After following some discussions over at the ReBelle Nation blog, as well as on Fallen Goddess's political forum, I followed this link.
Loose Change
The site purports to lay out widely available evidence, and leaves it up to the reader to verify them. In fact, most of the evidence is hyperlinked.
The conclusion of the site seems to be that the World Trade Center towers were rigged to implode during the mysterious "security drills" of August 2001 - and highly skilled government operatives on an "exercise," not Arabs with boxcutters, were the ones who hijacked the planes and crashed them into the towers, to provide cover. The collapse of World Trade Center 7, a 47-story building, has no plausible explanation, and was ignored in the 9/11 Commission's report; the site alleges that controlled implosion, again, is the only explanation.
It even says that the two United aircraft involved, N591UA (Flight 93) and N612UA (Flight 175), continued to be listed as valid registrations in the FAA database for four years after the attacks - and links to the website of a frequent United flyer, who swears he spotted N591UA operating as Flight 1111 in 2003. Flight 93 supposedly landed in Cleveland, with mysterious gaps in the cockpit voice recorder. Never mind that neither aircraft, nor the two "destroyed" American aircraft, were scheduled to fly in the first place. (Though I'll add that re-using registration numbers is not unheard of; N344AA, which belonged to American 11, formerly belonged to an American DC-7 - whose nose is at the Smithsonian Museum in Washington, DC, now. But re-using the number of a crashed aircraft is pretty bad taste.)
Regardless of whether one believes the official version, or what's presented at this site, I feel that one thing is clear. The attack plans were known to the federal government in August 2001, and even on 9/11, there was ample time to scramble fighter jets, and warn and shoot down the hijacked airliners, before they hit their targets. Failure to do so, and allowing 3,000 people to be killed at the World Trade Center, counts as willful negligence. W is not the strong-willed, determined wartime president that the Republican spin machine paints him as; he allowed 9/11 to happen, and basically let people die for his own political gain, so that he could ram through fascist provisions, such as the Patriot Act and the Real ID Act, that do nothing to make America safer, and everything to limit people's freedoms.
W indeed believes there ought to be limits to freedom, but I never imagined that he would go to such lengths to make the point. Plus, if he can't respond to disasters with advance warning, like Katrina, he can't do a thing about "spontaneous" disasters, like 9/11 supposedly was.
I'll also need to ask whether American and United Airlines are innocent victims, or willing accomplices trying to cover up their dirty deeds. I do almost all of my flying with these two airlines (particularly United), and I am in no mood to give business to a company that will get me killed for some cheap political gain. I have already blacklisted Korean Air, on my trips to Asia, for the same reason.
31 March 2006
24 March 2006
Misguided Immigration Reform
My facial paralysis is slowly letting up, and I am once again working fulltime - and blogging away.
A quick scan of some of my favorite blogs led me to Angry Asian Man, where the big topic is immigration reform, as proposed by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisconsin) and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania). Angry Asian Man is taking a very dim view of these proposals, and had links to pro-immigrant websites for further details; I checked them out.
These are the reference documents for the two proposals that I found:
As I mentioned in a previous post, helping an illegal alien, even on humanitarian grounds, will now be considered "alien smuggling," a criminal offense. Of course, being an illegal alien in itself is now a criminal, as opposed to civil, offense, clearing the way for local law enforcement to round up immigrants. I hope that there will actually be funding for this, if implemented - funding that the repeated tax cuts have dried up.
Aliens who cannot be deported for political (i.e. Iranian or Cuban, due to no diplomatic ties) or humanitarian (i.e. there was a case of a Nicaraguan transgender woman who would face sure death if returned home - and UN treaties prohibit such returns) reasons will be incarcerated for life, with no chance ever for asylum. Sure, it is a very bad idea to cross a border illegally, but it's not bad enough to warrant being locked up for life, next to the murderers.
The nonimmigrant guest worker proposal stays, making sure that greedy employers can hire foreigners at slave wages and destroy American jobs, without ever offering the promise of the so-called American Dream to these foreigners.
Instead of filling out an I-9 form to check the work eligibility of new hires (a process fraught with lots of fake documents), I now will have to check a federal database (just as error-prone) to verify work eligibility. It may be a bureaucratic nightmare - so much that even Republican-leaning Association of General Contractors (AGC) is against it (but then, contractors here in SoCal do need those cheap illegal laborers...).
Most importantly, there is a specific exception to this strict immigration law - for the Republicans' Cuban buddies. In the vast majority of cases, Cubans illegally entering the US won't be locked up for life - they will be given automatic asylum. And if Sam Brownback gets his wish, the Koreans - at least North Korean refugees who didn't previously settle in South Korea - will get the same exception.
This is an immigration policy that does nothing to solve the immigration-related problems in the American society. The guest worker program will only serve to keep unemployment high among working-class Americans (and wages depressed), while giving immigrants nothing in return. And for all the rhetoric about immigrants being the building blocks of this country, they are now seen as potential terrorists - and given the increased profiling by the law enforcement that will result from this, even legals and naturalized citizens won't be safe either. Of course, there are sweetheart backroom exceptions for the most partisan and most harmful immigrant groups, ensuring that the Republicans will continue to tilt the electorate their way with imported votes.
And before the immigrant groups start complaining and whining about these new bills, they need to look at themselves hard in the mirror as well. It is their support of conservative social values, including abortion ban and homophobia, that led them to lend support to the Republicans - who are now simply backstabbing them. The immigrants need to remember that in the eyes of the Republicans, they are simply disposable scums, much like the abortionists and the homos they hate so much.
If you are sitting outside the US and contemplating a move here, I strongly urge you to reconsider. We Americans no longer want you, the message is clear. I ask that you move to a country, like Canada or New Zealand, where you are wanted AND needed. I will too, when I can.
A quick scan of some of my favorite blogs led me to Angry Asian Man, where the big topic is immigration reform, as proposed by Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisconsin) and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania). Angry Asian Man is taking a very dim view of these proposals, and had links to pro-immigrant websites for further details; I checked them out.
These are the reference documents for the two proposals that I found:
- Sensenbrenner proposal (pro-immigrant analysis)
- Specter proposal (original text)
As I mentioned in a previous post, helping an illegal alien, even on humanitarian grounds, will now be considered "alien smuggling," a criminal offense. Of course, being an illegal alien in itself is now a criminal, as opposed to civil, offense, clearing the way for local law enforcement to round up immigrants. I hope that there will actually be funding for this, if implemented - funding that the repeated tax cuts have dried up.
Aliens who cannot be deported for political (i.e. Iranian or Cuban, due to no diplomatic ties) or humanitarian (i.e. there was a case of a Nicaraguan transgender woman who would face sure death if returned home - and UN treaties prohibit such returns) reasons will be incarcerated for life, with no chance ever for asylum. Sure, it is a very bad idea to cross a border illegally, but it's not bad enough to warrant being locked up for life, next to the murderers.
The nonimmigrant guest worker proposal stays, making sure that greedy employers can hire foreigners at slave wages and destroy American jobs, without ever offering the promise of the so-called American Dream to these foreigners.
Instead of filling out an I-9 form to check the work eligibility of new hires (a process fraught with lots of fake documents), I now will have to check a federal database (just as error-prone) to verify work eligibility. It may be a bureaucratic nightmare - so much that even Republican-leaning Association of General Contractors (AGC) is against it (but then, contractors here in SoCal do need those cheap illegal laborers...).
Most importantly, there is a specific exception to this strict immigration law - for the Republicans' Cuban buddies. In the vast majority of cases, Cubans illegally entering the US won't be locked up for life - they will be given automatic asylum. And if Sam Brownback gets his wish, the Koreans - at least North Korean refugees who didn't previously settle in South Korea - will get the same exception.
This is an immigration policy that does nothing to solve the immigration-related problems in the American society. The guest worker program will only serve to keep unemployment high among working-class Americans (and wages depressed), while giving immigrants nothing in return. And for all the rhetoric about immigrants being the building blocks of this country, they are now seen as potential terrorists - and given the increased profiling by the law enforcement that will result from this, even legals and naturalized citizens won't be safe either. Of course, there are sweetheart backroom exceptions for the most partisan and most harmful immigrant groups, ensuring that the Republicans will continue to tilt the electorate their way with imported votes.
And before the immigrant groups start complaining and whining about these new bills, they need to look at themselves hard in the mirror as well. It is their support of conservative social values, including abortion ban and homophobia, that led them to lend support to the Republicans - who are now simply backstabbing them. The immigrants need to remember that in the eyes of the Republicans, they are simply disposable scums, much like the abortionists and the homos they hate so much.
If you are sitting outside the US and contemplating a move here, I strongly urge you to reconsider. We Americans no longer want you, the message is clear. I ask that you move to a country, like Canada or New Zealand, where you are wanted AND needed. I will too, when I can.
22 March 2006
An unhealthy relationship
This morning, I've been leaving some comments on the ReBelle Nation blog, in regards to a post on North Korean human rights dilemma. After exchanging comments with Christy Cole, the blog keeper, I'm having some thoughts on my own. After all, living in Los Angeles - the largest Korean metropolitan area in the Western world - and interacting with its Korean community for better or worse daily, I have some thoughts of my own.
The US considers the Korean peninsula a strategically important location, and has considered South Korea a key ally. However, the status of current relationship does not bear that out. For example, the US has the following gripes:
I've previously described South Korea as my father, and the US as my spouse. It is in my best interest to see that the two enjoy a healthy relationship, not a warped, slanted one that they have now. (Think about it, when your father and your husband are encouraging each other to make your life miserable, that's NOT good.) And as long as the two keep building a relationship based only on the concerns of the far right, I am going to lose in a big way. It is a shame when South Korea sends its outstanding baseball team to the World Baseball Classic, and I dare not to go to the ballpark and cheer for them, because I can't stand the thought of being with the supporters of this unhealthy relationship. And when the sight of a Korean Air or Asiana 747 coming into Los Angeles brings me dread, instead of joy, that's the sign that things are seriously on the wrong track.
The US considers the Korean peninsula a strategically important location, and has considered South Korea a key ally. However, the status of current relationship does not bear that out. For example, the US has the following gripes:
- South Korea's current leftist government isn't helping American efforts to pressure North Korea.
- South Korean companies (Samsung, Hyundai, etc.) are making a killing in the US market, while Americans are largely shut out of South Korea.
- Younger Koreans seem to be less than grateful for US military action during the Korean War, assaulting American GIs stationed in South Korea, and even trying to destroy a statue of General Douglas MacArthur in Incheon.
- Many Korean women are entering the US illegally, often through Canadian borders, to engage in prostitution.
- The US supported South Korea's past fascist regimes (including a massacre in 1980), and slowed down its democratization.
- W treats the current president, Roh Moo-Hyun, like dirt. W is very unpopular anyway in South Korea (pretty much like most of the world).
- US military personnel appear to be above the law, immune to South Korean courts for their crimes while stationed in Korea (including crushing two girls to death with a tank in 2002).
- In general, the US seems to treat South Korea more as a protectorate than as an equal, sovereign partner.
- South Koreans must endure a humiliating visa interview and a lengthy application process to visit the US, and the only place to apply is the US embassy in Seoul (not even a lousy consulate elsewhere).
- Just like the US encouraged South Korean fascism, the Koreans are encouraging right-wing politics in the US. The Koreans are the Cubans of the West Coast - they vote Republican, and support right-wing causes with their mega-churches (and KCCC, or Korean Campus Crusade for Christ), the Unification Church, organizations like the New Right Foundation (which seeks right-wing resurgence both in South Korea and the US), and individuals like former Congressman Jay Kim and Counsel John Yoo.
- The seeds of this development were first planted when American Christian missionaries turned Korea into their backyard a century ago. Even today, it's the Christians who are most willing to overthrow the Roh regime and serve W's interests. Yet the Christians sell themselves as being patriotic to Korea, based on their anti-Japanese activities during the colonial era, when in fact, they actually were looking for a more Christian colonial power, like a Republican US, instead of independence.
- Koreans who make money in America act as if they are whites - treating blacks and Latinos like dirt. There is a reason why Koreatown was targeted in the 1992 Los Angeles riots, and the Korean storeowners still haven't learned a lesson.
- The Koreans are fiercely nationalistic, both on the left and on the right (though the two brands of nationalism differ immensely). The nationalism level is dangerously high - I only see similar levels of nationalism in the US, and never in other countries.
- The Koreans, along with a few other immigrant groups, are responsible for keeping Southern California more misogynistic and homophobic than Northern California.
- North Korean human rights, while a serious issue, is, for now, a special-interest pet project, pushed by the Korean right-wingers, and their American counterparts like Sam Brownback and Concerned Women for America, who don't have genuine concern for the North Koreans - only looking to advance a Christian, anti-choice agenda. Ted Kennedy is pretty much the token liberal on this issue.
I've previously described South Korea as my father, and the US as my spouse. It is in my best interest to see that the two enjoy a healthy relationship, not a warped, slanted one that they have now. (Think about it, when your father and your husband are encouraging each other to make your life miserable, that's NOT good.) And as long as the two keep building a relationship based only on the concerns of the far right, I am going to lose in a big way. It is a shame when South Korea sends its outstanding baseball team to the World Baseball Classic, and I dare not to go to the ballpark and cheer for them, because I can't stand the thought of being with the supporters of this unhealthy relationship. And when the sight of a Korean Air or Asiana 747 coming into Los Angeles brings me dread, instead of joy, that's the sign that things are seriously on the wrong track.
20 March 2006
Voting with my pocketbook
Every time I see a half-demolished Civic with a "Bush-Cheney '04" sticker still on it, a Dodge conversion van with "Marriage = (men's restroom symbol) + (women's restroom symbol)," or a Suburban with "Abortion KILLS" (all driven, here in Southern California, by conservative immigrants - either Latino Catholics or Korean Protestants - who have no respect for individual rights), I am determined to stop the Christian fascist tyranny any way I can.
Looks like I have a chance to do just that, right now. I've been looking for a new high-end laptop computer, to replace two computers: an aging desktop at home, and a laptop that my father will take over. Both of my outgoing machines, just like all of my computers, are Dells. Because of Dell's reputation, I've been looking closely at Dell's Inspiron and XPS laptops, but Dell's heavy contributions to W's war chest, plus its questionable labor tactics (including using untrained prison labor for recycling toxic computer components), always nagged at me. Plus, the prices are quite high (at least $2,500), and I'm hearing that Dell's once-outstanding tech support has gone down the dumps, now staffed by non-native English speakers in India who will be thrown off by American idioms (I already know how frustrating that can get). And I am in no mood to reward a Texas-based company for the state's recent passage of a draconian homophobic ballot measure. (Don't take me wrong though - I will continue to patronize good Texan companies like American Airlines and Frito-Lay.)
Fortunately, I have a more conscionable out, one that also saves me money. The HP Pavilion line is looking attractive, and will set me back only $2,000 at most, including taxes and shipping, for a loaded-to-the-gills example if ordered through Costco. HP is politically a bipartisan donor, and while it's no angel (it also outsourced tech support to India - for a time), it's not notoriously evil either; and Costco, of course, is famous for its progressive labor and consumer policies. Just about the only thing I'll miss out on will be two extra USB ports (HP offers 4, as opposed to Dell's 6), but that's a small price to pay for a better world to live in. And HP is based in Silicon Valley - a distant part of California for me, but still my state.
My Democratic contacts have been recommending sites like Buy Blue to help me make the most informed decision. While the political contributions alone no longer mean so much to me, the companies' policies toward the workers and consumers still matter - and Buy Blue does contain a good chunk of information toward that goal as well.
I hope to do the same with all major purchases I will be making from now on. This includes a possible replacement for my television (currently anti-labor Samsung). Also under consideration will be my car purchase, which I've tentatively timed for early next year. I still can't bring myself to accept a less-than-satisfactory competitor, on principles alone though; for example, the Mercedes C-class and the Saab 9-3 satisfy my principles better than a BMW 3-series or a Lexus IS, but they don't fit my personal needs and tastes as well.
Looks like I have a chance to do just that, right now. I've been looking for a new high-end laptop computer, to replace two computers: an aging desktop at home, and a laptop that my father will take over. Both of my outgoing machines, just like all of my computers, are Dells. Because of Dell's reputation, I've been looking closely at Dell's Inspiron and XPS laptops, but Dell's heavy contributions to W's war chest, plus its questionable labor tactics (including using untrained prison labor for recycling toxic computer components), always nagged at me. Plus, the prices are quite high (at least $2,500), and I'm hearing that Dell's once-outstanding tech support has gone down the dumps, now staffed by non-native English speakers in India who will be thrown off by American idioms (I already know how frustrating that can get). And I am in no mood to reward a Texas-based company for the state's recent passage of a draconian homophobic ballot measure. (Don't take me wrong though - I will continue to patronize good Texan companies like American Airlines and Frito-Lay.)
Fortunately, I have a more conscionable out, one that also saves me money. The HP Pavilion line is looking attractive, and will set me back only $2,000 at most, including taxes and shipping, for a loaded-to-the-gills example if ordered through Costco. HP is politically a bipartisan donor, and while it's no angel (it also outsourced tech support to India - for a time), it's not notoriously evil either; and Costco, of course, is famous for its progressive labor and consumer policies. Just about the only thing I'll miss out on will be two extra USB ports (HP offers 4, as opposed to Dell's 6), but that's a small price to pay for a better world to live in. And HP is based in Silicon Valley - a distant part of California for me, but still my state.
My Democratic contacts have been recommending sites like Buy Blue to help me make the most informed decision. While the political contributions alone no longer mean so much to me, the companies' policies toward the workers and consumers still matter - and Buy Blue does contain a good chunk of information toward that goal as well.
I hope to do the same with all major purchases I will be making from now on. This includes a possible replacement for my television (currently anti-labor Samsung). Also under consideration will be my car purchase, which I've tentatively timed for early next year. I still can't bring myself to accept a less-than-satisfactory competitor, on principles alone though; for example, the Mercedes C-class and the Saab 9-3 satisfy my principles better than a BMW 3-series or a Lexus IS, but they don't fit my personal needs and tastes as well.
More on South Dakota abortion ban
I was listening to Stephanie Miller on the radio this morning, as I often do; today, it was a guest host, since Stephanie is away.
The host played a snippet of a Republican state senator answering a question on what the exception to the abortion ban would be, which, according to the new law, would only consist of "grave danger to the woman's life." The answer to that question would be a "savage rape on a Christian woman saving her virginity for marriage" - because the resulting destruction of her moral standing would itself be grave danger to the woman's life psychologically.
I thought a rape, how savage it may be, was not an exception. Apparently only morally upright Christian virgins are worth protecting, to this Republican. This is nothing short of legislating morality and religion.
As I try to recover from my facial paralysis, I've had discussions with my mother - who has been nursing me - about the "rugged individualism" of American and European cultures. This is the individualism that gives people maximum freedom and minimal intrusion, as long as no harm is done, and is very different from the strict moral and social codes that limit people's choices in Latin America and Asia. This is precisely why white Americans will only speak ill of other people behind their backs, as my mother points out - because, as I explained to her, criticizing one's decisions in their face, in person, is intrusion into that person's decision-making - a no-no. I added that the Republican attempts to enact Christian moral laws is un-American for that very reason. I also added that I do not approve of Latin American and Asian immigrants trying to rewrite American moral laws - destroying the rugged American individualism in the process - and in particular, I strongly disapprove of the Korean community, with its moralistic mega-churches, Reverend Moon, and Torture Counsel John Yoo, to a point where I support banning further Korean immigration into the US.
The host played a snippet of a Republican state senator answering a question on what the exception to the abortion ban would be, which, according to the new law, would only consist of "grave danger to the woman's life." The answer to that question would be a "savage rape on a Christian woman saving her virginity for marriage" - because the resulting destruction of her moral standing would itself be grave danger to the woman's life psychologically.
I thought a rape, how savage it may be, was not an exception. Apparently only morally upright Christian virgins are worth protecting, to this Republican. This is nothing short of legislating morality and religion.
As I try to recover from my facial paralysis, I've had discussions with my mother - who has been nursing me - about the "rugged individualism" of American and European cultures. This is the individualism that gives people maximum freedom and minimal intrusion, as long as no harm is done, and is very different from the strict moral and social codes that limit people's choices in Latin America and Asia. This is precisely why white Americans will only speak ill of other people behind their backs, as my mother points out - because, as I explained to her, criticizing one's decisions in their face, in person, is intrusion into that person's decision-making - a no-no. I added that the Republican attempts to enact Christian moral laws is un-American for that very reason. I also added that I do not approve of Latin American and Asian immigrants trying to rewrite American moral laws - destroying the rugged American individualism in the process - and in particular, I strongly disapprove of the Korean community, with its moralistic mega-churches, Reverend Moon, and Torture Counsel John Yoo, to a point where I support banning further Korean immigration into the US.
09 March 2006
Ten years ago today...
It's Spring Break season for college students. Most are, as during my own college days, headed for Key West, Cancun, or other resort destinations for some (hedonistic) fun.
I decided to take a different route though, back in 1996. On March 9, I headed out from Manhatan to Newark, hopped on a 777, and crossed the Pond for the first time, ending up at London's Heathrow airport the next morning. After facing a nasty immigration officer, I headed to Bloomsbury, where I crashed in with an NYU student group for the next five days. I participated in many of their activities together, for a not-so-hedonistic yet fun group experience. After the NYU people returned to New York, I stayed on in London for two more days for some solo sightseeing.
I would consider this one of the most significant steps in my growth, along with my initial visit to New York City in 1991. The 1991 New York trip allowed me to experience a different world, though still within the confines of American Christian geography and culture, and as a teen (not to mention inspiring me to attend college in New York City). Being in NYC allowed me to go forward with the 1996 London trip, which broke that mold altogether, and allowed me to experience things that I would've never experienced otherwise - and eventually set the stage for my coming out.
London remained - and still remains - a special place in my heart. My final college spring break, in 1998, took me back to London (along with Brussels and Paris), my first overseas trip as a woman; that time, I rented a car and hit Stonehenge. And more recently, in 2003, I returned for a refresher/make-up visit to London and Paris, to visit places my previous visits had left out. And every return continues to bring the memories and the meaning of the original 1996 trip back to me, again and again.
I decided to take a different route though, back in 1996. On March 9, I headed out from Manhatan to Newark, hopped on a 777, and crossed the Pond for the first time, ending up at London's Heathrow airport the next morning. After facing a nasty immigration officer, I headed to Bloomsbury, where I crashed in with an NYU student group for the next five days. I participated in many of their activities together, for a not-so-hedonistic yet fun group experience. After the NYU people returned to New York, I stayed on in London for two more days for some solo sightseeing.
I would consider this one of the most significant steps in my growth, along with my initial visit to New York City in 1991. The 1991 New York trip allowed me to experience a different world, though still within the confines of American Christian geography and culture, and as a teen (not to mention inspiring me to attend college in New York City). Being in NYC allowed me to go forward with the 1996 London trip, which broke that mold altogether, and allowed me to experience things that I would've never experienced otherwise - and eventually set the stage for my coming out.
London remained - and still remains - a special place in my heart. My final college spring break, in 1998, took me back to London (along with Brussels and Paris), my first overseas trip as a woman; that time, I rented a car and hit Stonehenge. And more recently, in 2003, I returned for a refresher/make-up visit to London and Paris, to visit places my previous visits had left out. And every return continues to bring the memories and the meaning of the original 1996 trip back to me, again and again.
Health update
Looks like my paralysis is a facial palsy caused by viral infection in one of the brain blood vessels. I should recover fully, though it will take time, and I will most likely have to skip out on the meeting with my idol Calista Flockhart next month. (I will still send money to Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance anyway.)
I'll have to take it easy for the foreseeable future, and when I am cured, I will push for moving out from my parents' place, because living together is a source of stress.
At least my mother is starting to see that my female gender presentation is an integral part of me, which helps - but she still can't see me as a woman outright, which stinks.
I'll have to take it easy for the foreseeable future, and when I am cured, I will push for moving out from my parents' place, because living together is a source of stress.
At least my mother is starting to see that my female gender presentation is an integral part of me, which helps - but she still can't see me as a woman outright, which stinks.
03 March 2006
A worthy cause
Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance has just mailed me an invitation to its annual Comedy for a Cure program.
I went to last year's program in hopes of meeting my idol Calista Flockhart, though she left early, and I was unable to speak with her.
Finding a cure for this debilitating condition is a worthy cause in itself, and I will definitely buy a ticket to the event, which is on April 2. If the paralysis lets up, I will attend - and hopefully this time, get to say hi to my idol.
More information
I went to last year's program in hopes of meeting my idol Calista Flockhart, though she left early, and I was unable to speak with her.
Finding a cure for this debilitating condition is a worthy cause in itself, and I will definitely buy a ticket to the event, which is on April 2. If the paralysis lets up, I will attend - and hopefully this time, get to say hi to my idol.
More information
Won't blog for a few days
My face is partially paralyzed at this time (!). I am trying acupuncture treatments for the next few weeks. My inability to get health insurance will leave me with few other options.
So until my health improves, I won't be blogging much, if at all. I think family and social conflicts have truly taken a toll, and will have to push for moving out even sooner than before. The reactionary suburban hellhole, that I live in now, will literally kill me at this pace. (What good is saving up for a BMW, if I'll be too maimed to ever enjoy it?)
So until my health improves, I won't be blogging much, if at all. I think family and social conflicts have truly taken a toll, and will have to push for moving out even sooner than before. The reactionary suburban hellhole, that I live in now, will literally kill me at this pace. (What good is saving up for a BMW, if I'll be too maimed to ever enjoy it?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)