What is the strangest dream you've ever had?

Do you believe dreams "mean something"? And if so, did your strangest dream have a meaning or interpretation?

Have you ever had a dream that clearly told you something important and/or brought about a change of some kind for having had it?

It's...as of a little later this evening...officially summer, officially the longest day of the year (we're talking max sun and all that).

WHOOHOOOOOO!!!

What was the longest day you've ever had? How about the shortest? Looking at both, do you find that there's truth to the fact that time flies when you're having fun and drags when you're not?

What is your most unexpected truth? That is, what fact about you most defies the expectations people would have of you?

What is the most important or valuable thing to you that you would be willing to sacrifice?

What is the most important or valuable thing to you that you would not be willing to sacrifice?

What is the most important or valuable thing to you for which you would be willing to sacrifice almost everything else?

What was the last important thing you sacrificed?

Is there anything you do on a daily or near-daily basis for your own good or take great personal pride in? Is there any such habit or practice that you do that is the opposite-- say one you'd call a bad habit or that you are embarrassed or sheepish about?

We get one lifetime, and it's plenty of time for everything that's important. Best not pass up any opportunities when they come one's way, because every one of them is a precious gift.

When in doubt, dance like nobody's looking. They usually aren't.

Experts agree that experts hardly ever agree on anything, so all counsel should be taken with a grain of salt.

Every particle in your body is from the very earth you walk upon, and every particle on this earth came from somewhere in deep space. This makes you as significant as the very stars and as insignificant as space dust. But it also means you were, are, and always will be.

One should never be afraid of making mistakes; in fact, we should all strive to not only embrace them, but to look forward to the wisdom and freedom each one brings. Sometimes one can't truly appreciate life until looking at a rainbow that results from the torrent of water springing up from that fire hydrant they just drove through.

Sample everything, especially the things you don't want to.

Be outspoken. Be discreet. Be quiet and yell your head off. The tree that falls in the forest might well scream all the way down when no one is listening.

Assume nothing and be open to everything.

Strive to be here now.

Don't take yourself or anything too seriously. Someday you too may be walking around with your fly wide open or your skirt tucked into your hose; better then that you laugh at yourself than find yourself mortified.

I don't think there's a sane person in this country who doesn't see a LOT of problems in the world today, specifically things that could be fixed in our country-- things that are shot up and outta wack.

However, it doesn't matter _how_ you feel about the proposed constitutional amendment on marriage, right now, more than at any time in recent history, I strongly believe that across the party lines and liberals-versus-conservatives extremes, there's a common ground-- a LOT more important stuff going on that needs to be addressed, like the out-of-control government spending, the costly wars on multiple fronts with no end in sight, the tragedy of education in America, the current energy crisis, the number of companies (namely pharmeceutical and big oil) raising prices and reaping huge, specially-tax-sheltered profits (thanks Congress!) while most of America (namely middle America and elderly folks on meds) is feeling the pinch, and too many other gaffes to name.

And why, will someone tell me, in this time of crisis, *WAR*, and serious issues beyond listing, are our elected representatives spending valuable time debating a constitutional amendment that has _nothing_ to do with our current and most pressing problems? Why is Congress (and the sitting president) spending less time on the job than at any previous session (including many in peacetime!), and racking up more vacation days than any of their predecessors, and easily more than several of them combined? Forget political gain, forget political strategy-- these people are all AMERICANS, for Pete's sake! Don't they care about our country's safety and well-being?

And last but not least-- the question I REALLY want answered...why is this blatant smokescreen working so well? Why isn't all of (or at least the majority of) America enraged? Where's the backlash?

Congress should be shaking in their collective boots, fearing the wrath of voters everywhere, and at least _looking_ busy, but instead, Democrats and Republicans alike are posturing and strategizing off an artificial "crisis", spewing the same tired rhetoric while saying nothing of consequence at a time of many serious consequences.

Why?

[taken off the popsci website at http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/2c21c0f98d07b010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html]

Is It Raining Aliens?
Nearly 50 tons of mysterious red particles showered India in 2001. Now the race is on to figure out what the heck they are

As bizarre as it may seem, the sample jars brimming with cloudy, reddish rainwater in Godfrey Louis's laboratory in southern India may hold, well, aliens. In April, Louis, a solid-state physicist at Mahatma Gandhi University, published a paper in the prestigious peer-reviewed journal Astrophysics and Space Science in which he hypothesizes that the samples--water taken from the mysterious blood-colored showers that fell sporadically across Louis's home state of Kerala in the summer of 2001--contain microbes from outer space.
Specifically, Louis has isolated strange, thick-walled, red-tinted cell-like structures about 10 microns in size. Stranger still, dozens of his experiments suggest that the particles may lack DNA yet still reproduce plentifully, even in water superheated to nearly 600F. (The known upper limit for life in water is about 250F.) So how to explain them? Louis speculates that the particles could be extraterrestrial bacteria adapted to the harsh conditions of space and that the microbes hitched a ride on a comet or meteorite that later broke apart in the upper atmosphere and mixed with rain clouds above India. If his theory proves correct, the cells would be the first confirmed evidence of alien life and, as such, could yield tantalizing new clues to the origins of life on Earth.

Last winter, Louis sent some of his samples to astronomer Chandra Wickramasinghe and his colleagues at Cardiff University in Wales, who are now attempting to replicate his experiments; Wickramasinghe expects to publish his initial findings later this year.

Meanwhile, more down-to-earth theories abound. One Indian government investigation conducted in 2001 lays blame for what some have called the "blood rains" on algae. Other theories have implicated fungal spores, red dust swept up from the Arabian peninsula, even a fine mist of blood cells produced by a meteor striking a high-flying flock of bats.

Louis and his colleagues dismiss all these theories, pointing to the fact that both algae and fungus possess DNA and that blood cells have thin walls and die quickly when exposed to water and air. More important, they argue, blood cells don't replicate. "We've already got some stunning pictures--transmission electron micrographs--of these cells sliced in the middle," Wickramasinghe says. "We see them budding, with little daughter cells inside the big cells."

Louis's theory holds special appeal for Wickramasinghe. A quarter of a century ago, he co-authored the modern theory of panspermia, which posits that bacteria-riddled space rocks seeded life on Earth. "If it's true that life was introduced by comets four billion years ago," the astronomer says, "one would expect that microorganisms are still injected into our environment from time to time. This could be one of those events."

The next significant step, explains University of Sheffield microbiologist Milton Wainwright, who is part of another British team now studying Louis's samples, is to confirm whether the cells truly lack DNA. So far, one preliminary DNA test has come back positive."Life as we know it must contain DNA, or it's not life," he says. "But even if this organism proves to be an anomaly, the absence of DNA wouldn't necessarily mean it's extraterrestrial."

Louis and Wickramasinghe are planning further experiments to test the cells for specific carbon isotopes. If the results fall outside the norms for life on Earth, it would be powerful new evidence for Louis's idea, of which even Louis himself remains skeptical. "I would be most happy to accept a simpler explanation," he says, "but I cannot find any."

My personal theory includes the possibility of a new form of terrestrial life released into the atmosphere during volcanic activity around the same time, from around the same region. I have a hard time believing any material could survive falling into our atmosphere-- no matter how small-- without burning up on entry. BUT, it is possible.

Wanna see? On a clear day after about three days of no rain (nor heavy winds), go outside with a strong magnet and just drag it in a straight line just over the ground for about a yard or so. See the stuff that sticks to it? That stuff falls to the earth every day, and is supposedly the remnants of things that burn up in the upper atmosphere.

Esteem is important, but self-esteem is paramount. The world would be a better place if we all loved ourselves a little more.

What's your favorite quote (of your own creation)? How about one of someone you know personally that you esteem?

Everybody has a self-image; a way they see themselves, a way they'd like for others to see them, and ways in which they hope they're not seen. Often, only very rarely do these actually correlate with reality.

How do you see yourself? If you reduced yourself to a symbol, image, or icon, what would it look like? Would it be a sound? A feeling?

Do you know of anyone that you associate in such a way, someone who in your mind invokes such an image, be they friend, known quantity, or celebrity? Are they all good, or are some of them unflattering?

Okay, Jon Stewart is a genius. A comedic genius to be sure, but I speak more to the point of an astute observation he made that I'm still tossing around in my mind.

Basically, it comes down to is the following: The far conservative right of this country (by and large) include two camps, both with arguably huge overlap. On the one hand, you have the Bible-thumping pro-life fundamentalists that hold that an unborn child is an innocent life that must in all cases be saved, and that pro-choice people are cheapening life and violating basic religious tenents. On the other hand (actually, on the same hand, as there are a LOT of people who also hold this view too, including our president), there are people that believe in the righteousness patriotism of the war in Iraq, where thousands of innocent civilians (I'm talking women and children) are dying each and every day as "collateral damage", specificially due to military actions-- direct results of our own troops.

Honestly, I don't see how these two views aren't diametrically opposed.

And of course this begs looking at the OTHER side-- the far left. How is it that people that include huge numbers of vegetarians/vegans, seekers of peace, and defenders of all life...people who are SO connected to sparing their fellow animals any suffering...that these people are SO certain that unborn children feel no pain from abortions, whether they're five hours or five weeks old?

You're walking home late one night when you see/hear someone in the distance, calling for help. This person has been really hurt. As you approach, however, you realize the cries are not just for help, but also "get me out of here" and other signs, suggesting the danger may not have passed and may well be returning to finish the job. There's no one else around-- that you can see.

What would you do, when even trying to get more information or acting might put you in peril? How would you handle the situation, when you know a mistake or mistep either way could result in tragic consequences of one kind or another?

Recently, I expressed my views on the whole immigration debate. Well, ironically, Lou Dobbs (not exactly someone I've always agreed with) expressed much the same views!

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/10/dobbs.enforcement/index.html

Yay for free speech!

My push is that the current debate is a smokescreen for what neither side (of the politicians-- Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative) wants to actually talk about: how these laws really don't deal with the problem(s), or (as Dobbs puts it so well) necessarily indicate any real change will come in enforcement (especially given current enforcement). And (as we both put it) that punishing the undocumented workers and NOT the companies that continue to (knowingly) hire them in droves is (and has been) downright hypocritical, and pretty telling of where Congress' real political interest$ lie.

I saw an X-Files episode about a guy who had rain constantly following wherever he was. He ended up using this to make money, by going places that had droughts. So where it might've been a curse, he turned it into a gift of sorts.

It's like a variant on Mida's touch.

Think of something you've always wanted, or ability you've always wished you'd had. Is there a way it could be given to you, JUST LIKE YOU WANT IT, that could turn out to be a curse instead of a blessing?

Or maybe something the world might see as a curse or burden that you've turned into a goldmine, or at least a source of something nifty?

I was reading an AP newsfeed today; it had an article about legislation being considered on price-gouging (which, to date, while universally despised and opposed to, in principle, by all of Congress and the President, is NOT CURRENTLY ILLEGAL).

Anyway, here's the a snippet and the cause of my ire:

"The legislation would direct the FTC to define price gouging. Violators could face penalties of up to $150 million for refiners and other wholesalers and $2 million for retailers. The measure would cover marketers of gasoline, diesel fuel, crude oil and heating fuel.

Wholesalers and retail outlets such as corner gas stations and service station chains could face civil penalties triple the amount of their unfair profit. Violators could go to jail."

Read between the lines and you'll see what I define as one of America's biggest problems and challenges-- namely that whenever new legislation is being considered, big business' interests are protected first and the little guys get screwed over big-time. The _first_ thing that happens when any major legislation is being considered that might punish businesses is the upper cap. $150 million dollars is the upper limit. There's no reason why there has to BE an upper limit, but there it is. Small retailers can face penalties 3x their unfair profits, but corporations already have an upper limit which, as I write this, is already being talked down by lobbyists, and I can GUARANTEE you will be far less than triple their unfair profits. Even if a corporation is found to be grossly violating the law, a limit is already in place on how much they can be penalized.

Where is the justice in that? With all this talk of market forces, and letting the natural flow of market forces rule, what about when we've got Enrons and Worldcoms and Tycos?! Why is the natural order being stymied there?! Why are their upper limits? If a small business can be inadvertently bankrupt as a side effect of a punishment for their crimes, why not a bigger business?

Our current laws offer far too many protections to business and far too few to small businesses. In fact, I believe there are so many barriers to new business (and growth) in our laws, that our think-tanks and existing businesses are becoming inbred hotbeds for cronyism and status quo. Consider: when our country was founded, nearly 90% of business was self-employed individuals-- a model we kept long into our history and even part of the Industrial revolution. Nowadays, it's MUCH more difficult to start a business, and I'm not talking good ideas like food safety laws and fair labor standards-- I'm talking permits and zoning clearances and all kinds of other crap. And laws that make corporations less and less accountable for their actions. Wal-Mart decides to discriminate against their workers or pressure them to work overtime without pay? At worst a new CEO is named and the problem "is no more".

You can't sue a company, but it can "vote" by lobbying Congress with more push than any given citizen can ever have, and even do so with views that the majority of its employees disagree with!

I think it's time to take off the training wheels. The idea of a corporation and limited liability was a good one, but it's more than served its purpose once businesses get above a certain size. When mega-corporations are able to lobby for bigger pieces of the pie, it's time to scale back their tax-breaks and subsidies. Period. You got that much money, there's no need to "nudge" Congress for a taxpayer handout. And shame on Congress for falling to this level!

No, my opinion's not as eloquently thought out as I'd like, but I'm putting it out there for folks to think about. Big business should have its own fair share of accountability, liability, and no more an ear of Congress than you or I do. We're the ones that vote and it's darn well time we started acting like it!