 |
|
 |

 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Sometimes, it's hard to play music (or do any sort of art thing), when you see the real professionals and talented amateurs do it, and you think "Sweet Jesus, why the hell do I bother? I'm never going to be that good."
Today, however, I saw something on a friend's blog, which reminded me that even professional musicians like BNL can't do everything perfectly in a single take. Though, after seeing the Double Dippers show on S&D 3, you would think I would have been reminded of this earlier. (8-)
Keep playing, performing, dancing and singing. In the end, it's not about what other people think of what you do -- it's about what you think of what you do. Tags: philosophy
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |






 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Cdn freed in Sudan being refused help getting home: lawyer
Assuming this is true, then what the bloody good is Canadian citizenship? Either freaking prove Abdelrazik was guilty of something, something so heinous that he no longer deserves to be a Canadian (you'll note that even Paul Bernado, that sick damned bastard, is still a Canadian citizen), or given him the full level of assistance a Canadian citizen, innocent of any crime deserves, and bring him home -- especially if you're the people who suggested he should be put in jail in the first place.
Either legal protections mean something to all people, or they mean nothing. You can't have this half and half shit, justice defines what's right -- because the nature of justice and morality changes, usually to suit the powers that be. Or, as I like telling defenders of Bush's attempt to gain extended executive powers -- all those executive powers that you wanted to grant to George W. Bush. Well, unless something radically changes between now and Jan 2009, now it looks like a Democrat (or McCain, who's as bad as a Democrat according to some 'proper' Republicans) is going to have access to those powers as well, for warrantless wiretapping and all those other things. Yes, the godless heathens can now read your email without a warrant. How does that make you feel?
The limits on government power should be defined by how much power you want the OPPOSITION to have. Because, at one point, the opposition is going to be in power, whether you want to believe it or not. And if you take measures to make sure the opposition never gets into power, it's no longer a democracy, and this entire argument is moot. Because, in that case, it's now the law of the jungle -- and I don't think most political pundits and supporters out there truly understand the ruthlessness required to survive in that scenario. Tags: philosophy, politics - general
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |

|