Log in

No account? Create an account
LiveJournal for shoefly.

View:User Info.
You're looking at the latest 20 entries. Missed some entries? Then simply jump back 20 entries.

Wednesday, December 26th, 2007

Subject:even lower
Time:11:35 am.
Mood: disappointed.
 Yet another revelation that doesn't seem to be doing it's job... "The only reason why this happened to me is because you wanted me to do that."  Of course... but not quite.  That's why you can't grow.
  I feel like the clearance shelf on Black Friday... The cause of so much stress and hostility towards others when all I want to do is offer everyone a good deal.  

I have so many reasons for my anger and know that I am responsible.  I learn and grow from my mistakes... you repeat them.  There is a chip in the vase, and you buy a new one... I fix it.
Everything is replaceable to you.  You don't grasp the meaning of "unconditional", and this is why it won't work.
Comments: Read 1 orAdd Your Own.

Time:11:20 am.
The ode to you magoo... Happy Birthday Stump ;)
Comments: Add Your Own.

Tuesday, August 21st, 2007

Time:8:59 am.
Mood: amused.
   It's been a loooooong time...
Comments: Read 1 orAdd Your Own.

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2004

Time:12:17 am.
Mood: full.
"It's not wrong to love the avacado".
Comments: Read 3 orAdd Your Own.

Monday, March 22nd, 2004

Subject:beautiful day
Time:11:53 pm.
Mood: drunk.
So what,
a little bit of money to be made and next thing you know we're all
scarfing down cancer salad and giving birth to the deformed.
And for what? Convenience? heh. I wonder if there's a way to
conveniently remove this tumor from underneath John's ribcage,
or if you can conveniently restore Susan's memory and motor skills
from the surgery she had to remove her tumors.

This head of lettuce was tossed out and given to the worm
because in your eyes in was unfit for consumption...
unfit for your mouth. You couldn't stand the thought of
perfectly good healthy produce entering your household
with blemish. So what if you weren't the first to
eat off of it, the micro patrons need sustenance too dont they?
They aren't going to harm you.
Instead of realizing nothing in life is perfect...
you saturate the life supply of food with the nectar
of hades, the black blood of satan himself ridding your
now blemish free Super Produce of all "pests".
Ok... maybe that's a bit far out, but I never knew food and cosmetics went hand in hand.
- I just typed 'hades'... haha

if I ever start showing signs of age, I think I too will cash in Sarah's college fund, and put the house up for a 3rd mortgage
so Dr. Cutskinsky can lay open my face and pull it tighter than a deer skin drum.
Throw a friggen nickle at this stretched out face
and watch it bounce off faster than a 1960's Texas bullet
on Elm Street.

Can they do cosmetic surgery on the soul?-stvntmy
Comments: Read 1 orAdd Your Own.

Friday, March 5th, 2004

Time:10:41 pm.
Mood: awake.
It's a full moon tonight. Makes sense....
Comments: Add Your Own.

Monday, February 23rd, 2004

Subject:on to the next
Time:10:53 pm.
wow...it's been quite an update pause. I think it stopped itself, it was so long.
And at this moment, I'm deciding to insert un-needed punctuation where it's un-necessary.
But it looks good at the moment...
Arg.... I need some conversation.

I can't wait till this weekend.

(Slowly but surely)
Comments: Read 2 orAdd Your Own.

Sunday, July 27th, 2003

Time:2:47 pm.
Mood: restless.
ok... Sacramento it is... I'm visiting Stumpy for a weekend. Blah.
better than the alternative.

My birthday was last Sunday. I'm officially 23 years of age. Quite the depressant, in case anyone was wondering.
The fact I'm running behind, and well.... just out of time is becoming as clear as my reflection. Unfortunately, my vision is 20/15.
Maybe it's time to remove my contacts.

anyway... The fires are finally under control. Somewhat.
The monsoons have definitely offered a helping hand.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Tuesday, June 24th, 2003

Time:9:06 am.
June 20, 2003, 10:00 a.m.
The End Is at Hand

As NRO's designated pessimist, I feel it is incumbent on me to seek out news items, points of view, books and movies that will make your flesh crawl. Well, I have found a real doozy: Sir Martin Rees's new book Our Final Hour. In Britain the book sells under the title Our Final Century, which expresses its theme a bit more precisely. Sir Martin doesn't think that we — the human race — are going to make it alive through to 12/31/2099, and he has given a bookful of reasons for his opinion.

Sir Martin's two strongest points are:

In many fields of scientific and technological research, notably biology and particle physics, we are now tinkering with deep fundamentals that we don't completely understand.

There is a tremendous "force multiplier" effect in a lot of modern and soon-to-come technologies that will give malign small groups, or even malign individuals, the power to wreak terrible havoc.

There is not much doubt that he is right. On the first point, for instance, he notes that we can now create physical situations and processes that do not occur in the natural universe at all. He cites the gravitational wave detector at Stanford University. It contains a metal bar weighing over a ton, cooled to within a tiny fraction of a degree of absolute zero (minus 459° Fahrenheit). Unless there are extraterrestrial intelligences conducting similar experiments somewhere, this is easily the coldest large object in the universe. The midwinter night-time surface of Pluto is not that cold; inter-galactic space is not that cold; nothing in nature is that cold, because the "background radiation" left over from the Big Bang keeps the universe simmering at a steady 3 degrees above absolute zero. The entire universe resembles the interior of a microwave oven; the Stanford experimenters have shielded their equipment from that background radiation by very ingenious means.

[The Stanford experiment is not, by the way, anything like the last word in coldness. Eric Cornell and Carl Wieman at the University of Colorado got down to 20 billionths of a degree above absolute zero, thereby creating an entirely new state of matter called a Bose-Einstein condensate. Said Cornell: "This state could never have existed naturally anywhere in the universe. So the sample in our lab is the only chunk of this stuff in the universe, unless it is in a lab in some other solar system."]

Messing with the fundamentals of physics could have very dramatic consequences. At the time of the first nuclear explosions in 1945, some of the physicists involved wondered if they might ignite a chain reaction that would destroy Earth's atmosphere. A quick back-of-the-envelope calculation seemed reassuring, so they went ahead with the Trinity test. It is now clear that there was no possibility of worldwide conflagration from Trinity; but issues of this sort are now coming up with accelerating frequency, and there is a chance that sooner or later we shall get one of them wrong. The whole point of a scientific experiment, after all, is to find out what will happen if.... There is no knowing in advance. If there were, the experiment would have no point.

The kinds of experiments we shall soon be conducting might, according to perfectly respectable theories, have very dire results. One possibility is the swift reduction of our planet to a sphere of super-dense "strange matter" about a hundred yards across. Another is the annihilation of space-time itself — though since the sphere of annihilation could expand only at the speed of light, it would take a few billion years to swallow up the whole universe.

On the second of those bullet points I started with, let me introduce you to New Zealand handyman Bruce Simpson, who is building a cruise missile in his garage. He claims he can do the whole thing for less than NZ$5,000 (about $2,900), using off-the-shelf parts he buys mostly via the Internet. It is the same in biology. Back in the 1990s the Japanese cult called Aum Shinrikyo tried unsuccessfully to track down the Ebola virus in Africa. Nowadays, according to Sir Martin, they could assemble it in a home lab, using mail-order ingredients and information available on the Internet. That's the "advance" in just ten years; the 21st century has 97 still to go. See his point? Sir Martin:

"I staked one thousand dollars on a bet: 'That by the year 2020 an instance of bioerror or bioterror will have killed a million people.' Of course, I fervently hope to lose this bet. But I honestly do not expect to..."

The new science of extremely tiny machines, what is called "nanotechnology," might also bring down the curtain on our little show. One scenario was thought up back in the 1980s by Eric Drexler, who wrote the first book on nanotech. This is the "gray goo" catastrophe. Tiny omnivorous self-replicating machines could spread exponentially, chewing their way through the entire biosphere in a matter of days, leaving the earth's surface stripped of all life.

Is your flesh crawling yet? It probably should be. Sir Martin Rees is not a crank or a weaver of fringe speculations, not a Velikovsky or a von Daniken. He is one of the most eminent theoretical astrophysicists of our time, a Professor at Cambridge University and currently Britain's Astronomer Royal. He writes in level tones — the book is actually rather dull — and does his best to argue the probabilities.

He also gives good coverage of a corollary question that arises from all this doom mongering: Does it matter if the human race comes to an end? This is connected with another large question, perhaps the largest of all: Are we the only intelligent creatures in the universe?

We do not know the answer to this tremendous question, though there are heuristic arguments both for and against. Our own intellectual history suggests that we are probably not alone. Everything we once thought unique and central about our situation has been "dethroned" by the advance of knowledge. No, the Sun does not revolve around the Earth. The Earth revolves around the Sun, with a lot of other rocky debris. No, the Sun itself is not particularly important, just one rather average star among tens of billions in an "island universe." No, even that "island universe" is not unique or extraordinary, merely one of billions like it. No, we do not stand high above the animal kingdom. We are part of it, and arose from it. No, our mental states are not, or at best not entirely, the product of our wills acting upon a divine spark of ineffable transcendence. They can be changed completely by the ingestion of pharmaceutical compounds. Even our consciousness itself is in retreat before the onslaughts of the neuroscientists. It would be surprising, after all that dethroning, if we turned out to be the only intelligent species in the cosmos.

It might, nonetheless, be so. Presumably any intelligent species would have mastered the radio spectrum, as we have, and thrown out distinctive radio waves across interstellar space, as we are doing. No such waves have been detected after decades of searching. Presumably a species just a few hundred years more advanced than us in technology would have embarked on engineering projects, like the Dyson sphere, that would be visible across the gulfs of interstellar space. We don't see any. Presumably any sufficiently advanced species would spread itself out among the stars. We have not been visited in any obvious way, and it is hard to see the point of anyone crossing the galaxy to visit us in some non-obvious way. Nor is it likely that we are just ahead of everyone else. There are stars billions of years older than the Sun. If intelligent life developed on their planets, there ought to be civilizations in relation to whom we are, developmentally, at the level of plankton.

If we are indeed alone, it may be that once any species attains a certain level of technological sophistication it is certain to destroy itself by one of the processes sketched above, or some other process no-one has though of yet, or good old-fashioned nuclear annihilation. Or it may be that life is so extraordinary that its existence on our own planet is a huge stroke of luck, never repeated elsewhere.

Sir Martin tries to end his book on an optimistic note, suggesting that before the nasty stuff on Earth comes down, we may have propagated ourselves into outer space, or evolved into something smart enough to avert the horrors. (One of his sub-theses is that human or human-machine evolution may be about to speed up dramatically.) "The post-human potential is so immense that not even the most misanthropic amongst us would countenance its being foreclosed by human actions."

The author must spend his time among very cheerful people. I don't think I am an especially egregious case of misanthropy, yet I am certainly ready to countenance that foreclosure. Human extinction doesn't seem improbable to me. If we are already fooling with the very fabric of space-time, sooner or later we shall tear it. If hobbyists are building cruise missiles in their garages, fifty years on they might very well be kitting them out with thermonuclear warheads. If the DNA of the Ebola virus has been reduced to a long string of digits on a website somewhere, it can only be a matter of time before some Tim McVeigh or Osama bin Laden lets it loose in Yankee Stadium. Yep, we're done for. The game is up.

I can't even see that religion offers much of an antidote to this stuff. Would a loving God who cares about humanity allow us to be reduced to gray goo by a swarm of dust-speck-sized robots? I don't see why not. We are an old and tired species, and all too well informed about our own history — about the things He has allowed. The cold, distant God of the deists might have decided that we were one of his failed experiments, that there are more hopeful things going on in the Virgo super cluster. He might even be tired of our entire cosmos — which, according to some current theories, may be just one among trillions — and be ready to trash the whole shebang and start again. Even the personal God of my own faith might, for his own unfathomable purposes, decide that he's had enough of our vanity and folly.

Sir Martin Rees has laid out a host of convincing arguments for believing that these are the Last Times. I can't see any good reasons, theological or otherwise, for thinking that he is wrong.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Thursday, June 19th, 2003

Subject:The Dog Ate My WMDs
Time:9:08 pm.
Iraq's Lethal Peace
The Guardian

Monday 16 June 2003

It could yet change American minds

In the latest US ground strikes against Iraqi "militants" such as yesterday's raid on Falluja, the local people have used signalling systems - including lights and coloured flares - when the American forces approach. These signals, says the US command, are evidence of civilian collusion with "Ba'athist fighters" in their midst, further proof that tough action is justified. The citizens of Falluja and elsewhere have a simpler explanation: they need to warn their neighbours to take cover from an invader who, in the words of its commander Lt Gen David McKiernan, will "strike hard and with lethal force" whenever it thinks fit.

These ambiguities are familiar in any situation when an occupying army is confronted by resistance on the ground. Some of those targeted over the last few days in the Sunni strongholds north of Baghdad may indeed be "Saddam loyalists". Others will be ordinary people shot because they were misidentified or in the wrong place, whose tragedies quickly become a footnote in last week's wire stories. Operation Peninsula Strike has left more than 100 dead and taken 400 prisoners, of whom 60 were later released as being "of no use to American officials". How many of the dead would also have been "of no use"?

The grim story reported by our correspondent today from a village north of Baghdad, where a family of shepherds were shot by US tanks, is just one of many. In another incident last week, a family were killed as they "worked in their wheat field to extinguish fires set by US flares".

The US commanders themselves acknowledge that their occupation has met growing resistance and that they are engaged in what Gen McKiernan calls "a cycle of action, reaction and counter-action." Significantly, this realisation is reaching deep into the US heartland. Newspapers from Cleveland, Tallahassee, Charlotte and Salt Lake City carried headlines this weekend such as "Losing the peace", "Iraq war still hot, commanders say", "Civilian deaths intensify anti-US ire" and "The war is over, but US soldiers keep dying".

Almost unnoticed outside Iraq, the senior US administrator in Iraq, Paul Bremer, has issued a proclamation outlawing any "gatherings, pronouncements or publications" that call for the return of the Ba'ath party - or for opposition to the US occupation. Mr Bremer has tried to reassure by saying that the armed attacks on US forces are only "five or six or maybe 10 (fighters), no evidence of central command and control". If opposition is so small-scale, what is the need for such a blanket proclamation?

It also puts into dubious perspective Mr Bremer's insistence that the Iraqi people are free to decide their future for themselves (even if they "choose socialism", he told journalists last week). In reality, the US applauds demonstrators who protest against the religious regime in Iran, but bans those who object to the occupying regime in Iraq.

The latest military offensives, with their ambiguous bodycounts and dodgy "terrorist" identifications, began to recall the US "search and destroy" operations in Vietnam over 30 years ago. So does the talk of a "counter-insurgency" campaign though as yet on a smaller scale. One crucial difference is that US public opinion has continued to support the president. According to Gallup, 70% say that things are going well for the US, even if there are more doubts about the "WMD threat". Yet the longer that US troops remain at war - whatever it is called - in Iraq, the more that public support will be tested.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)
Comments: Add Your Own.

Tuesday, June 10th, 2003

Subject:Shoulder to Shoulder and Stabbed in the Back
Time:12:39 am.
By Robin Cook
LA Times

Friday 06 June 2003

LONDON — "Chutzpah" is the word applied to people who radiate belief in themselves without any visible reason to justify it. In the chutzpah stakes, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is way off the scale.

Before the Iraq war, he told us that Saddam Hussein had "large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and an active program to develop nuclear weapons.'' After the war, he explained away the failure to find any of these stockpiles or nuclear installations by saying Hussein's people probably "decided they would destroy them prior to a conflict.''

You have to admire Rumsfeld's effrontery. But not his logic.

The least plausible explanation is that Hussein destroyed his means of defense on the eve of an invasion. The more plausible explanation is that he did not have any large stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.

When the Cabinet of British Prime Minister Tony Blair's government discussed the dossier on Hussein's WMD, I argued that I found the document curiously derivative. It set out what we knew about Hussein's chemical and biological arsenal at the time of the 1991 Gulf War. It then leaped to the conclusion that Hussein must still possess all those weapons.

There was no hard intelligence of a current weapons program that would represent a new and compelling threat to our interests. Nor did the dossier at any stage admit the basic scientific fact that biological and chemical agents have a finite shelf life — a principle understood by every pharmacist. Go to your medicine chest and check out the existence of an expiration date on nearly everything you possess. Nerve agents of good quality have a shelf life of about five years and anthrax in liquid solution of about three years. Hussein's stocks were not of good quality. The Pentagon itself concluded that Iraqi chemical munitions were of such poor standard that they were usable for only a few weeks.

Even if Hussein had destroyed none of his arsenal from 1991, it would long ago have become useless.

So why did Rumsfeld build a case for war on a false claim of Hussein's capability? Enter stage right (far right) his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, a man of such ferociously reactionary opinion that he has at least the advantage to his department of making Rumsfeld appear reasonable. Wolfowitz has now disclosed: "For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on weapons of mass destruction because it was the one issue everyone could agree on.''

Decoded, what his remarks mean is that the Pentagon went along with allegations of weapons of mass destruction as the price of getting U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and the British government on board for war. But the Pentagon probably did not believe in the case then, and it certainly cannot prove it now.

Wolfowitz also let the cat out of the bag over the "huge prize'' for the Pentagon from the invasion of Iraq: an alternative to Saudi Arabia as a base for U.S. influence in the region.

As Rumsfeld might express it, we Britons have been suckered. Britain was conned into a war to disarm a phantom threat in which not even our major ally really believed.

This leaves the British government in an uncomfortable position. This week, Blair was pleading for everyone to show patience and to wait for weapons to be found.

There is a historical problem with this plea. The war took place only because the coalition powers lost patience with chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix and refused his plea for a few more months to complete his disarmament tasks.

There is also a growing problem of transatlantic politics. The more time passes, the greater the gulf will widen between the obliging candor on the U.S. side that there never was a weapons threat and the desperate obfuscation on the British side that we might still find one.

There is always a bigger problem in denying reality than in admitting the truth. The time has come for the British government to concede that we did not go to war because Hussein was a threat to our national interests. We went to war for reasons of U.S. foreign policy and Republican domestic politics.

One advantage of such clarity is that it would help prevent us from being suckered a second time. Which brings us to Rumsfeld's latest saber rattling against Iran.

It is consistent with the one-dimensional character of the Rumsfeld worldview that he talks of Iran as if it were a single, unified entity. In fact, Iran is deeply divided.

On the one side are President Mohammad Khatami and the majority of the parliament, who are reformers, reflecting the political reality that most Iranians consistently vote to join the modern world. On the other hand are the conservative forces of the old Islamic revolutionaries led by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who still has control over the security apparatus.

The blanket hostility toward Iran by the Bush administration has undermined the reformers and provided a welcome shot in the arm to the ayatollahs.

British policy on Iran makes sense in seeking to secure the advance of the reformers, which is in the interests of ourselves and of the Iranian people. This time we must make clear to the White House that we are not going to subordinate Britain's interests to a U.S. policy of confrontation.

Iran must not become the next Iraq.


Robin Cook is a former foreign minister of Britain and was a Cabinet member before resigning over the decision to go to war with Iraq.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)
Comments: Read 2 orAdd Your Own.

Monday, June 9th, 2003

Time:12:33 am.
wow. this picture is deceiving.
I look darling.

What is today....Sunday the .. 8th? I seriously wonder how much longer my knee will continue to work.

I'm noting the date for future reference. So then a year from now I can reminisce over how my joints were intact... and the fact that someone very close to me is psychotic.

Planet X. That's all that needs to be stated.
If this is me reading this around May 2004... I bet you're laughing your ass off about now.
Or crying.

boo. I need sleep.
Time to go watch my tax dollars in action,
Comments: Add Your Own.

Tuesday, May 27th, 2003

Subject:"I just have to look good, I don't have to be clear"
Time:1:19 pm.
Mood: sleepy.
Well, I've decided that I'm overdue for a vacation. A decent one. Maybe 5 days/6 nights in some remote location inhabited only by elk. Or caribou.
I've also decided that I'm going to venture out all by my lonesome. Josh will stay with the babe, and big momma has the next 3 months off (the only perk of working for the public school system), so she'll fill in the holes when Josh can't be there. Kind of like a multi-vitamin.
Just a bit more honest.

I was looking at airline tickets, and there is a round trip for $85 to Seattle. I've never been to Seattle.
Maybe Seattle.
I was even considering the Grand Canyon since it's only a 4 or 5 hour drive from here, but I don't want to be disappointed by experiencing "just another hole in the ground" (thanks Brent).
One would think I would revel in a full body massage/spa package, er... poolside appletinis, er... shaking my ass for 4 hours and then making out with a stranger in the bathroom. But no. I'm pathetic.
I'm a 22 year old trapped in a 22 year olds' body, with the mindset of my Gandmothers kindergarten teacher.

Sleeping in a pile of leaves sounds fun.
Wandering aimlessly while snacking on some natural hallucinogens and appreciating how refreshing the ground feels against my warm skin... all while trading insights with a wise Oak sounds more than pleasant.
who would have known.

arg.. I'll figure it out soon... I have until the end of Aug.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Thursday, May 15th, 2003

Subject:If I shit on your face, will you like it?
Time:1:16 am.
Mood: infuriated.
The audacity of certain assholes is amazing.
I'll elaborate later when not suffering from complete exhaustion.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Monday, March 31st, 2003

Time:7:55 am.
Mood: hopeful.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Tuesday, March 18th, 2003

Subject:such atrocities
Time:9:51 am.
Mood: good.
Well, it turns out I'm not going to go blind after all. The obscene giddiness and utter relief I experienced as I slipped on that hot new pair of Bausch & Lomb lens babies is indescribable.
"Woah"! my Dr. exclaimed as he shined the ray of heaven into my eyes.
"It looks as if the Andes have formed on these lenses".
Apparently every time I would blink, the massive "Andes" deposits would, in layman's terms: scratch the shit out of my cornea. Fun.
Which is why the past 4 months or so I've walked around looking like I've been working in a coal mine without any protective gear.
I've recently been accused of abusing drugs as well. Which is just funny. I mean, everyone knows that prescription drugs aren't REAL drugs.... and anyway... I only use around other people, which is recreational use... not abuse.
And I don't really snort crank, I just like the way it smells.

Well no longer! My eyes are white as pearls, and as moist as George's vagina.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Tuesday, March 4th, 2003

Time:11:02 pm.
Mood: guilty.
I can't stop...why can't I stop.
I continue to destroy every faint shadow of happiness that lands on my plate, and it all comes down to 'not thinking before I speak'. Which is a catch phrase that is so watered down in my mind at this point that I hesitate to say it, but it's true.
I hurt the one's I love the most, and this naive brat inside of me actually assumes that a particular individual will always be there. Like a mother, or sibling, or a shaved poodle trained to walk upright...
At times I'm ashamed of myself to the point of disgust, and this is one of those times.
I wish I could kick my own ass. I'm so afraid that what was said/done can't be reversed. I've never been so sure of anything in my life. This sureness was definitely reciprocated at one time... which now I'm growing increasingly aware that it may no longer materialize into the future fantasy that I wanted it to. I guess the keyword here is 'fantasy'. Fuck.
Comments: Add Your Own.

Monday, January 27th, 2003

Time:6:16 pm.
Mood: pensive.
"Most people would rather be sheep and have company than stand out on their own with antlers on".-T.A. ~ well fucking said damnit.
time for me to go eat matzo balls, and chat Israli politics at Starbucks.
Comments: Read 4 orAdd Your Own.

Subject:Tell em' Large Marge sent ya
Time:9:35 am.

Christian #1: hi i'm a christian because its sunday and im going to church
in my hundred dollar dress and golden earings passing
by the homeless and sick to be with the holy elite
singing empty hymns, praying idle prayers, and making myself feel
better because im going to heaven and you're going to hell.

Christian #2: hi im a christian because its wednesday and im going to
a bible study to sit with my holy frat brothers while
we let the oldest one lead in reading the scriptures because
he spent 40,000 dollars on bible college and is sharing his wisdom,
because we are going to heaven and you are going to hell.

Christian #1: hi im a christian because im an american and we are good
and everyone else is bad and uncivilized, and we are god's
nation and you are the devils.

the end
Comments: Add Your Own.

Tuesday, January 14th, 2003

Time:9:46 pm.
You have the grip of a madman and the strength of a child backed into a corner--
raped of the dollar that isn’t his
Falling on bruised knees, lifted up by those familiar boots
Scuffed and worn to the point of completion
Under the sole lies the tenderness of truth
My soul is wearing thin and is rubbed raw, stripped of the truth you step on.
Step out of line
Underneath, lies the polished promise of a newborn penny on a Sunday afternoon.
Comments: Add Your Own.

LiveJournal for shoefly.

View:User Info.
You're looking at the latest 20 entries. Missed some entries? Then simply jump back 20 entries.