no tape measure long enough.
And when I indulge in too much kvelling, Darin keeps the train on the light, right track by simply replying, "We had fun." And I am reminded that his persona is embedded in the Kingdom of Cool.
Wow.
Sunday, February 17, 2013
Saturday, November 10, 2012
STOP THE PETRAEUS CRUCIFIXION
The man is, after all, a human being.
When a man and a woman are in constant contact with each other, chemistry often takes over. Especially if one of them is exceptionally physically attractive. The human animal is in us all. The sex drive was born with Adam. Amazingly, adultery, in many states, is still a crime, though criminal prosecutions are rare.
Adultery is and should remain grounds for divorce--but without being a crime. It is a clear violation of the contractual obligation between a married couple and rather obvious evidence of a loss of intimacy and fidelity. It, however, occurs too frequently in our society to be swept under the rug of non-recognition. It is a primal instinct but, inconsistently, carries with it the stigma of the Scarlet Letter. Its frequency brings into play its allure and consequences.
My personal belief is that if you are in love with your spouse, you should remain faithful regardless of the temptations that will surely come your way.
During my 42 years of marriage, trying criminal cases nationwide, many opportunities presented themselves, but I, almost fanatically and religiously, never cheated on my wife. Never. Not even a kiss, a flirtation of any kind--I indulged in none of that, for I strictly adhered to the loyalty of fidelity. I deemed it to be the most important foundation of my marriage, a violation of which, by either partner, would forever and irreparably shatter the union. This was a ground rule in which I was emotionally vested--no exceptions allowed. It was an obsession with me.
But now, looking back, I realize that, although I was not wrong, I was very, very naive. Still am.
When two people find themselves in almost daily contact with each other, it frequently happens that a physical attraction evolves. The question thus posed is do you give into this desire, even once?
I now understand that a person can indulge in extramarital sex and simply walk away from it without any pains of conscience. I can't but others can.
Others find themselves so infatuated with the fire of new sex, the intoxocation with the ilicity of it, that they participate in an affair, as opposed to a one-night-stand (for fidelity purposes, I make no distinction). This may involve the consideration of divorce and remarriage. Blame it on a desire for what was once but no longer is, or the actual blooming of true love, or what ever---but it is a very serious matter with much potential for emotional collateral damage.
I am not that type of person. Even though I might accept the fact that my spouse may have erred in this regard, without the involvment of love and unaccompanied by any lessoning of love for me--the marriage, for me, is over. Kaput. And all the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put Humpty Dumpty back together again. But again, that's who I am. I do not impose this personal standard of conduct on others, in a judgemental way. To each his own, for I readilly admit to being obsessive-compulsive in this regard. I'll stay with my own set of rules, thank you very much, yet my astonishment at those who can indulge, walk away and never look back will never diminish. I can understand their outlook on all of this---but it ain't for me. My spouse cheats just one time, with no romance or love involved, and it's divorce time. I'm just not built thst way.
Which brings us back to General Petraeus. He has resigned as head of the CIA because of an extramarital affair he had with his biographer. She is a strikingly beatiful and sexy woman. It is not difficult to understand his attraction to her in the circumstance of long hours working together. His immediate physical appearance does not, at first glance, match hers, but power is an aphrodesiac and he is a most powerful man. It is not difficult to explain the how and why of the mutual attraction.
The General, gallantly, did not name his paramour, although the press revealed her identity, almost instantaneously. He said that he loved his wife of 37 years, and I'm sure he does. Whether he is in love with her is another question altogether.
He misstepped and is accepting the consequences. His infidelity should, in no way, tarnish his iconic status as a hero and patriot. He has not become "disgraced". His type of discretion is too common. It transcends all walks of life. Me and my fanaticism does not, I suggest, a majority view make.
The media shall be inundated with all sorts of conspiracy and covert theories supposedly underlining the "real" circumstances attending the General's resignation. Don't buy it.
The bottom line: he became infatuated with a very attractive woman and succombed. He is paying the price.
The price does not embrace his heroic service to his country. We should have an army of Petraeuses.
Lay off the guy.
If I can, my puritanical views notwithstanding, so can you
All the same, if I were married to the him, I'd walk away and burn the bridge.
But, that's just me.
At least I practice what I preach, at the cost perhaps, of being a romantic fool.
When a man and a woman are in constant contact with each other, chemistry often takes over. Especially if one of them is exceptionally physically attractive. The human animal is in us all. The sex drive was born with Adam. Amazingly, adultery, in many states, is still a crime, though criminal prosecutions are rare.
Adultery is and should remain grounds for divorce--but without being a crime. It is a clear violation of the contractual obligation between a married couple and rather obvious evidence of a loss of intimacy and fidelity. It, however, occurs too frequently in our society to be swept under the rug of non-recognition. It is a primal instinct but, inconsistently, carries with it the stigma of the Scarlet Letter. Its frequency brings into play its allure and consequences.
My personal belief is that if you are in love with your spouse, you should remain faithful regardless of the temptations that will surely come your way.
During my 42 years of marriage, trying criminal cases nationwide, many opportunities presented themselves, but I, almost fanatically and religiously, never cheated on my wife. Never. Not even a kiss, a flirtation of any kind--I indulged in none of that, for I strictly adhered to the loyalty of fidelity. I deemed it to be the most important foundation of my marriage, a violation of which, by either partner, would forever and irreparably shatter the union. This was a ground rule in which I was emotionally vested--no exceptions allowed. It was an obsession with me.
But now, looking back, I realize that, although I was not wrong, I was very, very naive. Still am.
When two people find themselves in almost daily contact with each other, it frequently happens that a physical attraction evolves. The question thus posed is do you give into this desire, even once?
I now understand that a person can indulge in extramarital sex and simply walk away from it without any pains of conscience. I can't but others can.
Others find themselves so infatuated with the fire of new sex, the intoxocation with the ilicity of it, that they participate in an affair, as opposed to a one-night-stand (for fidelity purposes, I make no distinction). This may involve the consideration of divorce and remarriage. Blame it on a desire for what was once but no longer is, or the actual blooming of true love, or what ever---but it is a very serious matter with much potential for emotional collateral damage.
I am not that type of person. Even though I might accept the fact that my spouse may have erred in this regard, without the involvment of love and unaccompanied by any lessoning of love for me--the marriage, for me, is over. Kaput. And all the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put Humpty Dumpty back together again. But again, that's who I am. I do not impose this personal standard of conduct on others, in a judgemental way. To each his own, for I readilly admit to being obsessive-compulsive in this regard. I'll stay with my own set of rules, thank you very much, yet my astonishment at those who can indulge, walk away and never look back will never diminish. I can understand their outlook on all of this---but it ain't for me. My spouse cheats just one time, with no romance or love involved, and it's divorce time. I'm just not built thst way.
Which brings us back to General Petraeus. He has resigned as head of the CIA because of an extramarital affair he had with his biographer. She is a strikingly beatiful and sexy woman. It is not difficult to understand his attraction to her in the circumstance of long hours working together. His immediate physical appearance does not, at first glance, match hers, but power is an aphrodesiac and he is a most powerful man. It is not difficult to explain the how and why of the mutual attraction.
The General, gallantly, did not name his paramour, although the press revealed her identity, almost instantaneously. He said that he loved his wife of 37 years, and I'm sure he does. Whether he is in love with her is another question altogether.
He misstepped and is accepting the consequences. His infidelity should, in no way, tarnish his iconic status as a hero and patriot. He has not become "disgraced". His type of discretion is too common. It transcends all walks of life. Me and my fanaticism does not, I suggest, a majority view make.
The media shall be inundated with all sorts of conspiracy and covert theories supposedly underlining the "real" circumstances attending the General's resignation. Don't buy it.
The bottom line: he became infatuated with a very attractive woman and succombed. He is paying the price.
The price does not embrace his heroic service to his country. We should have an army of Petraeuses.
Lay off the guy.
If I can, my puritanical views notwithstanding, so can you
All the same, if I were married to the him, I'd walk away and burn the bridge.
But, that's just me.
At least I practice what I preach, at the cost perhaps, of being a romantic fool.
TOO FEW CAME TO THE PARTY
It was Romney's for the taking but he blew it. Obama's weak spot was the economy. He could not achieve an upturn because the Big Boys wouldn't let him. I'm talking about the movers and shakers who control the money flow and cause stock market fluctuations within a 24 hour period. They sat on their cash (except for political shadowed donations) and froze the economy, the job seekers be damned. If Romney had won, the market would have spiked and euphoria would have permeated public opinion. And that would have been a good thing. So, why did Romney lose?
Harken back to 2011, when Obama and Speaker John Boehner attempted to effectuate a grand bargain which would alleviate the debt ceiling crisis and avoid plummeting over the fiscal cliff. Many Democrats were furious with the President, alleging that he had given away too much. Notwithstanding the failure to close the deal, Obama demonstrated that he is not, by any means, an ultra liberal. He is, first and foremost, a pragmatist. He "gets" the big picture and is prepared to embrace the predicate of politics, to wit, the necessity to compromise. This was an anathema to the radical right wing of the Republican party, a lunatic fringe calling itself the Tea Party.
The notion of reason was scorned and abandoned. These true believers were willing to let the country sink rather than compromise on anything. They were and are the most unreasonable of men. They fashion themselves as patriots but are, instead, lunatics. But, they controlled the House of Representatives and, clinging to their self-annointed mandate, wouldn't yield an inch.
They closely monitored the Republican nomination process and were ready to crucify any candidate who swerved off their course. Romney is not one of them, but was afraid to take any position which might cause alienation. So, he embraced their principles, secured their backing and won the nomination. The general campaign was, however, a different scenario.
Romney, correctly realizing that Tea Party tenets did not represent the electorate majority, held himself out to be a moderate Republican. But he was trapped by his Tea Party utterances during the nomination fight. Inconsistencies sprang up everywhere, providing the Democrats with a plethora of destructive ammunition. Romney responded by "modifying" his stances, effectuating the indelible brand of "flip-flopper."
Further, his positions on womens' rights turned them into ferocious adversaries. His immigration policies cost him the Hispanic and Latino vote. His failure to release more than 2 years of tax returns fed the notion that he was an arrogant rich/fat cat completely out of touch with the middle class. This list of missteps is endless. Blame poor advice or personal misjudgment, he turned off the majority of American voters. This type of political blundering does not bode well for an aspiring President.
Romney is not a demon. He is a good man who failed to eradicate the notion that he is a danger to the middle class. Had he been elected, he would have allocated to the states the supervision and control of those affairs of life in which the federal government should be the primary mover. Save for the economy, he would have led us down some very precarious paths.
When Obama uses the tools of compromise and reason to reach legislative agreements with Republicans--and he will--the economy will favorably respond, accordingly.
The super-rich lost but, worry not, they shall survive. Despite all the money at their disposal, they have presumably learned that elections can't be bought.
The seeds of the Romney failure were sown in Tea Party fields.
History will show Obama to have been a most able president.
The very near future will show that the better man won.
'Tis a good thing that has happened.
Romney is President of White Male America. He wooed them. He won them. And lost the election.
(for cp)
Harken back to 2011, when Obama and Speaker John Boehner attempted to effectuate a grand bargain which would alleviate the debt ceiling crisis and avoid plummeting over the fiscal cliff. Many Democrats were furious with the President, alleging that he had given away too much. Notwithstanding the failure to close the deal, Obama demonstrated that he is not, by any means, an ultra liberal. He is, first and foremost, a pragmatist. He "gets" the big picture and is prepared to embrace the predicate of politics, to wit, the necessity to compromise. This was an anathema to the radical right wing of the Republican party, a lunatic fringe calling itself the Tea Party.
The notion of reason was scorned and abandoned. These true believers were willing to let the country sink rather than compromise on anything. They were and are the most unreasonable of men. They fashion themselves as patriots but are, instead, lunatics. But, they controlled the House of Representatives and, clinging to their self-annointed mandate, wouldn't yield an inch.
They closely monitored the Republican nomination process and were ready to crucify any candidate who swerved off their course. Romney is not one of them, but was afraid to take any position which might cause alienation. So, he embraced their principles, secured their backing and won the nomination. The general campaign was, however, a different scenario.
Romney, correctly realizing that Tea Party tenets did not represent the electorate majority, held himself out to be a moderate Republican. But he was trapped by his Tea Party utterances during the nomination fight. Inconsistencies sprang up everywhere, providing the Democrats with a plethora of destructive ammunition. Romney responded by "modifying" his stances, effectuating the indelible brand of "flip-flopper."
Further, his positions on womens' rights turned them into ferocious adversaries. His immigration policies cost him the Hispanic and Latino vote. His failure to release more than 2 years of tax returns fed the notion that he was an arrogant rich/fat cat completely out of touch with the middle class. This list of missteps is endless. Blame poor advice or personal misjudgment, he turned off the majority of American voters. This type of political blundering does not bode well for an aspiring President.
Romney is not a demon. He is a good man who failed to eradicate the notion that he is a danger to the middle class. Had he been elected, he would have allocated to the states the supervision and control of those affairs of life in which the federal government should be the primary mover. Save for the economy, he would have led us down some very precarious paths.
When Obama uses the tools of compromise and reason to reach legislative agreements with Republicans--and he will--the economy will favorably respond, accordingly.
The super-rich lost but, worry not, they shall survive. Despite all the money at their disposal, they have presumably learned that elections can't be bought.
The seeds of the Romney failure were sown in Tea Party fields.
History will show Obama to have been a most able president.
The very near future will show that the better man won.
'Tis a good thing that has happened.
Romney is President of White Male America. He wooed them. He won them. And lost the election.
(for cp)
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
LET THE WAVE TAKE YOU
Alas, but sometimes, on more than one occasion, you find yourself in the shithouse of life, face down.
To what extent you have contributed to the mess at hand is immaterial, for it is what it is. Panic overwhelms you and quickly spawns depression, anger and despair. Your judgement becomes seriously impaired and the danger of your desperation is the obsesive compulsion to act impulsively and erroneously. That's when things can easily veer out of control. So, how do you deal with such a predicament?
First, realize that your decision making process is off the track. You will act at your peril. Accordingly, stop the rush to immediately resolve things. Shut down that most complicated of all computors: your brain. Watch a movie, read a book, surf the Internet--do anything that will allow you to mentally and emotionally shift into neutral and begin to re-fuel.
Second, understand that there is nothing more you can do, at this moment. Adopt a fatalistic attitude: what will be, will be. Stop swimming against the tide. You've hit rock bottom. Now, fall further through the floor. Invite fate to take over. Turn things off and get a good night's sleep.
You will awaken into a relative state of calm. The anxiety is diminished or gone because you are not allowing yourself to care anymore. You ask yourself,"Have I done everything I can to maximize my chances of pulling out of this?" If your answer is "yes", you shower, put clothes on your body, eat something and do what you have to do on that particular day in your life. In other words, you function, as best you can.
And, someway, somehow, your problem will alleviate or be resolved.
All because you fought off the demons of desperation.
All because you rebooted your soul.
All because you let you heal you.
All because you climbed aboard an ocean's wave and simply let it take you.
To what extent you have contributed to the mess at hand is immaterial, for it is what it is. Panic overwhelms you and quickly spawns depression, anger and despair. Your judgement becomes seriously impaired and the danger of your desperation is the obsesive compulsion to act impulsively and erroneously. That's when things can easily veer out of control. So, how do you deal with such a predicament?
First, realize that your decision making process is off the track. You will act at your peril. Accordingly, stop the rush to immediately resolve things. Shut down that most complicated of all computors: your brain. Watch a movie, read a book, surf the Internet--do anything that will allow you to mentally and emotionally shift into neutral and begin to re-fuel.
Second, understand that there is nothing more you can do, at this moment. Adopt a fatalistic attitude: what will be, will be. Stop swimming against the tide. You've hit rock bottom. Now, fall further through the floor. Invite fate to take over. Turn things off and get a good night's sleep.
You will awaken into a relative state of calm. The anxiety is diminished or gone because you are not allowing yourself to care anymore. You ask yourself,"Have I done everything I can to maximize my chances of pulling out of this?" If your answer is "yes", you shower, put clothes on your body, eat something and do what you have to do on that particular day in your life. In other words, you function, as best you can.
And, someway, somehow, your problem will alleviate or be resolved.
All because you fought off the demons of desperation.
All because you rebooted your soul.
All because you let you heal you.
All because you climbed aboard an ocean's wave and simply let it take you.
Friday, October 5, 2012
MY TAKE ON THE FIRST 2012 PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE
I come with no claim of political expertise, for I don't have it. I'm just a citizen offering my opinion on the first Obama-Romney debate.
The bottom line of all that I hear and read is that the President "choked." It was a moment of great stress and it is claimed that he was bested by Governor Romney. He failed to seize the night; he missed rebutting false or misleading statements; he looked befuddled---and so on, and so on. To which I ask,"So what!"
What are we to draw from this lackluster performance?
"If he can't stand up to Romney, he can't stand up to foreign Heads of State."
"Romney is more intelligent and smarter (there is a difference) and, therefore, more fit to be president."
"Denver's "mile high" altitude threw Obama off-stride. He should have spent more pre-debate time in that city."
"He swung and missed on pitches lobbed right over the plate."...........and so on, and so on.
Perhaps Romney was better prepped with clever zingers successfully designed to throw Obama off balance. But again, who cares? Their opposing positions on social issues remain constant. Their core values are still aligned with different social and economic groups. If voters can be persuaded to switch their vote on the basis of who "won" the damn thing, we are in a sorry mess.
The molds have hardened for each man. They have substantially different outlooks on almost everything, and they ain't gonna change.
Consider the contest (to use a lawyerly phrase) on its merits. Go for substance, not form. Maybe, just maybe, Romney turns out to be the better debater. That's no connecting link to who's got the righter stuff.
Stay focused on the most important issue. They both are patriotic Americans with littlle or no difference in foreign policy. It's their contrasting positions on social and economic issues which confront the nation's decision making process.
And this has nothing to do with who is the better debater.
In almost every closing argument, I would implore the jurors to keep their eyes on the ball.
Same thing here.
The bottom line of all that I hear and read is that the President "choked." It was a moment of great stress and it is claimed that he was bested by Governor Romney. He failed to seize the night; he missed rebutting false or misleading statements; he looked befuddled---and so on, and so on. To which I ask,"So what!"
What are we to draw from this lackluster performance?
"If he can't stand up to Romney, he can't stand up to foreign Heads of State."
"Romney is more intelligent and smarter (there is a difference) and, therefore, more fit to be president."
"Denver's "mile high" altitude threw Obama off-stride. He should have spent more pre-debate time in that city."
"He swung and missed on pitches lobbed right over the plate."...........and so on, and so on.
Perhaps Romney was better prepped with clever zingers successfully designed to throw Obama off balance. But again, who cares? Their opposing positions on social issues remain constant. Their core values are still aligned with different social and economic groups. If voters can be persuaded to switch their vote on the basis of who "won" the damn thing, we are in a sorry mess.
The molds have hardened for each man. They have substantially different outlooks on almost everything, and they ain't gonna change.
Consider the contest (to use a lawyerly phrase) on its merits. Go for substance, not form. Maybe, just maybe, Romney turns out to be the better debater. That's no connecting link to who's got the righter stuff.
Stay focused on the most important issue. They both are patriotic Americans with littlle or no difference in foreign policy. It's their contrasting positions on social and economic issues which confront the nation's decision making process.
And this has nothing to do with who is the better debater.
In almost every closing argument, I would implore the jurors to keep their eyes on the ball.
Same thing here.
Thursday, August 16, 2012
THE CHOICE
I was particularly tired that night as I got into bed. The usual aches and pains that are necessarily included in the home stretch of life. I welcomed sleep which came quickly.
I was being gently awakened. The lightest of touches on my shoulder. I turned and looked up. The person was sitting beside me and his face was extraordinarily benevolent and friendly. His voice was gentle but extremely authoritative.
"It's alright, don't be frightened, it's alright."
I was unable to ascertain specific facial features except to make note that he appeared very, very kind.
"I've got what I think you'll look upon as good news. I'm here to offer you a second chance."
I wasn't at all afraid, so reassuring and good was his demeanor.
"I don't understand. Please excuse me but I don't understand you."
"Of course. Let me explain. You've been down on yourself lately, reliving old baggage, over and over. You're a bit worn down and out, exhausting your energy in trying to constantly refuel and stay on high ground." He was smiling now.
"How did you know?" I stammered. The smile became a laugh. Maybe I had insulted him.
"I know all about you. That's why I'm here, don't you see?"
I didn't answer, lest I offend.
"I've got a proposition for you. Listen to it carefully."
I was very awake in a very deep sleep.
"If you wish, you can awaken in the morning and be young again, in the prime of life. What's more, you'll be at the top of your chosen game. Everyone will know who you are and will be vying for your favor. You'll enjoy the best of everything. The world will be your oyster."
I was stunned. "Why me?"
"Because it's your turn."
"Oh, my God," I exclaimed, cringing at the liberty I had taken. "Yes, yes, I wish. I want it! I'll be able to benefit from my mistakes, avoid the pitfalls, share my happiness with those close to me and squelch the naysayers."
He paused. "Not exactly, I'm afraid. You see, you'll be someone else."
I let those words sink in. And then I got it, the full meaning of what he was saying.
"I would die in my sleep."
"As far as the You as we know You now, yes. But it won't be Your end."
I believe I kept blinking my eyes, struggling to comprehend it all. Oh, the glory of a second chance at life! But, what of my loved ones? Come sunrise, they would be mourning me and I would be unable to tell them no need. I would be unable to communicate with them at all. The selfish cruelty of it all. I found myself involved in the ultimate weighing process. My face cried out to him for help. But, he said no more. He had spelled it all out and now it was up to me.
And then he began to slowly drift away.
He had read my thought process to the fullest.
He knew my conclusion and wasn't at all angry or even disappointed.
I had decided to wake up as me.
I was being gently awakened. The lightest of touches on my shoulder. I turned and looked up. The person was sitting beside me and his face was extraordinarily benevolent and friendly. His voice was gentle but extremely authoritative.
"It's alright, don't be frightened, it's alright."
I was unable to ascertain specific facial features except to make note that he appeared very, very kind.
"I've got what I think you'll look upon as good news. I'm here to offer you a second chance."
I wasn't at all afraid, so reassuring and good was his demeanor.
"I don't understand. Please excuse me but I don't understand you."
"Of course. Let me explain. You've been down on yourself lately, reliving old baggage, over and over. You're a bit worn down and out, exhausting your energy in trying to constantly refuel and stay on high ground." He was smiling now.
"How did you know?" I stammered. The smile became a laugh. Maybe I had insulted him.
"I know all about you. That's why I'm here, don't you see?"
I didn't answer, lest I offend.
"I've got a proposition for you. Listen to it carefully."
I was very awake in a very deep sleep.
"If you wish, you can awaken in the morning and be young again, in the prime of life. What's more, you'll be at the top of your chosen game. Everyone will know who you are and will be vying for your favor. You'll enjoy the best of everything. The world will be your oyster."
I was stunned. "Why me?"
"Because it's your turn."
"Oh, my God," I exclaimed, cringing at the liberty I had taken. "Yes, yes, I wish. I want it! I'll be able to benefit from my mistakes, avoid the pitfalls, share my happiness with those close to me and squelch the naysayers."
He paused. "Not exactly, I'm afraid. You see, you'll be someone else."
I let those words sink in. And then I got it, the full meaning of what he was saying.
"I would die in my sleep."
"As far as the You as we know You now, yes. But it won't be Your end."
I believe I kept blinking my eyes, struggling to comprehend it all. Oh, the glory of a second chance at life! But, what of my loved ones? Come sunrise, they would be mourning me and I would be unable to tell them no need. I would be unable to communicate with them at all. The selfish cruelty of it all. I found myself involved in the ultimate weighing process. My face cried out to him for help. But, he said no more. He had spelled it all out and now it was up to me.
And then he began to slowly drift away.
He had read my thought process to the fullest.
He knew my conclusion and wasn't at all angry or even disappointed.
I had decided to wake up as me.
Tuesday, July 10, 2012
RANDOM HARVESTS 3
As we all pray for a cure for cancer, here's another thing to hope for: An alternative to barbaric chemotherapy which ravages the body with horrific side effects. And will somebody rationalize the apparent unwillingness of the medical profession to administer pot or THC as an aid to combat this injection of poison. If ever a situation cries out for getting high, this is it. In California, with an easily obtainable prescription, one can shop at a pot store and browse from many different available species. It is the most effective way of reducing/eliminating the side effects of chemo. SO WHY ISN'T IT PUT TO THIS USE?
...........................................................
I submit to you the scale-tipper in the election-selection decision: The fact that the wealth class shall vote for Romney is, at least, understandable. If you have more, it's human nature to want to keep/enlarge it. President Obama has already proven his allegiance to the middle and lower income classes. Let's be realistic. Mitt Romney is not an evil man. He has proven skills which he shall, without reservation, dedicate to the his version of the betterment of America. The sky will not fall if he is elected, looking at him personally. In full disclosure, he's not my choice but we've survived with worse. The cause for great concern is this: The economy is in bad shape. Don't be naive. It is not going to miraculously recover by November. We're in for a long haul. It's not the President's fault, but it's his political Achilles Heel. In this climate, financially suffering people become susceptible to the rantings of demagogues. History shows this. Neither Democrats nor moderate Republicans are embraced by this catagory. There is, however, a faction out there which has already infected our Congress and whch simply won't go away. They are zealots to the extreme and it's either their way or the highway. They are cult-like in their philosophy, dangerous and must be taken seriously. They are blind to practical common sense and ruthless to those within their gunsights. They abhor the protection of the federal government from which they want "to take the country back." They believe that reason and compromise are dirty words. Will they succeed in "playing" the floundering economy card as a means of capturing the votes of those who are monetarily disadvantaged? Pray that they don't. The only preventive means available to escape from the clutches of the Tea Party is to vote Democratic.
............................................................
The Mob should again run Vegas. Those were the days! Really big stars in the main rooms while the lounges featured A-list known-names entertainers. Frequent visitors always received a "comp", you had to wear at least a sports jacket to a showtime dinner and everybody was happy. The theory behind this form of management was that if the main room or the lounge lost money, that was O.K. The patrons would be put into a good mood and this led directly to the casino which always made loot. When Howard Hughes and the corporate mentality took over, each operation had to make money on its own. The restaurants, the coffee shops, the lounges, the main rooms and even the hotel itself was not exempt. They all had to individually show a profit or heads would roll. Contracts were torn up without regard to legal consequences because, practically speaking, there weren't any. You gonna sue a casino corporation in Vegas? You won't find a lawyer. So the entire atmosphere changed. No more lounge acts. No more freely-issued comps. Every employee is constantly expecting to get fired. There is no dress code save for the requirement that you can't walk around naked. You think The Boys could be cold-hearted? Try pissing-off the Suits. Let whatever is left of the Mob come back in.
..................................................................
More Random Harvests whenever.
As Mrs. Cassidy said to Mr. Cassidy, let's hop-a-long.
...........................................................
I submit to you the scale-tipper in the election-selection decision: The fact that the wealth class shall vote for Romney is, at least, understandable. If you have more, it's human nature to want to keep/enlarge it. President Obama has already proven his allegiance to the middle and lower income classes. Let's be realistic. Mitt Romney is not an evil man. He has proven skills which he shall, without reservation, dedicate to the his version of the betterment of America. The sky will not fall if he is elected, looking at him personally. In full disclosure, he's not my choice but we've survived with worse. The cause for great concern is this: The economy is in bad shape. Don't be naive. It is not going to miraculously recover by November. We're in for a long haul. It's not the President's fault, but it's his political Achilles Heel. In this climate, financially suffering people become susceptible to the rantings of demagogues. History shows this. Neither Democrats nor moderate Republicans are embraced by this catagory. There is, however, a faction out there which has already infected our Congress and whch simply won't go away. They are zealots to the extreme and it's either their way or the highway. They are cult-like in their philosophy, dangerous and must be taken seriously. They are blind to practical common sense and ruthless to those within their gunsights. They abhor the protection of the federal government from which they want "to take the country back." They believe that reason and compromise are dirty words. Will they succeed in "playing" the floundering economy card as a means of capturing the votes of those who are monetarily disadvantaged? Pray that they don't. The only preventive means available to escape from the clutches of the Tea Party is to vote Democratic.
............................................................
The Mob should again run Vegas. Those were the days! Really big stars in the main rooms while the lounges featured A-list known-names entertainers. Frequent visitors always received a "comp", you had to wear at least a sports jacket to a showtime dinner and everybody was happy. The theory behind this form of management was that if the main room or the lounge lost money, that was O.K. The patrons would be put into a good mood and this led directly to the casino which always made loot. When Howard Hughes and the corporate mentality took over, each operation had to make money on its own. The restaurants, the coffee shops, the lounges, the main rooms and even the hotel itself was not exempt. They all had to individually show a profit or heads would roll. Contracts were torn up without regard to legal consequences because, practically speaking, there weren't any. You gonna sue a casino corporation in Vegas? You won't find a lawyer. So the entire atmosphere changed. No more lounge acts. No more freely-issued comps. Every employee is constantly expecting to get fired. There is no dress code save for the requirement that you can't walk around naked. You think The Boys could be cold-hearted? Try pissing-off the Suits. Let whatever is left of the Mob come back in.
..................................................................
More Random Harvests whenever.
As Mrs. Cassidy said to Mr. Cassidy, let's hop-a-long.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)