Amanda Unvarnished

Shalom all:
It’s time for me to regale you with yet more tales from the steak house, which could also be classified as bobular blunders. As the above suggests, Ray and I went to Ryans again last night, and the food was considerably better. Note to self: Don’t go to Ryans, or any other restaurant for that matter, any later than two hours before they close. we ended up going after making a trip to the Sprint Store to have our phones configured with reliable sighted assistance. Bob would not have been good for that one. Things would have straight down the drain, without delay at that point. So anyway, we get the phones configured, and then go get some dinner. Begin bobular blunders. We sit down at the table, and Bob starts to discuss the current case of the cross-burning, and oppines that a man who happened to be a witness to the crime, and didn’t stop it, got too harshly judged. Apparently, eight years in jail, where you have cable and ‘net access, and eat better than a lot of people on the outside is just too much to deal with. Then, the conversation spirals down to the statement, made by Bob, that the law is as corrupt as could be, and that someone who witnesses a crime and does nothing is not as guilty as the other miscreants involved. Furthermore, when I brought up biblical support, (Bob relies heavily on the King James translation of the Bible for the underpinnings of a lot of the choices he makes and encourages others to make), for the concept of guilt by association in a case like that, Bob promptly declared that “do not stand idly by while your brother’s blood is shed” is a spiritual law as opposed to a civil law. That tends to be the way a lot of Christians, though not all, explain away the non-ceremonial requirements, (which, consequently, make up the majority of what Christians like to refer to as “the law”), when confronted with the question of why they don’t follow the law when Jesus specifically commanded it, or when you ask them how Jesus was supposed to have fulfilled commandments like that. But, I seriously digress. The point is, a statement like “do not stand idly by while your brother’s blood is shed” is very obviously a civil law, even if one does not take the time to look the verse up within its proper context. Ray didn’t say much during this point of the conversation, which I find interesting, given that Ray has an oppinion on most things. As the evening progressed, the conversation spiraled to yet new levels of depravity. Bob decided to tell Ray and I a story about a local woman, in her late twenties, who married a man in his eighties. He extolled this as right and proper. In order to impress upon you all the complete depravity and perversity of a statement like that, (yes, Bob has a nack for special nack for taking a situation or idea that’s already depraved in and of itself, and bringing it to new and completely unfathomable depths of indecency), I need to give you a little background. It goes without saying that Bob holds some extremely screwed up views. For instance: Vlind people all have bad childhoods by default; blind people shouldn’t date other blind people because, if they get married and spend the rest of their lives together, they become ultradependent; blind people have an extra license to sin than the rest of society because we’re all frustrated, lonely people who need some sort of opiate; and so on, etcetera. So, when Bob suggested that said woman did the right thing by marrying the octagenarian, neither Ray nor I were surprised, although it does continue to shock me, at least, every time I hear views like that expressed. This stems from Bob’s view that women need to date older men because men their age are going to just screw them over. Well, OK, I can’t say that one’s totally flawed. But, the way it gets borne out is disturbing. I date older men, but there’s a limit: Namely, anyone older than nine or ten years is excluded due to the fact that the number of commonalities starts to dwindle, and at that point, we’re getting a little too close to the generational gap. “Who’s your daddy” is not a line I want to hear, especially when it’s coming from someone who is supposed to be playing a totally different role. Fortunately, thanks to the ending of dinner, the conversation didn’t have any more oportunity to downgrade any further. Ray and I got back here, and promptly tuned in to No Holds barred Radio, and listened to the further torture of Ellis 2.0. Watch this space for more on that. Because I’ve spent the last little while on this entry, and I’m not sure, after reporting last night’s episode, you can really add other, unrelated incidents to the same entry, I’ll go for now. Thanks for reading.

OK, I’m sorry, but I just have to do this. This is begging and pleading for a response, in some other form than a comment to the journal in question, where the comment could be deleted.
The following is a quote from Jamminjerry’s journal:
“The next time this happens, (for those who don’t know, Jerry’s journal was visited by an annonymous poster, who decided they wanted to leave him a surprise), I will be taking action. I don’t know what I wil do, but I will do something!”
Question: How does one take action against an annonymous poster? Email the livejournal webmaster and request an IP trace for an entry that was posted almost a week ago? IP addresses aren’t usually attached to names. More to the point, it’s stupid. You didn’t lose any money, and it would have been much more prudent if you’d have just deleted the entry and all comments associated with it, and just let the whole thing be forgotten. Instead, you make a groundless threat against an unknown someone, thus making yourself look more like an ass than that entry ever did. You also showed yourself to be exceedingly arrogant and self-centered. If I recall correctly, you weren’t the one whose reputation was questioned, and you weren’t the one who was insulted. Your girlfriend was the one who was insulted. But you made no mention of looking out for her, or her feelings, and you made no attempt to repair the damage done to her reputation. In fact, you’ve shown that, when it really matters, and when really important things like personal honor are at stake, the only thing that really matters is whether or not your ego is satisfied. That speaks volumes.

It’s almost midnight, and I’m still up because I don’t feel tired, and see no point in going to bed just yet. I’m getting some laundry done, and will probably make sure to put it away immediately. I have to take a cab to the store tomorrow, because I forgot to pick up some much-needed household items yesterday while I was out. I hate that. The bandwidth’s really dodgy tonight, so I’ll probably read a book while I do my laundry.

I didn’t sleep well last night. I’ve been up since about 9 something last night, and will probably stay up today, so I can put away the rest of my laundry, do some more laundry, and some other stuff. I went to Walmart yesterday, and got some new jeans, and a new shirt. I needed the clothes, since it’s been a long time since I’ve actually went out and bought some clothes, with the exception of some kippot, and some kerchiefs. Well, I did get some clothes for work a few months ago, but I didn’t buy those, so, as far as this discussion is concerned, they don’t count. I also went out to eat at a place called K&W Cafeteria. The food left a lot to be desired. I ate what was supposed to be steak and gravy over rice, black-eyed peas, (which tasted as though they hadn’t even been washed, just shucked and thrown in the pot with G-d knows what), a roll (which was actually good), and a piece of lemon pie, (which was really runny, and had very little crust). Note to self: Don’t go there on a Sunday, or probably any other day. Someone commented annonymously to one of my recent entries, asking if the Steve I mentioned is Steve Wolf of WolfFM. To answer the question: No. My Steve’s last name is ze’evi. I just happen to like WolfFM. I would like to know who it was who asked, just out of curiosity. I don’t mind annonymous comments, except that I don’t get to see a name associated with some of them. Some, though, sign their names at the end of their posts, and I like that. It puts a name with a comment.

OK, for some reason, I can’t edit my info on the livejournal site. It’s being a royal bitch. I’ve tried deleting the cookie associated with the site, but that doesn’t help.

Well, it’s been a little over a week since my last post, and from what I’ve seen, a lot’s happened. Jerry left for Michigan last Friday, and I’m enjoying the jerrylessness. I’m not, however, enjoying the new, record-setting length of time that has passed since I’ve talked to Steve. I’m not blaming him, because, no matter what, he makes it a point to tell me he loves me at the end of every conversation, no matter now long or short it is. For that, I am very grateful. And, from what I understand, the work load is supposed to lessen in a little while, so that’s good. I just looked at Jamminjerry’s journal, and it looks like someone’s posted a nice little He’s apparently pissed someone off. He should be careful of that, because if you don’t know who your enemies are, you don’t know who your friends are, and thus you don’t know who’s pissed at you at any given time. Anyway, enough with the philosophical rambling. I watched Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me, with description this week. I’m not sure which was funnier: The actual movie, or the description. To all who have commented on previous entries, notable Satanicharisma, I haven’t forgotten about your comments, and do plan to respond. I’ve just been spending the last week or so by myself, taking some much-needed me-time. I plan to post more often, but we’ll see what happens.

OK, I promised I’d comment on the Judas documentary, so here goes.
Over all, the documentary was good. It attempted to show that there is another possible way to look at Judas, namely that he isn’t as evil as he has been portrayed. My only disappointment with it is that while the writers went out of their way to prove Judas’ innocence, they still lay the blame for Jesus’ death on the Jews. If you’re going to tear down one aspect of traditional beliefs about the gospels, tear them all down.

I’m sitting here watching a thing on the History Channel about Judas Iscariot. For those who don’t know, he’s the one who supposedly betrayed Jesus because he was evil. Pretty interesting. I’ll comment on it after it’s over.

I’ve spent the morning doing the housework, so the kitchen, my bedroom, the livingroom, and the bathroom are all clean. Dishwasher is in the loading state, in other words, any dishes in it are dirty. So endeth all useful activity for the day.