i know i'm crazy
but i just can't stop

at four a.m. i should be sleeping
not thinking, not weeping, not pining

i know this is crazy
so i won't give it words
i won't give you words

i'll give you this
what you've always got
a hint, a smile, a nevermind

tonight is for crazies
let out in the wild
with a poor chance of survival
in the morning light

[inlink]matthew,281[/inlink]

aren't ducks (and other animals) smarter than that?

at the museum
the mess was there on the wall
black yellow white red blue
layers warring
my attention divided

great time at the pink, as always. met some new characters -- chief, his silent bob, and a guy who works at brentwood manor. plus, the always enjoyable conversation of fellow strippers.

matthew, whenever you want to go to the botanical gardens, i'm in.

also, i'm with jessbob and maidencateyes about having more recent posts show than just the last ten. i've faced the same stress of choosing whether or not to spend time catching up on everyone by clicking more, or just seeing the most recent stuff. if there were more immediately available, i'd be more likely to read all of them. and that's what i want to do.

paul [inlink]paul,1203[/inlink],

actually, i like the google ability. i think it's really cool. maybe if my family found me here i wouldn't think it was so cool, but maybe if they did, it would be alright. they could learn all about me and we wouldn't have to talk at all. and that's the whole point of blogging anyway, if you ask me. you can say what you want without that annoying conversational response (or if there is one -- like this here journal entry -- you can ignore it if you want).

so anyway, i am in no way saying that we shouldn't be able to google the site (although i agree about the annoying advertising and them making money off us). but i do think it's fair for people to try erase themselves if they want to make it more difficult for others to find them.

of course people out there (they) will find you if they're looking for you. i can't imagine how difficult it is to live anonymously. even my dad, who has never ever been on the internet, gets a result on a google search (http://maplesyrup.cas.psu.edu/producers/tioga.html).

but i think most of us (or at least enough of us) feel like "lil ole me" and who cares what i write, nobody's gonna take the time to look up my blog site every day. i feel that way, but then i also started posting much more on this site once i realized that people actually did read it. but i can imagine other people having the exact opposite response. i've always loved attention, but i guess the julie-types out there don't.

Ajay! [inlink]ajay,43[/inlink]

i forget about stuff like that. this is how i can manage not to live in fear -- i reject it from my memory. cause i once upon a time knew about the google cache thingy. and you've just thrown in in my face again.

you're right. you can't disappear.

but go ahead and try, that's what i say. even if it would look even more "suspicious" to the people with the supercomputers (i also forget to equate NSA with my idea of the Nazi Germany SS). as i said, don't live life in fear.

just i.m.ing (e:paul) and he gave me that quote.

i totally agree that by silencing yourself, you're giving into government oppression. at the same time, i think i can understand (e:churchofjulie) 's decision. it's not just that the fbi can/will check up on us, it's that joe schmoe who googles your (or his name if you use it) name can too.

the first time i EVER saw a blog, i googled my name (i forget the hip term for that) and saw a posting written by one of the girls who worked for me at the library. she didn't say anything bad about me and i was amused and enchanted that i ranked high enough for her to tell her friends about me. i never told her i saw her blog and every once in a while i'd check back in on it to see how she was doing. (that's the voyeur in me). but i think she would have freaked if she new i did that.

so that's why i think it's okay for julie/anyone to delete her journal -- after all it is her journal and she can do what she wants with her virtual identity.

but at the same time, i think it's a bad idea to give in to fear. as i told my mom the other night when she was discouraging me from driving by myself across the country, i refuse to live my life in fear. fear sucks. i hate being afraid, because then i've lost control of my life. if i can't feel free to express my thoughts and opinions--for whatever reason--then why should i continue living in america?

and that's what this all comes down to -- what america is, what the ideal is, and what it's becoming. somebody (maybe andy?) said or wrote the other day that the government doesn't want us to be afraid, they want us to be happy, because if we're happy, then we don't question what they're doing. i can buy that--but it's not how they're acting. right now they're dishing out fear. why else have a terror alert level? they're telling us how scared we should be each day, and assuming a certain level of fear on top of it! fear will cause the average person to do one of two things: 1) shut up and shut down, trying not to draw attention or suspicion; or 2) keep the eagle eye open, suspecting everyone and everything. both are a kind of paranoia and neither are productive or encourage you to think critically.




from:

i think i'm beginning to rant. i have been disgusted with the "Homeland Security Advisory" since day one. supposed it's a guage of the likelihood of a terrorist attack, but i consider it more of an indicator of how much terror the goverment wished to instill in their trusting citizens.

i'll close in peace:
"and you, my father, there on the sad height,
curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, i pray.
do not go gentle into that good night.
rage, rage agaist the dying of the light"
--dylan thomas

i decided to drive home last night to be a good daughter on father's day. my mom is away for the week, my brother with his wife's family, and my sister's a preacher--so she works sundays. so i too attended church, took dad out to lunch, and came home and mowed the lawn for my dad. i wanted to help him bale hay, but it wasn't dry yet. tomorrow is when he'll need help and i have to be in buffalo.

on the drive down yesterday, robin called and gave me the info on the party. sorry i missed it--sounded like fun.

i'm fairly disturbed by the destruction of churchofjulie. i'm glad she's coming back to b-lo, but sad it has to be under these circumstances. physical presense is generally preferable to virtual, but it's best to have bothl. i guess i could respect her wishes completely by not even mentioning her anymore.

on a related note, i am no longer going a on road trip to alaska. i may go home and work on the farm. we'll see.

Ajay, that is a beautiful picture ([inlink]ajay,41[/inlink]). Makes me want to sink into it. I love blue skies like that.

here's a heads-up for y'all who may go to brodo (or is it broda?), that place next to spot on elmwood -- when you order the tomato entree for $14, you get a tomato stuffed with cous-cous. now, it's tasty, but i think you could make this at home for about $1.50.

the salmon entree, on the other hand, is a delicious and filling meal. mmmm. that was good. i'm glad i didn't order the tomato like soyeon. (ha ha!)

went to albright knox today. i didn't know about the free admission on saturdays from 11am - 1pm. that's why i'm posting it here.

hope all is well with everyone. dodgeball sounds like good fun...

dude, if you haven't seen identity and you're looking for a good thriller-- go rent it. i love john cusack anyway but i thought it was pretty good.

i very easily suspend my disbelief, so don't ever expect me to say "i figured that one out halfway through the movie." if i do, it must be a really bad movie. so, i can't really evaluate it on those terms. i was surprised by the end. good enough for me.

plus i love john cusack.