Year Later, Back to the Blog.

Its been a year?
I could bore everyone with a recap of the year, but for now I shall spare thee.
This sucks. It's the first blog, so it's not going to be so great. I have to kind of do an introduction here. Let's start by saying some disclaimers.
First off, I doubt ANYONE will read this. Possible readers will be my wife, Tina, and Jeff who I should finally call my best friend, which is an insult to him, but the compliment may keep him reading for more then two weeks.
One of the problems with a blog or anything on the web for that matter (I helped co-write realscopes), is that it is interesting at first, gets stale, and people stop reading, and writer's stop writing.
I have several ideas to keep this problem to a minimum. One is that I want to keep the posting's weekly, with only important ideas coming out more than once a week.
Another point: I am doing this for myself and not looking to bore friends with reading it, or appealing to people online. It's more of a journal for myself.
Another thing I am going to do is keep the posting's logical, with good grammar, good arguments, and tone down the rant.
My previous blog was often written drunk, full of anger and depression, and I never explained my arguments or conclusions well.
On top of it, while I like to curse and love freedom of speech and thought, the web and writing is the last bastion of this, I still think cursing or being racist does nothing.
Shit, I got a masters in anthropology, no more saying white trash without some type of long paragraph with some excellent grammar to explain my position, I cost Tina some friends with my mouth.

With all of the above said, lets see how the postings go. If I like how it is, I may send out an email to some people to check it out.

Lets try a small practice, rant:

Blunkett, this English politician, I could look up his actual title(when I am less lazy I hope to include some links to back up the shit I write), but anyways, he works for Blair, is looking to pass this bill here in the UK, where one of the outcomes would be a curtailing of jokes on religion. Its more complicated then I am typing, anyone interested, do a goggle search or go to The Guardian Unlimited or something. My point is that Blunkett is blind and if we can not make fun of religion, then we must at all costs make fun of blind people! It's a terrible side effect of his bill, as many comics who have this need to make fun of the pope, will suddenly find themselves out of a job, rather then go penniless, or should I say penceless, (which is priceless!) they may have to resort to disability jokes and nobody wants to see that. My other issue is, what if my belief is this religion where I believe that my god wants me to MAKE FUN OF religion? I'm not against god or consciousness or any open thought. I am against a lot of the doctrine, the stories, and institutions, more of that later.

Well I am on my second jack and coke, its time to go. Let's hope this works out.

Chuck, deggsy, whatever the hell they call me now :OP