The New Haven girl who laughed.

I experienced for a moment with a New Haven girl the power over women that a Yale Man has. We went to East Rock Park. I doubt she would have gone with me if I had not been a Yale Man.

The moment was generated by the sensation I had taking her in my arms. It was the first time I ever felt lust with a woman. I had had the feeling of lust when I was cross dressing in secret and had my first orgasm. But with this woman I felt lust equal to that and was equally stymied by unsuitability of it. My first instinct was to say to her, "I love to feel you!" hoping she would open herself to equal lust herself. She didn't. She was struck by my virginity as if it was laughable, and that's just what she did. She laughed almost uproariously. It wasn't true virginity as I had copulated before, but once it was without attraction to the girl and the other time it was phobic to intercourse, for the sake of nominal virginity. This New Haven girl, of course, knew nothing of my history, but what was laughable about my behavior I cannot fathom. She probably was not aroused at all and my expression of feelings plainly declared that I was, and this inequality she took as some bizarre type of social advantage, and used that advantage to exult over my gullibility that she would be responsive. The words I said stand as a monument to the cruelty of people, for though her expression of advantage seems to me bizarre, to her it bespoke totally a presumption of due ridicule. She was laughing into her crowd, her social circle, while I spoke into the history books, for such is the nature of my published writings. My lust is empowering, and I never make excuses for it. If Yale taught me anything, it is that social circles are best left behind one as he sets out on a quest for eternal significance. Let the circles feel the effects in peculiar or distant ways, as is their need. I have a sense of the beautiful, or I would never have gotten this far, and it serves as a light on my products, hinting at the existence of some or other place where others, not just myself, will welcome them. It is not the complete product, but it counts. I think there is something beautiful in the story of the New Haven girl who laughed. It didn't lessen my lust. It served notice that lust for me is always close at hand, at which there will always be those who laugh. It could be worse, and in fact, in places it is. Other stories append there. Read the autobiography. The name of the New Haven girl of this story is Cindy Koval.

Congratulations to Egypt.

Hearty congratulations to Egypt on its attainment of freedom from dictatorship. May its stewardship of the remains of the ancient kingdoms be suitable to the modern realities, including the existence of my own Osiris-touched life.

What Crystal Newell may or may not understand, and how that needs to change if I succeed without her.

What Crystal Newell needs to convince me of if she ever develops a desire to show me loyalty is that having a child when I am in my seventies is a proper achievement for me.

We know Charlie Chaplin did it. But that just proves one incident. If Crystal is to exceed with her sexual prowess the competition, which is whatever becomes a reasonable field of females for me given what success I have once I leave Bryn Mawr Care, then that success, and Crystal's view of it in terms of what desire for me it generates, must be set against one another. This is the state of affairs I have created by breaking up with her. I am not trying to make her jealous. I am giving her a chance to see herself on a larger scale, one which may turn out to be more than she can manage. If I succeed greatly, then there will be little reason to return to just an old girlfriend unless she has some real sense. She will have to take the first step. Time is wasting already.

My last four artworks.

My last four artworks. Their titles, top to bottom, are: 1) economy, entropy 2) two sized circles 3) split circles 4) large $. All are 9 in. x 12 in., colored pencil on Bristol.

Sports, the Mafia, and toughness.

I think there is considerable evidence to suggest that my status as an athelete is considered by some to be unusually strong for a Mafia kingpin, as apparently they tend to have a less fraternal life beginning than I have been privileged to pursue. Or it may be that my athleticism is cited by those who would defend my selection against a faction critical of my toughness. Wrestling is a sport without blows, but replete with toughness, and that is where I found my sporting voice, leading me into manhood with a good footing.

No connection between me and the Jews, despite the analogy with Moses.

I have on occasion referred to myself with the terms, "the successor to Moses." This usage is misleading and I regret using it without any clarification of the fact that there is in it no implication whatsoever with respect to the Jews. Moses was tied to the Jewish race by birth and by personal identification with it that came later in his life than his earlier position of privilege within the Egyptian culture. I have no such tie or personal identification with the Jews. I do not attribute what I saw to an entity called God. I consider it instead to be a natural phenomenon that has enabled me to have a significant effect on my surroundings, these being those of a mentally ill person living in a nursing home for the mentally ill. It seems clear that there is something of an analogy between the Jews' role in the life of Moses and the mentally ill's role in my life. I don't bother to look for an analogy in my life for the parting of the Red Sea. First, it seems unlikely that anything like the event as depicted in the movie, The Ten Commandments, actually occurred. Second, I gather that I am something more of a scientist than Moses was, and expect more of a scientific process from myself rather than a magical one.

There is no doubt in my mind that what I did for the community in the nursing home where I live at this writing was something eligible to be called a miracle. I am myself at a loss to explain the particular acts I took, except for the ones related to the line-ups here, which are more simple in conception even though they too were very difficult under the conditions that existed at the time. What I said in the dining room I doubt I will ever find a way to explain. It was said in such utter turmoil, was so at pains to improve the situation, and drew from such an extreme ramp-up of understanding toward the creation of a positive effect, that explaining it will forever be a less useful and because of that a less likely action. It appears the effect is permanent, and done with such finality that my own fate is less tied to the mentally ill now than Moses's fate was tied to the Jews after he worked his magic at the Red Sea. My reading of this is that all of the mentally ill here have a greatly expanded field in which to seek their fortunes, and my fate is to seek my fortunes like the rest of them. Thankfully, I have no role in serving the mentally ill any more. I am at work on my personal understanding of mental illness and if I am successful in it I expect to benefit personally and not share my understanding with others, others having completely rejected the initial stages of development of my work.

Such is the path of logistical division between myself and H. sapiens.

Not a saint.

In case anyone is wondering, I am not a saint.

It is my debt to myself to understand the terms under which I seek to establish a more livable solution than the one I have worked under as a result of setting a goal for myself in college of serving the poor without regard to my own needs. This was a difficult goal from the outset and didn't have the effect on me of transforming my day to day sense of progress. As a result I made other plans than service without reward, first in economics and then in architecture, with the outcome of mental illness, perhaps because I had this conflict deep in my mind over the issue of rewards and the scale of the undertaking. The largest scale of undertaking of any I considered was this one with no consideration for reward. In a sense, it was this fact that guided my decisions over the long term and led to homelessness, in which I was forced to make do with a future utterly without reward, so why not make something of it, thus setting me up for pursuing the service goal I visualized in college. In this way, I rallied around my ambition, whose highest expression, in my case, was off scale in the world of college at Yale. And it could be said that I rallied around my ambition from the moment I reflected for the first time on service in a college setting. But still, this was motivated by self advancement, which is what ambition is all about. When one serves, he elevates everyone, and can expect this will include himself, though he must understand that this elevation takes fundamentally different directions in the case of those served and in the case of the one who serves. For those served, there is relief. This is absolutely different from the idea of the service economy. There, one works for pay, and performs service that contributes to, ultimately, what I have heard described as "the quiet enjoyment of assets." The history of the species is basically organized around this objective, and the stories of outsize servants dot the fabric here and there, but do not define the species assets. I have come to the conclusion there must be more in it than such an eccentric role for me. I want to be able to engage in the quiet enjoyment of assets, and I want to understand how this is accomplished so that I can raise my progeny up in that understanding. However, my reality is not economically strong. I produce nothing and do nothing that draws investment. What I produce is understanding. It is of the scale of my ambition. Generally, others will see no merit in it. My work is not generative of viral growth of audience.

However, there is evidence I have aroused the interest of some with a role that implies great ambition is not foreign to them. These identities will not be turned aside by the lack of ready economies in what I produce, or so I surmise, while they will still be looking to benefit. I find this picture of them attractive. Perhaps it fits. Perhaps it doesn't fit. Either way, it is wise for me to incorporate a more understanding component of my audience than any I began with when I started this blog. I knew such a component existed, but I had only a hope of seeing it respond.

With the manifestation of this component, as it occurs in spikes of large numbers of views of the blog in very short time intervals, there came a call to be cautious. A certain critical element is to be inferred. Confidence I am on the right path made it easy to operate in the spotlight of criticism. Yet it calls for something more than what I have done in the past. I must be starkly honest about my motives. This will serve my base of action.

This honesty about my motives leads me to question why I wish to seek financial comforts after having so strongly spoken of my goal to serve and to count myself among those who certainly didn't produce economic returns in proportion to their service. I have begun to enter this area of thought above. The species is centered on assets, not outsized service, which is an afterthought. My economic desolation gave me a space to inhabit of small size, but my critical skills found use in the time left to me, and I have invested in understanding, coming up with some ideas with large implications. On the strength of these ideas I determined that tool use by humans caused them to lose body hair because it made up for a loss of tactile contact with their environment.

I seem to be in a frame of mind in which I lead myself into concepts that extend in many directions none of which has the definition required for standing on to go any further. This may be out of having no conversation in the large scale of ideas, and needing to let ideas simmer for a while before it becomes obvious what the next proposition with merit will be.

That being the case, I allow that the ideas the reader may take from all this may well be earlier, and this present bit of writing is not yet as fruitful.

Report on a random occurence of note.

During something like a month preceding the news that I will be getting public housing, which was at the beginning of January, I did one of my occasional random selections of letters of the English alphabet, in this case of four letters, using the random number generator of my calculator.

The letters selected were "exod."

The fit at this point to the word "exodus" was so close, and the relevance to my claim of being the successor to Moses being so strong, I decided not to select further letters, the fear they would not be "us" being also a factor. Perhaps the exclusion of the English word "us" is a play on the fact that the departure will not be in the plural, but in the singular.

Thus a further evidence that my command of my bureau, specifically my ability to extract from it information without formulating it intentionally and thus without exerting stress on the formation of the information, so as to ease my going forward in harmony between the universe and my organic drives, is realized.

Depth of propagation into human race of my actions at Bryn Mawr Care.

An appropriate question at this point is: how deeply into the human population has the action I took here at Bryn Mawr Care propagated? Very hard to say. It surrounds me, and that is all I can say with certainty, which fortunately may be enough to get me past this obstacle that has been my home for twelve years, 17 if you consider it from the time I first arrived.

Hex on Twitter lifted.

I am ending my stand against Twitter. It's hard for me to adjust to so much change, but it does seem as if I am doing a little better understanding them. So the hex is lifted.

Architect jobs search on careerbuilder.com brings up only IT jobs.

I am wondering what architects, that is people who design brick and mortar buildings, think of the fact that when one does a search for jobs with the keyword "architect" on careerbuilder.com, and I presume similar sites give similar outcomes, all the jobs that are returned have to do with information systems architecture--none about bricks and mortar architecture, at least the first several pages worth of results.

Where do architects search for jobs?

Odors in my closet.

I have detected a complex of irritating odors evidently originating in my closet. This development followed a recent improvement in my personal habits.

Chicago Bears not supported for the Super Bowl.

With no girlfriend, Crystal Newell having been removed from that role a day or so ago, I can no longer support the Chicago Bears in their bid for the Super Bowl.

It is hard to set aside in my mind the suspicion that "biblical" flooding in Australia has a connection with my persistent economic failure. While in Moses's case he sealed his fate with those of a population, and rode out the intercession of global forces as protector of those peoples, I have not sealed my fate to any group, and the good that would come from me having economic success is a matter of my standing in the ecology. My success would open up new ecological relationships. The forces of mankind would become allied with those of certain other species whom I have discovered to be favorable to my work. The biblical disasters make of this not an offer, but a threat, leaning on the greater time scale of survival of these other species and their understanding of what is good for the ecology. Quite evidently, they consider what is happening to me to be bad for the ecology.

I did what I did for the other residents at my nursing home to make it more livable for myself. I don't expect repayment, and that is the part of the situation that is understandable in terms of religious values--selflessness and goodwill. But evidently, because the biblical disasters continue, such goodwill delivered at present is not what is as yet unrealized, and therefore sought, here. While Moses may have known considerable about the ecology to enable him to work miracles, it would appear that he did not know much about the ranks of the ecology which enabled him to work them. He spoke in the Old Testament of the role of God in bringing about his miracles. He wouldn't have had to resort to this attribution if he had known the fact that other species have ranks which exceed mankind in ecological persistence, and have the knowledge that makes it possible.

Mankind has created a temporary food chain apex for itself. It has not yet found a way to turn from its hungers long enough to create as part of its general individual legacy a place in the ecological and geological understanding of the planet. In fact, very little general individual legacy at all is passed on. We are exploring what we can reach on a very small legacy of u understanding.

You may read here that biblical disasters are the lot of a species that doesn't understand. For such a species only widespread retribution, focused by a mind which is at the very heart of the issue, will bring change. You have individuals who determine how species assets will be directed. These individuals are hampered by national rivalries and religious fervor. Such a situation ought to be immediately recognized as a condition of dependence on other species for a temporary food chain apex.

It was plainly obvious that a certain television commercial some ten years ago, in which two climbers bedded down in bags tied together on a sheer vertical mountain face, was only possible if someone had tapped into my mind and seen my thoughts about the time when I saw on a building the same fire that Moses saw on a bush, or at least saw my memories of those thoughts. At about that moment I visualized a party of six or so climbers bedding down on a sheer mountain face. This is not the kind of image that pops up like that without some very dedicated cause.

The commercial was for VISA.

At the time I was far from entertaining any thought of acquiring a VISA credit card. But within a year or so I did.

I have interpreted the commercial as having been intended to get resources to me so that I would not need to pursue a course of biblical mayhem such as Moses did.

Unfortunately, my dire circumstances are not the kind that yield to the obtaining of a line of credit. I had hoped they would be and I have worked along that line of development, but to no avail. I have also been receptive to the notion of special considerations as a deterrent to my having to "destroy the Egyptian army." Of course I am not blind to the distinctly avaricious factors in such an arrangement, for both myself and the interested third party. But if I am required to grant the legitimate claims of my educational loan creditors then I can't see how anyone can deny me my own distinctly selfish motives.

So the question now presents itself: is the person responsible for the appearance of my line of credit willing to endorse something more demonstrative? Such a move would necessarily have to plan to engage at some point the powers which I allege have blacklisted me. The simple fact that the identity of these blacklisting powers is not known to me argues that to succeed a measure designed to bring me economic prosperity would have to do something antecedent to widespread viral events. The blacklisters dwell on my faults. They would seek to extinguish viral beginnings by featuring them.

My problem is that I don't know what would be a good ignition point for going viral, and what approach to take in phrasing an ignition point in terms of the many unusual details of my life, as evidenced in my autobiography now available on scribd.com.

But there are problems for others in such a plan. Jealousy. Suspicion. Tradition. Religion. Meeting such elements of failure will require extreme measures.

You ask, how can I sustain such unlikely suggestions? But I say, how can you stand by and watch biblical disasters continue?

The amount of nonsense and suffering that accompanies jealousy, suspicion, tradition, and even religion is what can be avoided, provided there is enough sense of an alternative in my life and work. The threat of disasters continuing is a bet on a good number. It needs examination.

From the viewpoint of someone who has worked for the sake of an outcast group of people of whom he is a part, it is immediately at issue what the exact new level of well-being is. The lodging society for the group, fortunately, is unable to understand how an improvement has come about. This is an advantage for the outcast group's freedom to enjoy its new well-being. But it seems that the new proximity between outer and inner groups is still limited by economic disparity. The depth of the recent developments is such that it will take a long time for them to be fully realized. Thus the exact level of the new conditions economically may not be the right question. The very heart of the economy is affected, its protopecuniary center. Every quarrel critics have had of the limits of money to bring wellness is to be found active in this population of affected ill people here at Bryn Mawr Care. It is now working its way toward being a population of teachers of those values which each person knew were right but had been disregarded by those who cast them away.

My uncertainty is now what I should take up as my cause in the wake of bringing freedom to the ill here. I shall have to think about it.

Friends with poor memory?

Four previous colleagues of mine are now leaving unanswered email I have sent to them. They are:

George Blumenthal, formerly my thesis advisor at UC Santa Cruz and now chancellor of the university.

Bill Keel, former astronomy graduate student at UC Santa Cruz and now professor of astronomy at the University of Alabama.

Peter Beltemacchi, professor of architecture at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

Peter Land, professor of architecture at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

Crystal is incapable of self-criticism. The relationship is terminated.

I have determined beyond a reasonable doubt that Crystal Newell, the girl I have been dating since September 11, 2008, is incapable of self-criticism. This is a sufficient mark of poor character for me to cease dating her. It also implies inability to recognize character that does include a capacity for self-criticism, which explains why she chooses not to extend fidelity to me, and frees me from having to apply my self-criticism to search for a personal deficit or over-sight that would explain her lack of fidelity.

Any retreat from termination of the relationship would require nullification of the judgment that she is incapable of self-criticism, or a sanguine estimate of how long it would be necessary to wait for her to develop this qualification for marriage under the best of circumstances, my being with her being the sole guarantor of such, self-criticism being uncommon enough that it would likely not fall into place over the three years I am willing to wait over the two already passed. Waiting for that would be a matter of discretion on my part, requiring sufficient inducements in the way of accumulated incidents of exceptional character display or exceptional body carriage and proportions. My records having proven to be an influence over the population, it must be admitted that this current document must be granted some expectation of having an effect on the circumstances in question. But how long must the decision be delayed? Only long enough to let register in my frame whatever disposition there is of the state of affairs. No unseen hand is evident in the rapport between myself and this girl. Self-criticism is a necessary qualification for rulers, and any ruler must refrain from procreation if he has no mate capable of it. The state cannot be asked to gamble along with me, so I am letting Crystal go at this time, without need to explain myself to her any more than saying she is incapable of self-criticism, if she asks me, as she has in the past, why I haven't asked her out in a while. Fidelity would command more explanation and she has not produced it.

Awesome.

How many foreign countries have a translation for "awesome" that doesn't reinforce national rivalries?

Afghanistan: the three words, the measures they imply, and the understanding of journalists.

The American program in Afghanistan to "clear, hold, and build" was given a poor progress rating by an American journalist based on the observation that most of the country there is in the "clear" stage, and it was her feeling that this was a sign of no progress.

I disagree on high order grounds. The three words were, to my mind, selected to permit a concise organization of efforts, and it would be expected that at the outset of use of the three words a preponderance of "clear" conditions puts them on a track to the "build" conditions, along the lines of development intended to do so, rather than delegating them to the branding capacity of either default or lack of signs of change. The three words are effective, it appears to me, in the mind of those who know the measures standing behind them, and to see that effectiveness one needs to know the measures, a more extensive structure than the three words, and therefore their understanding a more demanding task than simply chewing on them as journalists like to do with news from the front. If the journalists can find an approach to understanding the measures intended to move territory into the "build" condition, then we can all share in assessment of the war and prove the value of our open society where generals let journalists know the kernel of what they are thinking and leave them draw their own conclusions which wind up in our hands as news consumers.

About a letter I sent to the State House in Springfield, IL in 2006.

Before the general election in Illinois in 2006 I wrote a letter, to the State House in Springfield, as I believe it is called, with a message I wrote in my own code for English. The plaintext of that message was this:

"VICTORY FOR BATEK"

In this election I was the Republican candidate for Illinois state representative. I lost the election, however all my political aspirations were stored in the establishment of good relations between blacks and whites in the United States. It is with due satisfaction, then, that I watched the election two years later of Barack Obama, the first black president of the United States. I had changed parties to the Democrats, first to vote for Hilary Clinton but changed again in favor of Mr. Obama.

Therefore I would like to issue at this time my thanks to the office holders and staff in Springfield who might have felt the effect of my letter. Some may have shared my aspirations and some may not have, but all are due thanks for keeping their public service good during this time of great change and new directions. Let us all hope the work of Mr. Obama in office results in fulfillment of the vote of confidence in him given by the American people, and general well-being of all, even those outside the U.S.

16x16 Sudoku solution.

I claim to have solved from scratch, without a computer, a 16x16 Sudoku.

I claim to have assembled a 16x16 Sudoku from scratch without a computer.

Bryn Mawr Care is expendable.

The staff at Bryn Mawr Care and their consultants, SIR Management, and the physical plant at Bryn Mawr Care, are all expendable. Nothing special about any of them or it. The same goes for all of the residents at Bryn Mawr Care except for the girl I am currently courting, Crystal Newell.

A problem employee at Bryn Mawr Care.

I have a problem employee at my nursing home. Her name is Carolyn and she is a CNA, or certified nursing assistant.

This person is on constant watch for opportunities to censure me. She has some strained image of me as constantly looking for ways to take advantage of the system. She ignores the enormous array of cooperative options that I tend to generate at all times, preferring instead to classify me as no better than the other residents. This would be justified if I had not built a social network here of awareness to some degree of what I have done to bolster employee skills. Unfortunately, the skills get more attention than who is bolstering them. This is a regressive situation. It discourages me from doing the bolstering, with those employees who don't take the time to contemplate my behavior from an objective perspective instead of a strictly disciplinary one. If a resident is obeying the staff, he is not observed, because every resident is considered by this type of employee to be a potential troublemaker first and there is no second. So this type of staff doesn't see what I do most of the time to bolster.

Perhaps giving Carolyn's name here will have some consequences and bring her around to a more objectively observant position.

On the eve of the coming in of law granting civil unions to gays.

There is a difficult to conceive part of my proposed policy on homosexuals in human society. It is that displays of public affection of all kinds by gays must be prohibited.

It is my feeling that such displays hinge around the assumption that gay interactions are not an offense to overall species sexual affairs. The fact that a gay person has the potential to interact sexually with his own sex is a matter of the extents to which human imagination can be pursued in behavior. I can have an orgasm masturbating in which I visualize absolutely nothing. This is not a positive behavior for the species, and I don't ask for rights to express such a potential in public. I am granted individual rights to pursue it. I am not granted the right to make a spectacle in public out of my imagination turned to this purpose. If I were I'm sure there would be numerous ways I could take advantage of it. It may be possible to present homosexuality as exactly this kind of behavior and argue that it should not be allowed to be seen in public to any extent. Imagination has gained for itself some extensive protections, notably the right to publish literature of all kinds so long as certain limits are imposed, such as the prohibition of libel. It would make sense to me for gay sex in literature to require a warning label, just as cigarettes must do. Gay literature is more offensive, I would suggest, than general heterosexual pornography, and merits this provision of a means to spare the public the trouble of exposure without a warning.

Opposition to homosexuality that I have seen has leaned on statements of feelings about it, and this has been unsuccessful in managing the problem. Enlisting religion to support these statements is of no help whatsoever. Humans have and will encounter from time to time such difficulties. Rights are a matter of government dealing with government, how much is enough and how much is too much. Homosexuality goes far deeper than these concerns and was unanticipated in the agendas of the most forward-thinking men and women. Government needed to be made safe first. Too much satisfaction with this provision is not a good thing. Public conversation needs to be made safe now, and homosexual motives need to be removed from them. Without this achievement there will be dissipation of heterosexual motives. It already exists, and I have taken the extraordinary step of refusing to speak to homosexuals. This has been a successful policy. I feel well positioned to remain firm in my policy of individual right affirmation and mating right denial for homosexuals.

Let us advance along this path of mine. I believe it is good to guarantee individual rights to gays. Let them discuss the policy. Let them keep their gay behavior unseen by the public. It is a better discomfort than being the subject of baiting and other abuse, and I feel it is something they ought to be able to see as such. I do not feel like extending forever a tolerant attitude to the existence of homosexuality and putting it out of existence is a tax I believe should be borne by gays, not straight people.

A couple of months ago I secured the administrator's promise to move my roommate out of the room. This roommate was talking to himself all the time very loudly and making insulting remarks about me which I could not answer because he was talking to himself, not me, but I had to listen to it. This in itself was untenable. But added to this, he was frequently leaving feces on the toilet seat and not cleaning it up, forcing me to choose the two alternatives of either doing him service and cleaning it up myself, or living with it. Neither of these two alternatives was acceptable.

The administrator said that he would move this person out of the room when space became available. I didn't belittle his intelligence by asking him what the reasoning was behind this delay. I had every right to do so, however, and just didn't because it was an automatic argument of unknown discomfort and I wanted to maintain neutrality with this administrator, for what it was worth.

If the administrator lacked the authority to break up an existing other room's two roommates in order to switch my roommate with another person somewhere else, so that I would get a new roommate and so would everyone else of the four of us involved, then, in that case of such lack of authority, there was good reason behind the delay.

I fail to see any other argument for there being reason behind it.

Therefore, the delay implied, from my point of view, that the administrator's latitude to exercise the authority in question lay at cross purposes with his estimation of the merits of my complaint.

There are two components of those merits. One, the unacceptability of my roommate's behavior. And two, my standing as a human being, such as it may happen to be across the broad range of ground on which I stand, from mere animal creature, to paying customer of this nursing home, to person dear or not to anyone at all, or to acknowledgment as first by an organization not to be played with and having a distinctly Italian or Roman composition.

As I have said, I reckon there to be only one explanation for the delay. The fact that I have not proven that there could be no others is a fact that I can play with like the administrator can play with his own latitudes.

I'm afraid from the looks of it the matter comes down on my side of the fence. The administrator, Patrick Baalke, and I are at odds on a non-speaking basis.

I had the roommate removed from the room by virtue of a more receptive audience in the recreation therapy supervisor, Ms. Phyllis Gilmore. I have not spoken of this with Mr. Baalke. I gave him two months to either be freed from his unwillingness to use his latitude by the appearance of a free space, or exercise his latitude. I feel this was quite sufficient.

Mr. Baalke is not perfect. But his imperfection is aligned against my credibility as a person of standing, and that is the new untenable situation. Other administrators have been and will be also not perfect. It is probably the case that this one is better taught a lesson than being discarded. I have not insulted his intelligence, after all, and he will need that to appreciate my dissatisfaction with his exercise of power.

On my size.

Certain factions within my organization are not trusting me but rather waging calculated offenses against me because they estimate my effectiveness as a leader is marginal because of my size.

I see no such deficiency.

Leaders throughout history have been of all sizes. Napoleon was 5 feet 6 1/2 inches tall. If the advantages of height were more significant than the disadvantages, then we would see every species continuing to enlarge without end. In fact, as height increases, the supportability of a body decreases, as supportability goes as the square of linear size divided by the cube, or resultantly the inverse of linear size. The square determines the strength of the frame to support its weight. The cube determines the volume, and therefore the mass, which must be supported by the slower rising area.

A man who understands the role played in warfare by intelligence will always fare better among men than a man who doesn't, on average.

Consider your world, gentlemen, but be comprehensive.

Three milks is over the limit.

We have certain residents here at Bryn Mawr Care who abuse the system and take more amenities than they are alloted. One such case is people taking three glasses of milk when two has been given to us as the limit. A paired male and female both did this at dinner tonight and I asked staff if it was proper to take three. Staff saw what had happened and spoke up that this was wrong. Staff is not prepared to meet the situation of residents acting with brute force and artificial self-righteousness. The two residents walked out with their extra glass each. Nothing was done about it.

I sat down to dinner and these two residents started bad-mouthing the staff. I raised my voice and said that all we had to do was get three milks at dinner and lunch (this was an error. We get milk at breakfast and dinner, not lunch.) and we could live a glorious, or words to that effect, life. The female struck up that the staff acts like a totalitarian government, or something like that. I said granted, but we can't be screwing each other by taking three milks. Then the male attacked me calling me an asshole and saying it was none of my business. This is the way we are encouraged to treat each other by the laxity of the staff in maintaining a just order. But I insisted that the staff step forward and be heard. Several staff did come forward and there was a shouting match. The male resident had somehow discarded one of his glasses of milk and said I was wrong, that he didn't have three glasses. I know he walked away from the meal distribution line with three glasses of milk. The female still had all three of her glasses and in the end the on-duty case manager said she was going to report the girl. This is not a good result. The two of them were equal conspirators in this and the one will support the other downstream from here. The attack on me by the male was not well addressed, as he used guttural speech and I have little experience matching that blow for blow. Progress is nice and I have done considerable toward it, however, without a strong hand always at the ready, things can deteriorate suddenly. As it is I have to keep an eye out in the future for this male antagonist, for he evidently is now going to keep a grudge against me permanently. He's the kind, and there are many, who easily turns to lifelong enemy. I need a good rejoinder to have on my tongue next time I see him where there is room for a skirmish.

New title for autobiography.

I have just uploaded a new revision of my autobiography and changed the title.

Make a test--donate.

Just think how much goodwill you will get with me if you make a donation. The button is in the sidebar at right.

Just think how much economic development will occur if I am happy.

Why not make a test? Science is where I put my marbles, not religion. Science uses tests. If you think what I write is unique, then why not test its range of effects with a donation?

Stepping up to the plate with regard to radical Islam.

I think it is probably correct to interpret the position of radical Islam to be that the state is stronger that entrusts its government to those of its population who are recognized to be the most spiritual. This is written into the Koran.


Therefore it is possible that radical Islam, when it found out that I had seen on a building the same fire that Moses saw on a bush, and also found out that this fact was known to the top monarchy of the United States, that it was considered by radical Islam that the United States was weak because it had not trusted me to assume the role of government.

This organization of the facts, I might speculate, can be developed into a strategy for maintaining legitimacy in the world's top spiritual leaderships of an attack on the United States.

It would be nice if I could just think this and write words of leadership of the United States. To a certain extent I do this. However, it is not government. Government involves checks and balances. What I have is thinking in the dark about the impact of what I say and write. It's all guesswork.

If I knew that what I wrote was law, I certainly wouldn't write so indiscriminantly as I have done to date, largely trying to establish myself as an authority.

Authority and government are different.

Any ruling body which finds a  voice among its people that commands attention for one reason or another must assess how best to incorporate that voice into the rule of the people. In my case, the matter of my place in rule has been attacked within the organization. I cannot count on anything I write or do being parsed favorably. The position of my attackers within the organization is unknown to me. Also, the point at which they first packaged my life as undesirable is unknown to me. As a result, as I said before, I strike out into the dark.

One could imagine that attacks by Al Qaeda have been less spectacular since 9/11 because I have until now refrained from putting to words my interpretation of the attacks. To a certain extent it's a matter of belief. I am still pretty much a modest person and don't like to attribute world events to myself. When I do act to have such an effect it is usually not specifically designed to have a certain effect on my place in the world downstream from any such effects, only to perturb the world. It is my feeling, and a blatant one, that my poverty is the result of someone's doing, not any result of the law of averages affecting all the various things I have tried in an attempt to escape it. Not only the bottom line of my enterprises have been zero, but also the components of each one have followed the path of zero tolerance for productivity. It doesn't take complex thinking to imagine some scenario in which someone might at some point have concluded, for very concrete reasons, that I am worthless despite this or that success all throughout my life. Environments vary widely and certainly some might find me undesirable. I find this no reason to give up. The total environment has the kind of specifications of its rulers that the master of any small environment will have the basics that could manage a place there. This is the grounds on which political candidates are given a green light for positions of great power. It is a fairly straightforward process. My task will not benefit from an attempt to guess what objections these people have to me and then addressing them with some combination of defense and reform. This I conclude from the standpoint of the structure and dynamics of information. I cannot know the nature of the complaints. It is not that I have a certain attitude about it. It is that my existence is ruled by a certain economic principle which consistently persuades me not to go looking beyond a certain level of composure for the evidence of such complaints. This is inherent within a mindset that chooses to imbue a large environment with goodwill and leadership that it clearly otherwise lacks. The indifference to complaints begins early in such a venture.

The invisible hand in my economics of life made itself deducible when my father told me I wasn't going to get into Yale College. I believe I treated this information as only that. Had I been devoted to an agenda I might well have given it great importance and struggled with it in aggravation. So many years have gone by now that my aggravation is devoted to a whole universe of concerns about my fate. So long as I can rely on the word of IPBI (see my autobiography, segment 7100, item id 8656) that I am First (the only sensible interpretation of this being it refers to a monarchy in the United States) then I know that there is some agency with rulership powers here that will have reason to include an attribution of ability to rule in all its attributions of me, and that any attempt I make to do honor to such a position will include possible realizations of such honor. Unfortunately, this is as yet a pursuit of authority, not government, and the core problem of my life is unaddressed by this.

I will look forward to the development of governing powers in the plans for me. I would meet them with a change of approach. I don't believe any structures exist for such a development. I would go in that direction if there were an expression of interest. I would not if there were not. We already know monarchies exist without published inclusion in the Constitution. I myself do not know what documents apply to the rule of the monarchy that inducted me. I find it hard to believe that they would not exist within law, particularly since my discovery of a bulletin at the Yale Law School that referred to monarchies in the U.S., discussed in the autobiography, segment 5300, item id DCAD.

It is my judgment that government by me would require a different documentation than exists now in support of my place in this monarchy. I have pretty much gone the route with this state of affairs. I don't want it to be represented that my being spiritual has anything to do with religion. For me, it has always been a matter of survival. This produces the corollary of putting my descendants on an equal plane as I keep for myself. There is no other use for much of what I have learned than my descendants avoiding more effectively what I avoided only to the point of immolation. A well governed population is a better substrate for conferring survival logistics upon one's own offspring. They provide exceptions.

When I was applying to college the first time--I went a second time and got a second B.A.--an organization called the College Scholarship Service gathered information from me and my father about our finances and determined how much of my college bill we each should pay. The colleges used the CSS to determine how much they would pay, how much I would pay, and how much my father would pay.

The yearly amount Yale specified that my father would pay was $2000.

Unfortunately, he refused to pay that much. He paid $1200.

Yale never asked me how much he paid and I assume it never asked him either.

I was forced to apply all my summer earnings to cover the difference of $800 each year.

I never complained. This was my father.

Now I'm complaining. Why didn't Yale verify that my father was paying what they determined was his fair share of the bill?

My troubles at Yale were compounded by having to live on a budget without margins.

Additionally, representatives of Yale at a college night at my high school had claimed that Yale would cover what I and my father couldn't. They didn't say anything about loans. When Yale raised its tuition I was forced to accept what it called a Tuition Postponement Option, essentially a loan.

My immaturity prevented me from realizing that both Yale and my father were forcing hardships on me that I never had a chance to assess before going to college and spending my money on it.

Then IIT appeared. I was apparently worth more as a debtor than as a graduate to them. They failed to inform me in my third year when my loans were ready to be signed. As a result, no loans, no final semester, no degree. How am I going to earn an income without a professional degree?

Well, no one was there before I went to IIT to advise me that with a resume showing eight years of undefinable time due to homelessness there would be no hope of getting a job, even if I had the degree.

I am sick of all the lousy input I have gotten in life from those who supposedly were my trusted family and friends.

Alma mater--other mother. What a joke.

No wonder American education is deteriorating. It's fraudulent. You can't build on a rotten foundation.

The U.S. is declining in the world. It thought it was great. It wasn't. It isn't. It won't be.

It considers me irrelevant.

As it sinks into recession, it will regret considering me irrelevant. I will be glad when I die in poverty that I could see the U.S. declining around me.

Obama rally last Saturday.

Saturday I went to a rally on Chicago's Midway Pleasance at which President Obama spoke. It lasted four hours, all on my feet. Two bands played. First time I  ever went to a political rally in Chicago.


I got a good look at the President. His delivery was masterful and his speech well crafted. Never having done any political speech writing I am very impressed with his work.

I plan to vote straight Democratic tomorrow. I'll be a judge of election, as usual. Still a Democratic judge.

Donation to the UNCF in 2006.

I donated $20 to the United Negro College Fund on February 7, 2006. I chose to have Dorothy Jackson notified. I kept it out of our conversation for the purpose of maintaining secrecy of my dedication to the principal of African American advancement, a purpose which may have been a significant element in the election of Barack Obama to the U.S. presidency.

What next, given the suggestion I caused the fall of the Soviet Union?

Depending on one's estimation of the probability that my missive to the Soviet embassy caused the downfall of the Soviet Union, one will be of some mind respective of that estimation to allow that I am entitled to my day in the media, despite the factors regarding my place in the Chicago Mafia, factors militating secrecy. It is evident the Mafia has no interest in assessing the autobiography from cover to cover and that only the general public is widely enough based to adequately do so.

Some of the events depicted in the work will shock a lot of people, but without a normal distribution of readers on a range of biases there will be no possible motivation to cross-check throughout the work for some recognition of the uniqueness of the story to the point that shocking events will be well woven into the sense of the life from beginning to the end of the tale. I recognize that this can be seen as a dangerous suggestion. I am not arguing for more input by the Mafia. I am arguing for less. The most shocking events occurred before my induction and understanding them is not going to be had by way of my history of association with the Mafia. They are concerned with my relevance to them. This is a small relationship compared to my entire life's import. Failing to submit the autobiography to a complete analysis will lead to interminable stagnation of my greatest potential.

A viewing of the video life story in the sidebar will show clearly that my life as a Mafia kingpin is startlingly absent any details as rich and productive as my life before that. This I must suggest stems from a basic failure of the Mafia to investigate my story or to encourage me to discuss it. The posting of the video story to this blog occurred with opposition from a major mass of the Mafia organization. I am left to conclude that the issue for this mass is not some small number of details, but every detail over some fairly long interval, such that the real issue is my very identity. My only recourse under these conditions is to propose the widespread distribution of various forms of the autobiography. These would include circulation of the work itself, adaptation to the screen in either fictitious or documentary form, and my own view of the work as will be gotten from media presentations of me in conversation about it. Such coverage will certainly bring along with it criticism, some from light exposure tending to discount it or vilify it, some from any number of exhibitionist tastes, and some from interest in the deeper issues. The chief of the deeper issues is survival, my own of course, but also that of the free world which was posed to engage the Soviet Union at any moment as it had been for some number of years until, I am suggesting, I sent a document to the Soviet embassy in early to mid-December of 1989. Even the people who were living under Soviet rule must admit they now face no threat such as they did before their government collapsed, so the population served by my action, if cause and effect is the correct relationship, is even greater than the free world.

Document is argued to have caused the fall of Communism in 1989 and following.

Within the autobiography is a recounting of my steps creating a document I sent to the embassy of the Soviet Union in December of 1989 just about a week before the execution of Romania's president on December 25. The exact date of posting my document is not certain. It occurred before my visit to my brother's house on the 24th, no more than a couple of weeks before then. Over the succeeding months the entire Communist world was flooded with downfalls of Communist regimes. Certainly there was trouble before I sent the document, however, overthrow of the government was not a manifest certainty at that time. Things could have gone many ways, but my document arguably pushed the whole mess to ruin.

No convincing argument supporting any individual action or actions by other persons as the cause of this global upheaval has been offered.

To locate the passage in the autobiography describing the steps of creation of the document, it must be noted that the work is divided into 100 equal time intervals ending in my 59th year. One of these intervals, at this writing, is further divided into 100 intervals, so each segment is given as four decimals, most of them with the last two as zeros. The interval in question is 6500.

Within each interval, commentaries are listed as "items" and each is given a four-digit hexadecimal random id number. This gives a way to search for a commentary whose id is known, yet avoids a commitment to any strict order of commentaries within one time interval. Time order is a priority within each of the segments, but is not as reliably known as the larger time divisions, and moreover, many events have relevance on some continuum of time or have a complex time relationship to other items and subjects, making their association with one moment a difficult one. A random id is suited to this structure.

The random id of the commentary on the document I sent to the Soviet embassy in Washington D.C. is D9C4. So this commentary is specified as segment 6500, item id D9C4.

This event is not discussed in the video life story located in the side bar.

My autobiography now 310 pages.

My autobiography has reached 310 pages. Here is a link for purchasing it for $15.

Court decision on gays in the military.

The recent decision by the courts to end the practice by the military of keeping homosexuality a secret and forcing out those who don't is in line with my stated policy that homosexual rights of an individual, rather than couple, nature are to be butressed, while couple rights denied.

I stand by my policy and I will stand by the new military policy so long as it becomes and remains consistent with my own.

The connection between Crystal Newell and myself.

The connection between Crystal Newell and myself is gaseous. Under stress, it dispels, then accumulates again. Sometimes it takes a long time to reaccumulate. Each time it reaccumulates I learn something about her.

IIT homecoming this weekend.

Went to two IIT alumni events this weekend. Friday night was a networking session held at the on-campus hang-out, the Bog. Met two current IIT students named Chuck and Steve, and we talked about a number of things including photography. Also met another current student, Aisha (can't recall exact spelling). She is an architecture student and a member of the student group, Student Organization for Alumni Relations. Also met a student who was very interested in my thoughts about whether anything had changed on the IIT campus since I was a student. His name began with a P. I said campus was not changed in any way--it's identical. They had nice appetizers.

Today, Saturday, they had a lot of alumni events. I took a trolley tour of campus and learned so many things that IIT is doing to improve its physical identity, and also that the public housing to the south is gone and classy condominiums, and a Starbucks up in its place. This is good news.

Then I attended a lecture by the university archivist about the students and campus of the 1950s. I learned a lot about activities of the military on campus.

Then I had a burger and dog, compliments of IIT. Yum!! Thank you very much.

Enjoyed homecoming very much and looking forward to next year.

Still to come...a lecture by Susan Solomon, IIT grad and Nobel Peace Prize winner, on October 13.

Recent update: I couldn't go to the lecture by Ms. Solomon because I had to go to a class as a judge of election. They discourage rescheduling those.

Not a life to emulate

Would I recommend the sort of life I have had to today's Yale students?

There are so many reasons not to. I am poor. I am mentally ill. New Haven's last official words to me were stay away. My blog is unpopular. Most of my family has disowned me. This is a deep and dark cavern to explore in looking for signs of do not enter.

There is no "BUT". I may have a life of substance in terms of accomplishments (now the but) but they are all resting on the slimmest footing and the most vulnerable chemistry, that of DNA, with respect to permanence. I will not succumb to a tendency to poetry in the interest of selling what I have not enjoyed. My life is not one to inspire imitation or succession. It has been a tedious existence. Little romance. Day after day of hunger and cold. Refuge in the unappealing arms of Social Security Disability. By any measure it is a tragedy.

Life itself has been an irritant.

Why?

There is a possibility the reason is that as a freshman at Yale I mused about my choice of a direction in life among all those I had seen and heard about, the lives of Yale alumni, and I came to a general but murky conclusion that the best way I could use my Yale education, were I to complete it, was to seek no reward but yet work, and do this in the company of the poor of America. I had no skills for it. I had no ideas to make it concrete and actionable. I only had a desire to admit myself into company which at the time I would have blushed to think of as fellows of the same kind. And for this choice there remains no reward. That keeps me in the company. It doesn't make me happy. I have never disowned my appetite for pleasure. I have learned to live with various levels of poverty, both in terms of money and in terms of logistics. I have no ashram to offer those interested in me, whether as a place to live or as a house to provide brief respite. I have not extended anyone's spiritual empire. I have not written anything pointing the way. These disqualify me for that one office which I can otherwise claim with reason, that of successor to Moses. So perhaps I shall ultimately disengage myself from that claim, and go entirely sui generis. Great. Another vanity.

Such as it is, it is a warning to all but those who disregard them, not to follow me.

Utility

Given:

Utility to the wise.
Utility to the population.

Which is the greater value?

Islam today.

It might serve understanding of current global politics if I say something about my role in it all.

First, there is the matter of my advice to certain bodies of power in the United States, given at some time in the past--perhaps a few years ago. It was a time of great feelings of instability between the motives due to a sense of violation, on the one hand, and the motives of historic compassion among peoples of the Christian faith, on the other. I sensed at that time that the real danger was not in the actual forces at play, but in these feelings of instability. With that sense in my forethoughts, I issued an advisory to certain powers which had been following my work and progress, to the effect that it was my view that those with the responsibility of defining policy at a high level of authority needed to make a decision of whether they would stand as opponents to Islam in an absolute way because of its association with the new global terrorist threats, even though this association did not necessarily justify identifying the one with the other, or, rather than that, taking some other stance. I intended no hint of personal favoratism in such a decision, and I believe none was taken. As a result, certain powers moved quietly toward a more robust position of opposition to all of Islam than had been given serious consideration before my advice was given. I have no position on whether this position of opposition is valid or invalid. I consider it a religious matter and I am not devoted to any religious partisanship so such matters strike far from my most fervent desires.

I have instead of a position on the relationship between Islam and Christianity a position on the relationship between religion and science. It is that, in my view, science yields results which have greater validity than any results of religious endeavor. The sphere of human life, as that of all life, is greater than any religious crystalization of principles can ever gather together. Instead, religious principles are crafted so that the considerations which science takes as necessary, that of proof and consistency, can be safely discounted and belief substituted for them, with what has been historically a fairly good improvement over what went on before any of the religions were conceived. Such a method, that of religion, is suitable for promulgation and reflective consideration of broadly based principles which go beyond what science can currently provide on a more objective basis, and this is helpful. But I would suggest that there is merit in applying what Jesus said, "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. Render unto God what is God's." to science and religion. This would disengage religion from the question of evolution, an incendiary suggestion admittedly, but something which I think Jesus might have found to have great practicality were he living today. It would also tend to allow all religions to stabilize their growth against other developments, including other religions, and take some satisfaction in being allowed some significant credit for their beneficence, while at the same time take some humility to heart in the face of such massive blessings from science that have accompanied the gradual loosening of the hold of religion on the universal scope of mankind's enterprises.

Let this be read as the thought of a deeply modest scientist who formerly engaged one or two religions as an adherent, to one or other degree of faithfulness.

Yale Club event last night.

Last night I went to a Yale Alumni event at Piece Brewery and Pizzaria on North Avenue. There was no cost so I could attend. They had all the beer and pizza you could eat.

I talked to Robin Walsh Schoewe, a Yale Club of Chicago board member. She was an economics student in the class of 1985 and has done a lot of banking work. One of her three children will be applying to Yale this year. Good luck on that!

I also talked to Rich Blond, a lay priest at the Episcopal Church of the Atonement, which I once attended when I was still religious. Rich is about fifteen years before me in age. We talked about budgeting, and about some of the people we knew in common at Atonement.

I noticed across the street from Piece there was a bicycle shop, Rapid Transit Cycles, that I had been referred to as a place to let my girlfriend, Crystal Newell, try out a recliner. Crystal declined the invitation.

It was a great evening.

Humor in a modern biblical figure.

One of the most important qualities of any modern day biblical figure is a sense of humor. Anticipation of a biblical figure has concentrated on a successor to Jesus. Such a figure would have little room for a sense of humor. Jesus had none. Thus there is no ground on which to build one, for anyone taking him as a predecessor.

I am no Christ. Jesus is not my predecessor and I don't often look to him for inspiration. On the other hand Moses is my predecessor and I often look to him for inspiration. I try not to picture him as Charlton Heston. I find that hard to do. It might seem tempting to point to him and say everyone should respect me the way the audience of his film is led to respect him. This is a hazardous route. If I am a successor worthy of the name then there should be ample validation in the record as supplemented by my own telling of my life story. And here is where the sense of humor earns its keep. So much sacrifice and relentless misfortune needs a balancing theme. It is an immediate restorer of peace to think that humor is a deep part of my own approach to life, not taking myself too seriously and accentuating my peerfulness. This way my friends throughout my life can enjoy each one a stake in the transcendence I have carved out of the misfortune, as my good friends and comrades at all the many stages of the story, and as assessors, going forward, of the many ironies and absurdities of it all.

The nine videos in the sidebar go far in one direction and the moments of humor are well distributed throughout. It is this aspect that I rely on to remind me of the responsibility I have to keep the whole thing light. It is surely a sign of success to be able to laugh at the ridiculousness of one's own attempts at standing out from people one needs as brothers and equals. It is admittedly a laughter on a deep level, but such is the nature of the thing and the place where the humorous side emerges in my thinking. On that I can rely with freedom to be zealous, where my own humor gets its biggest boost.

God, homosexuality, and the problem of H. sapiens.

Homosexuality is one of those things like war and poverty that men have looked at uncomprehendingly since the beginning.

It is my feeling that my own language, based on sixteen characters I cannot share because I haven't the stamina to research how to get a computer to produce them, is responsible for certain positions I have taken on the frontiers of civilization, one of them my position that homosexuality is best eliminated, with as much care as possible not to cause the individual comfort of these people to be encroached on. That homosexuality is a sign of a dysfunctional civilization, even a dysfunctional species, is easy to see for those who also see that there is no God. Unfortunately there are billions of people who don't see that about God, and this makes it a demanding task to have a reasonable discussion about homosexuality, even speaking alone as a writer does.

So here is my position:

This species is subject to universal substitution of sufficiency, as a valid motive of comment, for progress in argument. If a comment has some way in which it can be taken immediately as sufficiently motivated, with a threshold of sufficiency on the order of what allows people to remain unmoved, to fit where it does into a discussion, then that comment is justifiable under the universal consensus of the species. Thus outfitted, the members of this species propagate their status gotten by the generosity of others far away and perhaps long ago, without having to do any Goddam thing of their own to progress beyond war, poverty, and homosexuality. As a state of species motivation, this amounts to an enormous bulk of material precious to each person that commands attention only because some or other rule of order allows it, and thus the beast is so arrayed for being out at pasture.

The species is proud of its self-image. It associates that image with God. In fact, there is no argument in it. Modern appliances in a civilization that has no argument preventing the occurrence of war and panic seems to me what we expect of children. "Don't worry about learning how to earn a living now. It's time to play and have fun. Worry about earning a living when you're older."

The argument is harder than this. So far I have dealt in plausibilities. These are closer to argument than sufficiency, but still not as argumentative as what the best science demands. I am not arguing with a prototypical individual, but with what I can make out to be a statistical description of the whole population, without depending on the existence of some who agree with me. Those who agree with me will have their battles but until progress is made in the discussion with the whole population there is no solace from being not alone.

Truth is fine. Navigating points of argument is considerably wider in scope. It cannot be done by professing commitment to truth. What is in common with all H. sapiens? What frequency are its other characteristics, not in common? Those who have seen the greatest variation in these characteristics are confined by the things in common. There knowledge is blocked.

Let me rest. Call it be-ers block.

On the quoting and attribution of my work.

I am under the impression that what I publish in this or my other blogs cannot be borrowed or used by others without attribution in a form that is legally prescribed. I am not familiar with those legal provisions but I find it in my interest to learn what they are.

I am not a lawyer. Legal research is not one of my studied abilities. Therefore I must make the best use I can of what occurs to me to be sound ethical practice. As a writer, I know that there are written sources of information about the law which I can make use of to improve the legal standing of this that occurs to me as ethical. On a zero budget I can do no better than this, it seems to me. A legal opinion by a lawyer would cost money that is not nearly reachable by my budget. (It is my experience that they ask for a retainer before performing any work and these are on the order of $500. That is not something I can foresee being raisable by me for the indefinite future.)

Toward starting a discussion of this matter, and in keeping with what I have just said, I now wish to introduce a quote regarding sharing when sharing is being encouraged. It is a quote from Wikipedia's Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License, regarding use of material on Wikipedia.

Before giving the quote I must state that I do so because it bears on the topic of use of someone else's material, not because I consider it legally applicable to my blogs, which I may or may not do according to my study of the document from which the quote comes, or the quote itself. There are differences between Wikipedia and my blogs. I give the quote because there seem to be some similarities, and, as a person of less than legal qualifications, I am induced to give it in the sense of a useful beginning to my discussion, which itself may prove to be short and small in detail since I am not able to know how much there is a need for me to engage a thorough discussion here of the law.

Here is the quote:

"* Attribution—You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work.)
"* Share Alike—If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same, similar or a compatible license."

Now this calls up considerable substance which I cannot comment to. What is a "similar or compatible license"? What, indeed, is a "license" altogether?

And as I say, this passage may or may not have some relevance to my blogs. But like Wikipedia, I would be pleased if my work were influential, and influential work is quoted by others. Wikipedia may object to my attributing such a view to them, and if so I will admit that it is only a personal reflection based on what I have seen, and not to be construed as something I propose as fact.

But I offer the quote as an example of what has been said by a source which seems to be widely considered reliable in matters stemming from being influential and quoted, about its own position on the matter of others using its work.

Without knowing the law, I must stop at merely saying that if anyone quotes my blogs, it would be my preference that they annotate the material as a quote and attribute it to me in the sense of my blogs. Also, I would prefer that the magnitude of the material quoted be limited. It is my understanding that both of these preferences have a solid legal footing.

Let the reader take heed of these matters and know that they are something on which I have an opinion, with significant implications in terms of the elements here discussed in so brief a manner, but not in that lacking an interest by legal authorities.

Comic

Comedy is an angle, not a position, and comics are ambush acrobats withouot knowledge of anything between them and their target.

Clarification of my position on homosexuality.

Let me clarify my position on homosexuality. Two points: 1) It is very poignant. These people are to be granted no less comfort through their own effort than anyone else. This is an individual right. 2) It is unfortunate, and needs to be ended. Beyond comfort, I don't see any rights stemming from a perversion of the cultural provisions for procreation. Gay couples are an abuse of those provisions. I don't care whether religions condemn them or not. It's impossible for gays to contribute to the sexual equation. I don't know why it happens. I wish I did. It would help form understandable policy. As it is my policy will be considered contrary to many people's conception of rights. There is too much about homosexuality we don't see that would probably raise objections if we did. It seems they are using the closet to produce a secret institution. Obviously we have to find a different solution than the closet. They should be assured of due comfort as individuals and not forced into hiding by discrimination as individuals. But the cultural provisions for couples are more important than the Constitution provides. Either legal opinions must confront this fact or the Constitution must be amended to state it explicitly, and if that doesn't work, then it's time for another revolution. I will not sit idly by and watch this species go to the dogs.