Sting - They Dance Alone

I love this song.


 Hey Mr. Pinochet You've sown a bitter crop
It's foreign money that supports you
One day the money's going to stop
No wages for your torturers
No budget for your guns
Can you think of your own mother
Dancin' with her invisible son

Snow White Ride at WDW

This one is so dated, and corny, but I love it. No doubt they'll replace it someday with a newer, stupid ride based on another film. RIP Mister Toad.

Breathe - Hands to Heaven

All of the best music was in the 80's...

Enya "Watermark" and how I see the cover...

Every time I look at the Enya "Watermark" album, the fruity new age album of the late 80's, it looks sort of like a Spanish wrestler to the left spewing out a lot of red soup (or blood maybe?  Ewww...)

Maybe I've just studied it too long, or maybe, just maybe, you'll never see the album the same way again...?

Does anyone even listen to this album anymore?  I still get a kick out of it, although I still cannot understand anything that she's singing, either in Celt or English.

Annoying Orange - Ask President Marshmallow #1

This is the president that we should have elected...

How Much Time Can a Lay Elder Give to Ministry? | 9Marks

My thoughts on this 9Marks post on How Much Time Can a Lay Elder Give to Ministry?  There's just so much that I disagree with about this, but here's what I responded.  I can't help but feel like this is starving the flock and dividing the bride by men who can't make the church their full-time committment:


If I need open-heart surgery, I will NOT go to the guy who is an IT pro during the week but does double-bypass operations on the weekend...

If I need to take a flight to Europe, I will NOT go to the guy who repairs toasters during the week but flies DC-10's on the weekend...

How much more different than going to a man entrusted with the double-edged sword of God's word?  Why would I submit myself, my wife, and my children to the teaching of a novice, who isn't in the word as a full-time profession?  Save the baby-food teachers for the pentacostal and KJVO churches, and give me a spiritual leader who is a full-time teacher, full-time-theologian and full-time shepherd, and not waht Lloyd-Jones called a "hobbyist".

Windows 8 - I want my START button!!!

Been fiddling more with Windows 8, and starting to hate it more and more.  The Start button is something so intuitive, so ingrained in my nature, that I can't function well without it.  Plus why is is that if I open anything in Win 8, I can't close it?  Where did the X in the upper-right corner go?  What crazy person redesigned this OS?  It's madness!!!

R.I.P. Twinkies

Sorry to hear that the Twinkie empire was driven under by stingy union practices, but since I gave up eating these long ago (too much hydrogenated oil and preservatives and what not) it doesn't bother me much.  Still, going to miss seeing that iconic cowboy Twinkie character with the lasso.  Happy now, unions?  Everyone lost their jobs, and the world has lost the cowboy cupcake, and the punchline for many a joke about unhealthy eating.

Then again, those things never age, so they should just fill up a warehouse with them and then gradually auction them off over time for an exorbitant price.  They should at least preserve one in a museum somewhere...

Bing. Blah.

I've heard Bing referred to as the "Myspace of search engines", and there's definitely that feeling when I use it.  I don't get into it, and I really don't see what Bing offers that Google doesn't, other than an extremely stingy point-earning system that can be redeemed for gift cards or something.  To be honest, though, my searching is so scattered and irregular and often done without even thinking of a point system, that I'd just as soon use Goodsearch, that gives money to charity with search, and designate a charity then forget all about points being earned, because in the back of my head I know that it's automatically going to help others.  Otherwise, I'm wondering how many Bing points I have, and if I should redeem them or not, or just let them get forgotten.

I've compared the results of Bing vs. Google, and Google just seems so much more robust with what it returns.  I would think that both engines would have similar capacity to seek out and catalog the web - images/video, etc, but Google is just the champ.  I prefer Goodsearch for most general searches for information (99% of the time I'm just looking up the definition of a word of a bank phone number) but if I want to find something of depth, like what the group "Breathe" has been recording since the 1980's (apparently very little) then it's going to take something of Google magnitude.  As for Bing, I just don't see the appeal (nice splash images on their main page, though...)

Avengers Alliance PVP Time-Wasting

Playing Avengers Alliance has taught me that time-wasting can be a deep, bottomless well, especially when you're in player-vs-player mode, where there are some many other people out there in the world who waste just as much time as you do, if not more.

Although I'll give this guy credit: it looks like he's got Ghost Rider with Spiderman on a leash (it's actually not - just a strange placement, but nevertheless funny...)

Why I hate football

A man who plays football says to the world: "I hope to injure my spinal column in such a devastating way, through repeatedly being tackled, that I will be forced to live with chronic pain for the rest of my life, popping Motrin like M&Ms..."

A man who sits motionless watching football on television is telling his wife: "I'd rather not have intimacy with you, but I'd rather spend two hours watching young, muscular men grapple with one another."

A man who sits motionless watching football on television is telling his wife: "Those half-naked women cheering on the side-lines for every major team? I'd rather stare lustfully at them than at you..."

A man who sits motionless watching football on television is telling his wife: "A constant stream of commercials for beer, junk food, and semi-pornographic movies are far more important to me than quality time with you."

A man who sits motionless watching football on television is telling his children: "I'd rather watch strapping, fit young men through a ball around to one another, instead of spending time outside playing games with you."

A man who sits motionless watching football on television is telling his wife: "I'd rather sit inert and let fat congeal around my heart."

A man who sits motionless watching football on television is telling himself: "I'm wasting hours of my life watching men run around and grab one another for hours, followed by some of the men hauled off to hospitals, while the rest hurry off to take a collective shower. What have I accomplished?"

Raising the dead?

This makes me just a tad uncomfortable... Of course, the context of Jesus message where he commanded the raising of the dead... wasn't that directed to the apostles? Regardless, I'm not sure I agree with this guys exegesis, and a video like this would beg the question: how often should we do this? all the time? Should Christians just hang out at the morgue and just raise everyone? Or was this a passage directed at Jesus' immediate followers, and not necessarily one we should be applying to us today?

Human Torch vs. Human Torch

Marvel Avengers Alliance - a tremendously fun time-waster.  PVP - even more addictive.  But found a serious drag in PVP combat, and that's when Human Torch is paired against the Human Torch.  Both characters have a "flame on!" ability that causes them to regenerate health, so when it's down to these two clowns, the fight can really, really drag...

Why Go to Seminary?

Gospel Coalition had an excellent post today on Why Go to Seminary?  I would have left a comment but, alas, I'm either banned or Chrome is just acting up (likely the former - dang, I need to stop being so snarky in my comments, I know that's wrong.)  But I love everything about this post: the three or so readers of this blog know that I really do NOT like the idea of "lay elders" or "hobbyist preachers" or "tent-making elders", as I think it's ultimately starving the flock by having it led by a novice.  There are rare exceptions, sure, but not everyone is a Spurgeon...

There's much I enjoy, but I thought this was a particularly good point about the topic of friends built at seminary, something that the lay-elder can't really benefit from (or even, for that fact, the lone wolf online student, unless they are very lively in online chats and discussions, but not sure how far you'd be able to get with that.)  Here's a quote that's right on:

Good seminaries strengthen the unity between churches by building bonds between ministers. The friendships you build while you're in seminary will strengthen your ministry for years to come. The guy who sits next to you in 8 a.m. Hebrew class may someday lead his church to support your missionaries. The couple you meet at orientation may pray for you and your family for the rest of your life. The classmate you study with for a final may someday labor beside you for reformation in your denomination. So go to seminary, devote yourself to reading, and learn all you can from your professors. But don't fail to invest time in relationships while you're there.

All around Houston, there are plenty of novice pastors who need to be reading this TGC post.

Texas Secession - could something like this really happen?

I've been following some of the news stories about Texas succession, and this has me wondering if I'm situated in a state that will soon be it's own country... again.... or if this is just a lot of hype.  Of course, last time I checked, the secession petition was over 25,000, so maybe there's a possibility.  Or not.
Here's the petition, currently at 26,526.

(And I wonder if writing about this is going to put me on some watch list?  (I'm probably on a watch list by the Global Vasectomy Society...)

I'm not saying to sign this, but rather consider the consequences: Texas is a state with a fairly good economy, with plenty places that I've visited that seem to be all but recession proof.  Houses are affordable, and the jobs seem plentiful in Houston.  There wouldn't be a military, but then again, everyone I know on my street (heck, almost everyone I know in Texas) is armed to the teeth already, so wonder if something like this would work?  I expect the MSM will bury this with some stupid celebrity news stories, but what if it actually took off?

Hermeneutical Backflips

Was engaged in an interesting discussion this weekend with a friend about the Christian practice of "cherry-picking" parts of the New Testament that we like and don't like, particularly in reference to head coverings (I Cor. 11).  There are Christians who get so fired up over homos, but to be honest, I think this is a secondary issue to something like head coverings, which are spelled out pretty clearly as an ordinance by the apostle Paul, it was a practice followed for centuries, and only around the 1950's did Christians somehow "figure out" that head covering no longer allied to women (conveniently, around the same time that feminism came onto the scene.)  Wives of pastors and theologians don't like to wear head coverings, so they tell their husbands this, and their theologian husbands then do the hermeneutical back-flipping of explaining that head coverings of I Cor. 11 were actually "contextual" and "don't apply anymore" - not, I would argue, out of faithfulness to the Bible, but rather, to cover their backsides from the wrath of their wives.

Just a hunch.  Here's a nice summary of I Corinthians, a wonderful book of the NT...


Summary of 1st Corinthians

Kid's eat free! (oh, but with a catch!)

"Kids eat free!"  Well, actually, TWO kids can eat free, because the average, normal family would never freakishly have more than two nuclear children, so we ONLY support giving a free meal to children who fall into the nuclear model of only two children.  Two parents = two children.  What, you had more than two kids?  You freak!  Don't bother bringing all of your children into our restaurant, because they won't get to eat for free!

Three kids!?  Freakish!
Four!?  Are you insane!!?
Five or more?  Call Obama!!!  Time for population control measures!

Coming soon:  Free dinner for all men who can prove they had a vasectomy!

"Superman IV" - the Greatest Super Hero Film EVER!

I maintain that "Superman IV: The Quest for Peace", is not only the greatest of the Superman movies, and not only the greatest of all super hero films, but could possibly be considered one of the greatest films ever made.  This post was spawned from my recent viewing of the 'Avengers' film, which to me was just a big "meh" with a lot of CGI effects, but no soul (more on this in a future post).  Not like Superman IV!  Here are some thoughts as to why this film is so fantastic:

• This was Christopher Reeve's last run as the man of steel, and by the fourth film, he had the character perfected.  All of the nuance of this hero, straight from the comic book, perfectly depicted on the silver screen.  Of course, meddling with human affairs across numerous countries and taking away millions of dollars in military weaponry to destroy it in the sun, all with a universal acceptance of the UN delegates, did seem a little peculiar.  But bah, who cares about plausibility in a Superman film?
• Lex Luther returns, and he creates the Nuclear Man, the coolest of all villains, even cooler than Zod!  With all of Superman's powers plus crazy fingernails that cause nuclear poison, too!  Shame that he was so weak that when the sun was taken away he'd lose his powers, but thankfully, the moon orbits the sun, so he wasn't in the shadow of the moon for very long before regaining his powers again.
• Lois Lane is back too, looking like she's aged 20 years since the first film!  Apparently Superman's "memory eraser" kiss must have had some sort of residual aging side-effect.  But hey, all that more intriguing!

I could go on and on, but the fact remains, Superman IV is the greatest super hero film ever.  I'll have more to say about this cinematic gem in future posts.  "Now Neophytos!" you might say, "What about the OTHER Superman films?"  And to that I say, "meh."

• The first one was decent, but it did tend to drag with a little too much Marlon at the beginning.
• The second one was ok, except for all of the blatant commercialism, and the totally icky romance with Superman and Lois Lane, including the ultra-icky 'Fortress of Solitude' segments.  Yuck!
• The third one was terrible.  It was more Richard Pryor than anything else.  All I remember of that film is the opening, with Pryor standing in line in a smoky, stinky unemployment office, begging a smoke from some guy, while everyone around him smoked.  I've been unemployed, and been in unemployment offices, and they don't look anywhere near that smokey.  Oh, but Robert Vaughn was good in that... wonder if he's still alive.
• Then Superman IV blew away all of the others.  
• I refuse to accept the cannonicity of 'superman returns'.  It never happened, and if it did, I refuse to accept that Superman was a creep sneaking into windows late at night (and why didn't he just stun Luthor and his crony on the big kryptonite continent from a distance?  And how did he manage to pick up that thing, anyhow?  Ridiculous.)

I hear there's a new Superman film coming out.  Doubt it will be as good as "Superman IV".  This one was THE best of them all.  I need to go and watch it again...

'Lincoln' movie - Looks stupid to me

I've given up on Spielberg - he hasn't made a decent film in decades, and I doubt Lincoln will be much better.

• Why'd they pick an actor with such a wussy voice for Lincoln? 
• And hasn't the Lincoln story been told to death in cinema?
• And do they really expect me to believe that the writers in Hollywood will be telling an objective, historically-accurate story?  (history is just like science: it can be bent and warped and mangled depending on who it's being taught by)
• And biggest question:  where are the vampires?

'Walking Dead' - I don't get into it

I worked through most of the first and second seasons of 'Walking Dead', and I just don't get into it.  It's got plenty of creepiness, but the problem is that the show is so stilted and padded with unbelievably dull and unconvincing character dialog that's so frequently dry and irritating, to the point that I just skipped ahead after one boring conversation after another.

The sub-plots seem might contrived, such as Sheriff Rock's boy getting shot by a deer hunter, a hunter who conveniently has a doctor nearby to bring the boy to (oh, but he's a veterinarian, so that helps tone down the ridiculousness factor.... riiiiight.  He's a veterinarian that knows all about removing bullets and fixing ruptured internal arteries and doing blood transfusions, because those are all things that veterinarians do on a regular basis..."Hurry!  We need to find another Saint Bernard with type O-negative blood!")

The violence, and periodic sexual content, definitely makes this a non-family friendly program, and is disgusting enough to make this a non-rational-neophytos-friendly program too.  Killing zombies by stabbing them in the eye sockets with a screwdriver... oh yeah, thanks for that unpleasant bit of nausea...

What floors me is that they have a "Walking Dead" shooting game in the toy section of the local Walmart.  I ranted about this before, but it bears repeating, if for no other reason than a justification to add 'walmart' as a label to this post.  Why do they carry garbage like that?

The big problem with "Walking Dead" is that there's no clear picture of where this gang is going and why.  By the end of season 2, it seemed like the Rick guy was flipping out, and then the camera pans to a prison.  Why?  Is it filled with zombies or is Rick going to lock everyone up?  Well, frankly, I don't care enough to find out and I won't be bothering with this goofy show anymore.

Besides, the thing about zombies is, how do they see?  Wouldn't flies and bugs be all over their rotting eye sockets?  So what do they do, smell the living humans?  Even that is wacky as the soft nose tissue would all start rotting and falling off too.  Little details like this, though, don't matter to the story-writers with AMC, I suppose, but it is one of those things I wonder about (that, and how is it that with time and bacterial decomposition zombies don't just all fall apart, as Poe once wrote, into a "nearly liquid mass of loathsome—of detestable putrescence."  If these zombies are a result of disease, what exactly holds them together an animates them?

Well, whatever.  It's been a slow day and I posted way too much here.  I need a life.

Tax break for Vasectomy?

I wonder if Obamacare will someday give tax breaks for men to get vasectomies? Seems like the type of stupid thing that this administration would do. I suppose this is more of a brief, Twitter-style thought, but then again, I hate Twitter and won't use it, so suppose I have to put this thought here...

Dixie-Chick Foot-in-Mouth Disease

Years ago I remember all of the stink about the Dixie Chicks and how the squirrelly-little lead singer Natalie Maines (who sounds more like the whines of a tortured cat than actual singing) made some remarks about George W and the war in Iraq, and there was a big hoopla that followed. What really struck me, though, wasn't necessarily the comment, but rather, the nutty foot-in-mouth syndrome that resulted when the following happens:

A celebrity/actor/singer makes a nutty comment that has NOTHING to do with their craft!

I don't know why this isn't more common sense. If you're a singer... sing, and be quiet about politics. If you're an actor... act, and shut your mouth about politics. For crying out loud, I pay to see Matt Damon jump from rooftop to rooftop trying to recover his lost memory, not to hear his snooty opinions about politicians. Unless you are a political pundit full-time, well, don't give up your day job to let us know what you think. We don't care! You just come across looking stupid, you alienate people, and your sales go down the toilet! There are seriously actors that I will not support or watch simply because I can't stand political remarks and comments they've made.

A recent example I can think of, oddly, was Dr. Andrew Weil, the bald, bushy-bearded health and nutrition guy. I really used to enjoy him and his teaching, but I was listening to one of his books the other day, and for no reason at all, he starts ranting and railing about stem cell research and how terrible the opposition of the so-called "religious right" is. What the heck? One minute he's giving valid nutritional and scientific data, the next he's spewing out his political views. I seriously stopped listening and I won't listen to anything else he has to say. Why? BECAUSE I WANT TO HEAR HIM TALK ABOUT NUTRITION, NOT HIS INANE POLITICAL VIEWS!!! It's not just because I do believe that stem cells represent the very earliest - and viable - stage of human life, but it's because I didn't get the audio book to listen to him talk about that. I got it to listen to science and nutrition, not pushy appeals for Josef Mengele-style human experimentation on human life and inane political accusations.

(and for the record, I'm NOT a part of any "religious right" - I consider myself more of a "religious removed-from-politics". Politics revolt me, and no one, left or right, fairly represents Christianity, so I'd prefer to separate my beliefs with anything going on in Washington - especially from characters like Sarah Palin. I've studied enough history to know that when Catholics and Anglicans run the State, that it's the genuinely faithful Christians who live peacefully and believe the truth of the Bible that are the most heavily persecuted, tortured and killed. But I'm getting off-topic...)

Dr. Weil - when you read this, do me a favor: talk about vitamins, nutrition, supplements, exercise, probiotics, organic farming, raw milk, clean water, etc. Leave your sophomoric political views out of things. You lost my support. And this goes for all of you singers and actors. To put it another way...

(sing to the melody of Stevie Wonder's most awesome "Higher Ground")
Singers.... keep on singin'
Actors.... keep on actin'
(and keep your politics out of it!)

BTW - I've long wondered what it would look like if Dr. Andrew Weil and butter-cooking woman Paula Deen had a child. Well, via the magic of Photoshop, here you go!

"Super Earths" - and why aren't we there yet?

Stories like this one about the potential of other earth-like planets really has me wondering why we aren't there already.  This is the type of thing that scientists should be concentrating, not with nonsensical speculations about apes turning into men and other valueless recreations.  If anyone believes that "science has all the answers" (which it doesn't....  It has some good answers, and a lot of BAD one's too, like asbestos, chemical warfare, killer pharma, nuclear waste and fallout, etc) should realize that space exploration is THE thing to be focusing on.  Not stupidity about fish turning into lizards, but rather, how the heck do we get working warp engines.

If you go to a bookstore, instead of seeing shelves filled with goofballs speculating about stupid things like evolution, there should be TOMES of books about space travel, star ships, and warp engines (the stuff of Star Trek should be the stuff of reality by now.)  There's nothing I hate more than going to a science website or magazine and reading pages about neanderthal nonsense.  For crying out loud, get us into space first, and then speculate your silly caveman ideas!

If I was a scientist, that would be my focus and path.  As it stands, I nearly failed every science class I took because, while I like the ideas, I hate the actual study.  Go figure.

Space exploration should be THE prime focus of all science, followed closely by the science of making the environment safer, followed then by the science of making food and water safer and cleaner.  But I don't hear nearly enough about these subjects, and instead it's just scientific monkey business.

10 Questions a Pro-Choice Candidate Is Never Asked by the Media

Gospel coalition had this post recently: 10 Questions a Pro-Choice Candidate Is Never Asked by the Media

But I think they missed out on the biggest one:  "What about the medical side effects of abortion?  Are women being fairly and honestly informed about the medical consequences of a surgical abortion, both immediate and long-term?"  From a strictly naturalistic viewpoint, abortion is NEVER safe.  It's foolish to ever apply a word like that to a procedure in which a woman has an unborn child surgically destroyed and vacuumed from the body.  A back-alley abortion could be considered "more" dangerous compared to a hospital-setting abortion, sure, but even at a hospital, or a posh abortion clinic, the fact remains: when a woman gets a DNC, it isn't safe, and there are plenty of medical risks such as uterine puncture, hemorrhaging, scarring, internal bleeding, side-effects from the medication, etc, etc.

Yes, natural childbirth is dangerous, I'll agree, but I think comparing abortion to natural childbirth is something of a false dichotomy. Natural childbirth, by it's very nature, is a natural process in which a woman, with minimal (if any) intervention, delivers a child. It doesn't need to be done in a hospital, and technically can be done without a doctor or nurses or major intervention of any major degree. Not so abortion. You can't just "naturally" have an abortion: there are doctors are nurses required, and drugs, and for a standard D&C-style procedure, there needs to be a hospital room, medical equipment, drugs, and a lot of HUMAN intervention, which can in many respects be prone to error (check out some of the YouTube "abortion clinic 9-11 calls" sometime).

 Abortion clinics generally do NOT have all of the full medical facilities/specialists that a standard hospital ER will have, so if something goes wrong during the abortion surgery, a 9-11 call needs to be made to take the woman from the abortion clinic to the hospital. The abortion-breast cancer link is another issue as well. Plenty of good research suggesting a connection, and even more convincing that there is a risk is the fact that mainstream media routinely buries these stories about a connection - and if the MSM buries a story, you know there's truth to it. And if there is no connection, then where on earth is this epic breast cancer epidemic coming from lately?

Abortion is never safe, regardless of where and how it's done, and women need to be adequately informed.  Laws should mandate that women are fully informed before the surgery so that they know exactly what the risks are.  There needs to be more objective research done into the abortion/cancer risk as well.

Things I learned from the 2012 election...

This last election was all about Obama vs. a lesser version of Obama
Mitt wasn't really all that different from Obama.  He wouldn't have come into office and radically cut back government and spending.  It would have just been more of the same.  Honestly, I don't care for Obama's platform or his grizzly, unborn-child-hating policies, but I find I care just as less for Mormon-cult-following Romney.  Yeah, I voted for Romney, but only as a protest against the incumbent, and not to support the cultist (in fact, from a religious standpoint, I'd rather have a nominal-Muslim like Obama in office than a Mormon and a Roman Catholic.  The idea of a Roman Catholic president is the stuff of nightmares, as it's a much worse cult than Mormonism that teaches a grotesque, satanic blending of church and state, with a long bloody history of burning baptists like me.

The mainstream media is a joke
The MSM is just a giant Obama hype machine and...

You know what... I'm ending this post before I even get going, because a giant lightning bolt of realization just hit me:  I really don't care.  No more politics tags for me.  I'm sick of it all, and I'd rather write about something else.

There is no such thing as a vegetarian

I've been thinking about the fact that, as human beings, there really is no such thing as a vegetarian, or, more precisely, someone who's existence does not exist at the cost of other lives.  I don't care about arbitrary and nonsensical distinctions like vegetarian or vegan or ova-lacto-vegan and similar stupidity:  just being alive, your soul inhabits a shell that is covered with bacteria, good and bad, and that your own body is a bacteria-destroying machine from birth to death.  A bacteria is a living organism, just as much as a cow is, and simply by existing, you kill bacteria.  Your gut and digestive system daily kills countless microscopic organisms.  Just being alive, you destroy other lives.  And there's no way to be alive, and be human, without doing so, unless you were just a brain in a jug of chemicals, I suppose.

So really, there are just varying degrees of being carnivorous.  You can be on the low side, and be a living, breathing bacteria killer, killing countless microscopic organisms daily, or on the high side, like me, and enjoy BLTs for lunch while also subsequently having my body killing bacteria.

The point is this:  you can't be alive without killing something.  Depending on the plants you eat, like cabbage, you'd have to kill the plant to get the cabbage on your plate.  And even a fruitarian, eating only fruits that fall from trees, would have to kill grass walking to the tree, or kill bugs and organisms on the ground by walking, or driving, or just periodically snorting a fruit fly up the nose.
Our bodies are non-stop bacteria killers.  Bacteria is no less alive than a cow or a fish.  There is no such thing as a vegetarian.  We all take lives deliberately or in-deliberately, whether or not we like it.

George Lucas: Epic Sellout

I've been thinking about the news recently about George Lucas selling out  (figuratively and literally) the Star Wars franchise to Disney, and I frankly don't care anymore.  The Star Wars franchise is so overly-marketed and so saturated with garbage, that it's impossible to tell what fits into the actual universe and what doesn't.  I've found myself getting sick of Star Wars over the last few years, especially with the Clone Wars, which seems to just be a video game with far too much light saber and ever more panning of a otherwise boring transition time between Episode 2 and 3 (we know Anakin goes bad, and we know Palpatine is the puppet master of everything, and it's just puppet-characters all fighting one another, so what's the appeal of the show anyhow?)

But more than anything with this story of Lucas selling Disney  I think the lamest thing of all is would be that he sold the one token feature of his empire that really gave him identity.  Sure, he was known for American Graffiti  Indiana Jones (making it great initially and also ruining it years later), Willow, and that dull sci-fi film with the bald people.  Oh, and Howard the Duck. But Star Wars was THE thing he was known for, and he just off and sold the one token identification that you think of when you think of George Lucas.  I guess I just don't get it.  Maybe he's like me and he's just sick of Star Wars.  "Here, take it, pay me for it, and do what you want with it."

It has no appeal to me.  I could care less about an episode 7, and if it was made, would likely wait for it to hit NetFlix instead of wasting the money.  I think George should have just wrapped up the series and put it to rest.  Disney is just going to goof it up, or have Gore Verbinski direct it with a dull and repetitive Hans Zimmer score, and chock it full of unrealistic and non-convincing Pixar special effects.  Blah.  I don't care.

George, you should have just put the franchise to rest yourself, buddy.

TEEEL: 88MPH