Are the details in the fabric?

What if i lived to see fulfilled the dreams of those I come into contact with? It doesn't even have to be big dreams, a little one here or there will suffice. What if I were able to be a vessel for a higher power? What if my words, my thoughts, my actions made people think beyond themselves? Is the connection we have to others unmarked by some and embraced by others? Where do I fall? To be fully alive must there be a happy balanced, or is it necessary to be conscious of this connection? What if I started to live consciously, with the reality that my every choice, my every breath, my every word, my every thought has an affect on something outside myself? We all exist beyond ourselves. We are intended for a purpose beyond ourselves. We all have potential greatness; we have potential destruction. We all live it out every day. Greatness and destruction fuel our world. Dose the destruction of one negate the greatness of another? Does the greatness of one empower the destruction of another?

Beauty is...

..Ray LaMontagne. How is it that I just found out about him a few weeks ago thanks to my wonderful cousin. I saw that she was friends with him on the MySpace. "Amazing" is all I have to say!! There is a longing that i feel with his music. A good longing, a vindicable longing. His music sounds like fall feels. That is all I have to say. Have a good day!

Ray LaMontagne EPK

Last week, two times in a row, I have been having crazy weird dreams about bombs blowing up the country. My aunt says that I am probably stressed out about the looming elections; I think she may be right. I have taken up reading the newspaper. My goal is to get through the first section starting with the opinions. I keep my pencil in hand and write down my thoughts or opinions in the margins.
I came across this column in the opinion section written by Garrison Keillor called "Americans' B.S. detectors go off the charts with Palin." (Now, I don't want this to be a crap-on-Palin blog, but I think that her beliefs and actions need to be taken into account when there is a possibility we may be calling her President Palin in the future.) But, back to the newspaper...I underlined almost half the article, and there are quite a few exclamation points. One example:
"The attempt to link Barack Obama to an old radial in his neighborhood has desperation and deceit written all over it."
Just today, the only McCain ad I saw on TV was the one that mentioned "William Ayres, the terrorist" and how Obama lied about knowing him. Palin says during her speeches that the two "pal around" together. This is not true. They were both part of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a group founded in the 1990 by the high profile Republican and philanthropist whose widow supports the McCain campaign. The purpose of the group was to improve public schools in areas ranging from teacher training to music education to parental involvement. Ayers was on a voluntary advisory board who hired lawyers to write bylaws which, in time, would need to be unanimously approved by the board of directors, of which Obama was a part. In late 1960s, when Obama was 8 years old, William Ayers was part of a radical leftest group called the Weather Underground, a group of college students who violenly protested the Vietnam War by bombing public locations. Ayers turned himself into the police in the 1980s, charges against him were dropped, and he has since become a "Distinguished Professor at the University of Illinois." Obama describes Ayers actions in the Weather Underground both "detestable" and "despicable." Just go to factcheck.org for more information.
On a much lighter note, I was looking up chords to a song called "New Deep" by John Mayer, and I ended up looking at what people said the song means. Some are comical.

I woke up this morning around 4:30 in the AM, thinking about something I had written in 2004, about poverty. At the time I was fasting. I was fasting at first because I wanted to know if I had the willpower to do it, but then it became a spiritual experience where I was learning more about myself and my connection to the world around me than I had ever had up to that point. I was in the library at the local community college that I had been attending. I was trying to study, but some students were being distracting, so I decided to just write. I was writing about nothing in particular. But then I got this image of one of those malnourished children that they show on TV from oversees. I had this image of a child whose belly was swollen with hunger. I started to wonder what this kid did to deserve the life he had. I began to wonder why God would allow such things to happen. I have yet to find the answer. But I began to explore what it meant for me. I began to wonder what God was trying to show me through the image of a little child collapsed on the side of a road in a foreign country with a vulture waiting in the distance. Maybe, if we allow it, these images can teach us love. Not the act of love, but love itself. I can imagine there eyes not looking at me, but looking through me. Looking through the surface and exposing me. Exposing everything inside of me that does not echo love: the fear, the anxiety, the mistrust, the greed, the pride, all the things I keep hidden. And it shouldn't be a matter of "you can always find someone worse off than you." It should be a matter of shifting my misguided perception of how the world has wronged me. It should be a matter of living in a way parallel to what the New Testament teaches as opposed to what the Western Church teaches.

While I was trying to write this, I stumble upon a story....

Read it

Watch it

Amazing

Democracy: "A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives."
Chapter 11 of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) allows foreign investors to sue government when they feel expropriation has taken place. For example, a Canadian company had sued the United States for $970 million, under NAFTA's Chapter 11, because of a environmental regulation in California. Now this was not just some "hippy libs" trying to pass another law about the environment. It began over MTBE, a chemical added to gasoline to help clean the air. The problem with this chemical is that was found to cause cancer in lab rats. The major issue arose when the drinking water tested positive to MTBE contamination. The contamination was linked to several leaks in gas stations. American citizens living in or around the area did not feel comfortable with the idea of being exposed to MTBE through their water, and as much as the state tried to clean up the contamination, the tainted water spread. So the state enacted a regulation. This environmental regulation was passed on 25 March 1999, and it ordered MTBE be phased out of all gasoline sold in California. However, this was not welcomed by the Canadian company, Methanex, who is the largest producer of MTBE. A few months after the regulation was passed, Methanex sued the United States. Methanex explains their choice to sue under Chapter 11. Although, they do not mention the whole part about their product producing cancer in lab rats. They did not receive a settlement as of 2005.
Ok, we live in America, and one of the benefits of being an American is that anyone can sue the crap out of someone else for any reason whatsoever. So the aforementioned story on the surface seems like something acceptable by American standards. But the thing about Americans suing Americans is that it goes through the American court system. If the case goes to trial, American citizens are the jury. Wasn't it Lincoln who envisioned the future to have a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people?"
With NAFTA's Chapter 11, another citizen or company from a foreign country who is part of NAFTA can sue the United States of America. The suit filed is then reviewed by a tribunal (mostly international law experts), who make a decision. No American citizen or legislation is admitted. If the US loses, the government is subject to pay out. Now who does the government get all its money from? That's right, us! The American taxpayer. Where has democracy gone? The American people, in this instance, have NO voice in a matter involving themselves. Where has democracy gone?
On the other hand, an American citizen, or an American company can sue a foreign company under Chapter 11 if they feel they have been expropriated. The first claim filed under Chapter 11 was by an American company, Metalclad, against Mexico. You can go here to read the rest of the story.
I would like to think that America has the right to get rid of a chemical that has been found to cause cancer in lab rats. I would like to think that Mexican citizens have the right to demand that a company cleans up their toxic waste dump, before they start to accept more waste. I think that Canada should have the right to ban deadly chemicals produced by US companies that are banned in America without the fear that they will be sued for expropriation. I think that countries should have the right to put warnings on cigarette packages without the fear of being sued for expropriation. I think that if a product sucks, it needs to be fixed or taken off the market. I think that it is ridiculous that Metalclad won its claim against Mexico because a tribunal thought it appropriate.
The following is an exert from a speech given by our President on 6 November 2003:

Our commitment to democracy is also tested in the Middle East, which is my focus today, and must be a focus of American policy for decades to come. In many nations of the Middle East -- countries of great strategic importance -- democracy has not yet taken root.

All people deserve to be free. Democracy has been uprooted in this country, Mr. Bush. Should it not also be strategically important to build a firm foundation of democracy in our own country, before we try to impose this belief on others? Shouldn't we be a democratic country before we try to make other countries democratic? Would it not be a lie, a falsehood, Mr. President? But I suppose that because these countries are "of great strategic importance" we must not let them pass from our hands.

For your listening pleasure...

Heart Home Mayer

Man alive, it's been awhile since I posted anything. I finished up this year at school, I am proud of myself for finishing this much so far. I have moved back to New Port Richey, not under the best of circumstances. But whatever, some situations are out of my control. I just need to find a job and go from there. Anyway, back to my purpose:

The word "home" has always intrigued me. It is defined as "the place where one lives permanently, esp. as a member of a family or household." However, that definition seems un-proper. I remember as a child, my family had a plaque in the house that said "Home is where the heart is," and we all have heard this cliche before. To understand this cliche a bit more, one must define "heart." Heart is "a hollow muscular organ that pumps the blood through the circulatory system by rhythmic contraction and dilation..." or "the center of a person's thoughts or emotions, esp. love or compassion." Having never read these definitions prior to this moment, many thoughts are traveling in my brain. In reflecting on the word "heart" in the forementioned phrase/cliche:

• One could say that home is where a persons literal heart (the muscular organ that pumps the blood through the circulatory system by rhythmic contraction and dilation) is at any given moment. Which may be a comforting thought, being that one need not look outside oneself to find home. But then again, this may leave one closed off to anything outside themselves, when in actuality the connection between humans and the whole of the universe however seamless, are indisputable.
  
• One could say that home is the center of ones thoughts or emotions rooted in love and compassion. Now, love and compassion may both be directed inward, but one may not understand either love or compassion solitarily. Therefor, with this definition, one must look outside oneself to find home.

The second definition of "heart" clarifies a question I have asked myself. To prepare for this question, some information must be given. I believe that the creative arts is an invaluable tool to both express and receive understanding on multiple levels. I believe that there is no definite line between the sacred and the secular (meaning one may express truth of God or receive truth from God whatever and wherever the creative medium may be). I believe music goes much deeper than notes played or lyrics sung. I believe that music influences people in their thoughts and emotion. I believe that music allows the listener to understand the thoughts and emotions and the meaning of the artist on an unexplainable level. I believe that if the heart is the center of ones thoughts and emotions, than the creative arts, specifically music, is an expression of heart. Ergo, my question (I have said this for years): John Mayer's music is home for me. His music makes me feel home. It makes me feel as if whatever situation I am faced with and wherever I am located at a specific moment, for the duration of the song I am home. I can breathe. I can believe that things will be good. I feel secure. I feel safe. I find home in a song. Why? Is it sweet? Is it sad? Set the person of John Mayer aside (although he seems like a kick-ass guy). It is the music he creates. It is the feeling that his music gives to me. There is a validity of feeling. I find reflections of my heart in the chords and lyrics and rhythm of the music he creates. For that I am truly thankful.