BridgeGate20.com

Just Dialogue 3

By Punkerslut

It’s all jus’ dialogue!

An Interview With Truth

It is almost popular now to casually remark on the negative
effects of smoking cigarettes. “Yeah, that’s almost as dangerous
as smoking,” one teen comments about the suggestion of jumping
off a bridge. His popularity rating gained 7 points, which would
be lost when he later made the comment, “That’s almost as sexy
as a nine year old boy!” When I talked with this teen, whom
asked that his identity be referred to as “Super X,” he said, “I
really thought I was cool with the guys when I they liked my
anti-smoking remark. He made me feel like a real part of the
team, because all night, I hadn’t said anything. I was still
dreaming about that Casey Lain video I saw earlier.” Then, he
shared his sorrows with me, “They made a mistake when I said a
nine year old boy… I meant because, most of the time, nine
year old boys are accompanied by really hot, late-30’s mothers.
Now that turns me on.” Then Super X had to depart my presence,
so that he could pick up a K-Mart catalogue for children’s
swimsuits.

While flipping through the channels of TeeVee (that glamorous
fuck-box), I saw a Truth commercial. Truth, for all of you who
have selective vision and can’t see propaganda, is an
anti-smoking organization. In this commercial, they piled up
dead bodies at the corporate headquarters of some smoking
business — well, dead body bags, and I’m only assuming they had
real bodies in them because they were heavy, and the people kept
shouting through a microphone, “Do you like killing people!?!?”
In another commercial ad, they drive a van through a rich
neighborhood and blast propaganda through a microphone, “We know
you invest stock in smoking businesses!” Now… Carrying dead
bodies and blasting noise in a neighborhood at 3 in the morning,
those are only misdemeanor crimes. Honestly, these commercials
look more like pro-mischief-ism than anti-smoking. Finally, one
commercial, they talked about something like the cowboys being
killed by smoking, and then they have horses dragging body bags
(again, with the bodies), and then there was some propaganda
terms thrown at me, which I think I will only benefit the reader
by not repeating. So, just what gives? Fortunately, I got an
interview with the people from Truth. The three whom I
interviewed were John, Susane, and Charles.

John: When I think about the big smoking corporations, I see the
face of Hitler.

Punkerslut: Really?

John: Yeah, and in a few years, they’ll have the Nuremburg
Trials again for everyone who has sold cigarettes.

Punkerslut: Do you think that smoking companies should be killed
for what they do?

John: Oh, most definitely. We’re like Gandhi, we try to change
society.

Punkerslut: In less than 37 seconds of this interview, you
managed to compare smoking companies to Hitler and yourself to
Gandhi. How do you respond to these accusations?

John: I think that, the media is biased, towards smoking
companies, because all of the smoking companies control the
media.

Punkerslut: Fascinating. Susane, do you have anything to add to
this?

Susane: What I really don’t like about chemists and drug users,
though, is they act like they know what they’re talking about.

Punkerslut: When they really don’t?

Susane: Yeah.

Punkerslut: And you, Charles?

[At this point, Charles starts waving his arms around and
drooling.]

Susane: It’s been worse ever since the accident.

Punkerslut: What happened?

Susane: He was hit by a truck, and the doctors had to surgically
remove his brain.

Punkerslut: I’m so sorry.

John: A truck, I add, which was paid by the smoking companies to
do this!

Punkerslut: The truck was paid?

John: Well…. yesh.

Punkerslut: Incredibly provocative.

Susane: Charles still does our commercials for us.

Punkerslut: I would have never of guessed…. but, moving on,
what do you think about your civil disobedience towards smoking
companies?

Susane: We’re fighting an oppressive system, Punker. We need
everyone’s help we can get.

Punkerslut: An oppressive system?

Susane: Yes… well, see… Smoking is bad.

Punkerslut: Is it?

Susane: It certainly is!

Punkerslut: Why?

[At this point, the three looked at each other with blank faces.
A minute would pass before someone spoke…]

John: Because… it’s not healthy?

Punkerslut: Fascinating. What if a person wants to smoke, out of
their own liberty?

Susane: See, that’s the thing… Smoking is bad.

Punkerslut: I would say you narrowly avoided answering the
question, but watching you avoid the question is like watching a
500 pound man jump a hurdle.

John: What do you mean, liberty?

At this point, each of them gave me their idea of a Utopian
society, while I nodded my head and wondered why I thought this
would be interesting. This sort of interview is something I
would not wish upon my worst enemy. But then, we go to the next
interview…

Planet of the Apes Interview

“Planet of the Apes,” the original 1968 film, was great. Of
course, it was based on a novel, and not some script writer’s
heroin-induced dreams. That is perhaps the greatest reason why
the film itself was magnificent. However, there were some
complaints against it. In my effort to discover them, I
interviewed the fans of “Planet of the Apes.”

Punkerslut: Hello, everyone.

Jack: Hey, slut.

Dave: Yo, homie.

Punkerslut: Uh, yes… What did you two think about the
beginning dialogue in this movie? Taylor talks to Landon,
telling him about his life, saying that the main reason that he
went on the trip was to live up to his American image. Taylor,
however, thinks that he himself left Earth because it was too
superficial. What do you think of these?

Jack: I didn’t really like that dialogue. It was too complicated.

Dave: I totally agree. I think Taylor should have been like,
“Man, that would suck if this was really earth and it was
inhabited by apes.”

Jack: Yeah, and Landon could say, “Yeah, that would really suck.
And like, this whole area is called the Forbidden Zone.” And
that token black guy could be like, “Whoa, totally. Fo’ shizzle,
my shnizzle!”

Dave: See, it wasn’t really necessary for him to go off on a
tangent like that about life. He should have been focused on the
possible ape-like dangers that lay ahead of him, instead of
talking like he landed from a spaceship on a new planet, which
he did, but that’s besides the point. Like, they could have
developed an anti-Zaeis campaign with slogans and stuff, that
way they could be prepared for Ape City.

Punkerslut: Hhhmmmm, I see…. What were both of your favorite
episodes?

Jack: MY favorite episode was the third one, where Dr. Zira goes
to Earth and attends Women’s Rights meetings, gets drunk, and
wears clothing from JC Penny.

Dave: Personally, I liked the fifth episode the best. I mean,
apes living among mankind, it was like a utopia, but then those
goddamned mutants had to come out of their caves and mess
everything up. That’s why I stopped recognizing wheelchair
people as human beings.

Punkerslut: Uuuuhhhh?… well, moving on… Was there anything
about the first episode that bothered either of you?

Jack: I think the apes should have been…. you know… big
breasted.

Punkerslut: What the hell are you talking about?

Jack: Honestly, I can’t stay focused on something for more than
six seconds unless sex is in…. what were we talking about?

Punkerslut: Dave, did you have any problems with the first
episode?

Dave: Besides the beginning dialogue, I really think Taylor
should have nailed that Nova girl. He shoulda’ really thrown her
to the floor. And Dr. Zauis shouldn’t have been the chief of
science. He shoulda’ been the chief of kick ass.

Punkerslut: Uuuummmm…. anything else, Dave?

Dave: Now that you mention it, it would have been really cool if
Charleton Heston had a gatling gun in that movie.

Punkerslut: And how could a gatling gun be explained?

Dave: I ‘unno….. he brought it with him from earth.

Punkerslut: They let him bring a gatling gun with him on the
space ship?

Dave: Well, they do bring that weird ice cream on space ships. I
don’t see why a gatling gun would be different.

Punkerslut: You’re probably right.

Dave: Yeah, I am. And like, Taylor would arrive at the city of
the apes, and he would be like, “Eat lead, apes… Det det det
det det….” And like, they could explode and stuff, and the
humans would learn to talk because, you know, guns and violence
are necessary to real communication…

Punkerslut: Okay, Dave, shutup…. Final question….. Would
either of you like to see another “Planet of the Apes” movie
made? Several years back, they remade the first episode. Should
they do the same to the second episode?

Jack: Well, they tried to. That was their intention. To remake
all of them.

Punkerslut: But…?

Jack: Their first remake was so piss-poor, they decided not to
torture humanity with more sequels.

Punkerslut: It’s good to see film directors with Humanitarian
ideals. We could only wish George Lucas had the same ideals
before he made Star Wars Episode 1, or before Steven Spielberg
made AI and pissed on the corpse of Kubrick, or before Steven
Segal made any movie at all.

Dave: It’s hard being the life of a cynic, isn’t it?

Punkerslut: You have no idea.

www.punkerslut.com

For Life, Punkerslut

AC : “Dysfunctional partnerships should be dissolved. The President should have divorced prior to indulging his sexual appetite. Sexual exclusivity is an integral - possibly the most important - section of the marriage contract. The President ignored his vows, dishonoured his word, breached his contract with the First Lady.”

DC : “People stay together only if they feel that the foundation upon which they based their relationship is still sound. Mr. Clinton and Mrs. Clinton redefined their marriage to exclude sexual exclusivity, an impossibility under the circumstances. But they did not exclude companionship and friendship. It is here that the President may have sinned, in lying to his best friend, his wife. Adultery is committed only when a party strays out of the confines of the marital contract. I postulate that the President was well within his agreement with Mrs. Clinton when he sought sexual gratification elsewhere.”

AC : “Adultery is a sin not only against the partner. The marriage contract is signed by three parties : the man, the woman and God between them. The President sinned against God. This cannot be ameliorated by any human approval or permission. Whether his wife accepted him as he is and disregarded his actions - is irrelevant. And if you are agnostic or an atheist, still you can replace the word ‘God’ by the words ‘Social Order’. President Clinton’s behaviour undermines the foundations of our social order. The family is the basic functional unit and its proper functioning is guaranteed by the security of sexual and emotional exclusivity. To be adulterous is to rebel against civilization. It is an act of high social and moral treason.”

DC : “While I may share your nostalgia - I am compelled to inform you that even nostalgia is not what it used to be. There is no such thing as ‘The Family’. There are a few competing models, some of them involving only a single person and his or her offspring. There is nothing to undermine. The social order is in such a flux that it is impossible to follow, let alone define or capture. Adultery is common. This could be a sign of the times - or the victory of honesty and openness over pretension and hypocrisy. No one can cast a stone at President Clinton in this day and age.”

AC : “But that’s precisely it ! The President is not a mirror, a reflection of the popular will. Our President is a leader with awesome powers. These powers were given to him to enable him to set example, to bear a standard - to be a standard. I do demand of my President to be morally superior to me - and this is no hypocrisy. This is a job description. To lead, a leader needs to inspire shame and guilt through his model. People must look up to him, wish they were like him, hope, dream, aspire and conspire to be like him. A true leader provokes inner tumult, psychological conflicts, strong emotions - because he demands the impossible through the instance of his personality. A true leader moves people to sacrifice because he is worthy of their sacrifice, because he deserves it. He definitely does not set an example of moral disintegration, recklessness, short-sightedness and immaturity. The President is given unique power, status and privileges - only because he has been recognized as a unique and powerful and privileged individual. Whether such recognition has been warranted or not is what determines the quality of the presidency.”

DC : “Not being a leader, or having been misjudged by the voters to be one - do not constitute impeachable offences. I reject your view of the presidency. It is too fascist for me, it echoes with the despicable Fuhrerprinzip. A leader is no different from the people that elected him. A leader has strong convictions shared by the majority of his compatriots. A leader also has the energy to implement the solutions that he proposes and the willingness to sacrifice certain aspects of his life (like his privacy) to do so. If a leader is a symbol of his people - then he must, in many ways, be like them. He cannot be as alien as you make him out to be. But then, if he is alien by virtue of being superior or by virtue of being possessed of superhuman qualities - how can we, mere mortals, judge him ? This is the logical fallacy in your argument : if the President is a symbol, then he must be very much similar to us and we should not subject him to a judgement more severe than the one meted to ourselves. If the President is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, or otherwise, superhuman - then he is above our ability to judge. And if the President is a standard against whom we should calibrate our lives and actions - then he must reflect the mores of his times, the kaleidoscopic nature of the society that bred him, the flux of norms, conventions, paradigms and doctrines which formed the society which chose him. A standard too remote, too alien, too detached - will not do. People will ignore it and revert to other behavioural benchmarks and normative yardsticks. The President should, therefore, be allowed to be “normal”, he should be forgiven. After all forgiveness is as prominent a value as being truthful.

AC : “This allowance, alas, cannot be made. Even if I were to accept your thesis about ‘The President as a regular Human Being’ - still his circumstances are not regular. The decisions that he faces - and very frequently - affect the lives of billions. The conflicting pressures that he is under, the gigantic amounts of information that he must digest, the enormity of the tasks facing him and the strains and stresses that are surely the results of these - all call for a special human alloy. If cracks are found in this alloy in room temperature - it raises doubts regarding its ability to withstand harsher conditions. If the President lies concerning a personal matter, no matter how significant - who will guarantee veracity rather than prevarication in matters more significant to us ? If he is afraid of a court of law - how is he likely to command our armies in a time of war ? If he is evasive in his answers to the Grand Jury - how can we rely on his resolve and determination when confronting world leaders and when faced with extreme situations ? If he loses his temper over petty matters - who will guarantee his coolheadedness when it is really required ? If criminal in small, household matters - why not in the international arena ?”

DC : “Because this continuum is false. There is little correlation between reactive patterns in the personal realms - and their far relatives in the public domain. Implication by generalization is a logical fallacy. The most adulterous, querulous, and otherwise despicable people have been superb, far sighted statesmen. The most generous, benevolent, easygoing ones have become veritable political catastrophes. The public realm is not the personal realm writ large. It is true that the leader’s personality interacts with his circumstances to yield policy choices. But the relevance of his sexual predilections in this context is dubious indeed. It is true that his morals and general conformity to a certain value system will influence his actions and inactions - influence, but not determine them. It is true that his beliefs, experience, personality, character and temperament will colour the way he does things - but rarely what he does and rarely more than colour. Paradoxically, in times of crisis, there is a tendency to overlook the moral vices of a leader (or, for that matter, his moral virtues). If a proof was needed that moral and personal conduct are less relevant to proper leadership - this is it. When it really matters, we ignore these luxuries of righteousness and get on with the business of selecting a leader. Not a symbol, not a standard bearer, not a superman. Simply a human being - with all the flaws and weaknesses of one - who can chart the water and navigate to safety flying in the face of adverse circumstances.”

AC : “Like everything else in life, electing a leader is a process of compromise, a negotiation between the ideal and the real. I just happen to believe that a good leader is the one who is closer to the ideal. You believe that one has to be realistic, not to dream, not to expect. To me, this is mental death. My criticism is a cry of the pain of disillusionment. But if I have to choose between deluding myself again and standing firmly on a corrupt and degenerate ground - I prefer, and always will, the levity of dreams.”

About the Author

Sam Vaknin is the author of Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited and After the Rain - How the West Lost the East. He is a columnist for Central Europe Review, United Press International (UPI) and eBookWeb and the editor of mental health and Central East Europe categories in The Open Directory, Suite101 and searcheurope.com.

Visit Sam’s Web site at http://samvak.tripod.com

Google Adsense is a unique program that can produce a lot of revenues over time if you are patient. Here is an overview of the basics of Google Adsense.

To understand the basics of Google Adsense, you first have to understand Google Adwords. Adwords is a program where people can bid per click to buy space on platforms Google supports with advertisements. This includes the ads you see on the top and down the right column of results when you search on Google.

Adsense is the result of a crafty little idea wherein Google essentially wanted to maximize distribution of Adwords. With Adsense, Google took the unique approach of letting independent sites place certain types of Adwords advertisements on their pages. This type of advertising is known within the Adwords platform as contextual advertising and advertisers can opt out of it. Most do not.

The beauty of Google Adsense is it creates additional revenue sources for sites. For instance, lets assume someone bids 60 cents in Adwords for the placement of their ads. A site then shows those ads through the Adsense program. When an ad is clicked by a person on that site, Google charges the advertiser and splits the money with the site in question. The exact amount of the split is not provided by Google, but is known to reflect the quality of traffic, click through rates and other aspects.

The Google Adsense program is incredibly simple to use. You sign up through Google and, once approved, are able to select the format of ads you want to list on the pages of your site. Google then immediately generates a java script, which you copy and paste into the html of your pages. You cannot change the code, but you can select any old location on your page you want.

Once you have inserted the code and republished your site, it is time to sit back and watch. Google provides stats within your account area. You can see basic click and revenue information as well as monthly totals. Once you reach a total of $100 in revenues, Google will kick out a check to you. The check is issued more or less at the end of the month following the one in which you hit the magic $100 amount.

Obviously, there is more to Google Adsense if you want to make a full business out of it, but this provides the basics of the game. You will be tempted to click the links on your page. Don’t! Google will ban you from the program.

That is the popular and, thank God (if you’ll pardon the use of the G name) the politically correct feeling among most Christians today. You will recall that in the second book of the Potter series, The Chamber Of Secrets, Harry Potter alone heard the voice of the basilisk. When he confided in his two friends about it, one told him that even in the wizarding world, hearing voices is not a good thing. Like art imitating reality, can’t we say that even in our non-wizarding world, it’s not a good thing to be hearing voices. Whether those voices be God’s or someone else’s voice.

Most of us would agree that hearing voices in your head, voices that aren’t there, this is indeed a bad thing. In fact it used to be a sign of being crazy. But what if the person claims to be hearing God’s voice? How can we know if God is speaking to this guy such that we can’t immediately lock him up in the looney bin?

The obvious answer is that we, the non-Harry Potter-hearing-voices-people, have to recall the eleven different ways that God speaks to mankind. Some of those ways are observable and objectively verifiable. Others are not observable but they can be verified. Examples in the first category are the times that God spoke to Moses out loud and all the other Israelites could hear their conversation. Or when God the Father spoke to Jesus during his baptism, and the others gathered around heard that talk. Or when the wayward prophet Balaam had a talking to by his donkey. Makes you wonder who the dumb animal was at that time, doesn’t it?

Only daring men and women choose to hear God’s voice today. Many christians don’t hear God because they don’t know what exercises to do that would enable them to hear his voice. While other christians choose not to hear God out of fear of what their friends will say about them. They will likely be considered to be crazy, religious fanatics, and attempting to glorify themselves. Worst yet, those christians will be imposing their morality on the rest of us because they claim to have heard God. Right?

The value of hearing God is that it saves lives. I recall the time that God told me to pray for a certain Dee Jay (Strawberry Jan) that used to be on KEZY 1190 AM. He told me that she was in danger and I was to pray for her often. So I did, even though I didn’t know her, and knew nothing of her personal or professional life. Six years later she was nearly killed by a drunk driver on the freeway. Finally about 15 years later I met Strawberry Jan in person. I am certain that my prayers were central to God’s plan to save her life in that accident, prevent certain injuries and lessen others during the years.

If you are courageous and want to hear God, then contact me toll free at (877) 230-0100 or by email at sgtrepo@comcast.net
A Mark B. Replogle Article / October 2004

All rights reserved.
Copyright 2004 by Mark B. Replogle

No part of this Article may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

About the Author

Mr. Replogle is an Attorney at Law in private practice in California. He served with the Marine Corps Central Command last year, in the Office of the Staff Judge Advocate. Mr. Replogle wrote the books Saviour Clinton: An Evil American King, and How To Hear and Discern The Voice of God.

The URL at the bottom of this article contains a list of the
best online poker sites available along with a short
description. If you already play online then you should still
check out the ones listed. All the sites I have listed are both
Macintosh and PC friendly. Also each site rewards the player
differently. For example the site listed with the highest
recomendation allows you to cash in player points for tournament
tickets. It has a large selection wich you may choose from and
that vary in point cost so that you don’t need too many to start
taking advantage of this feature. Take a few minutes and look
through the list and see what catches your eye. Also the top
rated site has a 500% first deposit bonus up to $1000 wich is
the highest I have ever seen offered by any of the onliine poker
sites. Just highlight the URL and paste it into your browser.
Good luck at the tables.

http://javapoker.webhop.info/