NO! Not seriously, I was kidding. As long as you've been a reader of this website, I thought you'd understand my personality by now. ;-)

Thanks for your thoughts, Matt, and I think you have a very valid and great question. I have nothing to back up my answer with sources or facts, but let me take a stab at it.

In a way, I think that's the stage we are in now, that we are using what's available and exploring alternatives. However, I think those that are against exploratory oil drilling and very pro alternative energy, are like that because it's a way to exert pressure on the finding and using alternative energy. I'm thinking their thinking is . . . if we don't make it a priority now and move away from our oil addiction, we'll never make an effort to do so. I'm not saying that I support that view, but I think that's why some folks are very against opening up new areas for exploratory drilling, they fear opening up new drilling areas will just keep us from trying to find another energy source.

In a way, it reminds me of the U.S. rubber shortage from WWII. If I remember correctly, 90% of our rubber came from an area that was now under Japanese control. Because of that pressure, scientists were forced to be innovative and eventually make synthetic rubber cheaper and more plentiful. Without the pressure to move away from raw rubber, synthetic rubber would more than likely not have been mainstream for a long, long time, which happens to be a superior product to the raw stuff.

Like I said, I don't fave sources or other data to support my answer, but that's my stab at it.

I see you are an ACU student. I always thought they had the better looking women compared to the other universities. Good choice on your part. Make sure to eat some Sharon Allen's for me.

I think your judgement or observation are clouded are partial to Robert and Lance, and that's natural because they are family and you've known them for a very long time.

"It was not used as a punch line . . . " - In Robert's response to me, he specifically stated it's used as a punchline.

"Nicknames are expressions of affection and love." - This is not necessarily true. In many cases yes, but I also know of many cases in which nicknames come about because one if being made fun of. I'm aware of the history of them using Walt towards each other, that it was used way before I came into the picture and I addressed that in my email. But if they know that's a sensitive for me, then out of love and acceptance, I think they should filter themselves around me.

I feel like I came to them asking for bread, and they gave me stones.

ooops . . . you are absolutely correct! lol

Hey Larry, you mentioned that Obama doesn't respect anyone. Can you give me an example of how he has been disrespectful to another politician in a public setting? I want to understand where you are coming from. I stated three examples in which elected officials have been disrespectful, but other than disagreeing on policy, I don't recall our current president showing any kind of disrespect to another elected official. Sure, there's campaigning and disagreement on policy, but I would like to understand what you think he has done to show he doesn't respect anyone, in particular, the office that is held and whether it was in a public setting.

Back on Sept 11, 1998 at the White House prayer breakfast, Bill Clinton specifically stated he sinned and asked for forgiveness from God, Hillary, Monica and the Lewinsky family, and others. But I guess in the eyes of some, no matter what he says or does, it will never be genuine enough.
http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/clinton-sin....
http://articles.nydailynews.com/1998-09-12/news/1...

Doh . . . that's what I get when I grasping for material and trying to push a post out. Thanks for the catch.

Iran/Iraq . . .Obama, Osama . . . It's hard trying to please everyone. ;-)

Well, maybe for YOUR work. Or maybe you need to wear headphones. ;-)

Actually, I didn't listen to the whole thing all the way through, but thanks for pointing it out.

Hey Wendell -

What I think a lot of people forget about my blog is that just because I post something doesn't mean that I'm either against or support what the post is about, that is unless I specifically add my commentary or thoughts. So in this case, I didn't make a single comment about the Interfaith Alliance (which I'm not familiar with) or the Rick Perry clip. I just wanted to post it without any of my thoughts or opinions and see what others thought about it. I think you'd agree that my blog touches quite a bit about faith, and also touches politics from time to time, and things about our beloved state . . . and with all these elements included in this story, I thought it was BoN worthy.

Now, when I do my Bag of Randomness, I certainly throw in my opinions and thoughts, but I would say about 90% of my non-Bag of Randomness posts don't carry any of my thoughts/opinions/commentaries - they are just things I post that I think my readers would be interested in and I let them interpret and think themselves.

As for me being a Rick Perry hater . . . you're right, I'm not a fan of the man, but I don't like saying that I'm a hater. Hate is a very powerful word and I try to avoid it for the most part.

And I'm not trying to hide the fact that I lean to the left, and I'm not here to claim that most of my posts are for one party or the other, I'm just saying that when I post something there isn't an agenda behind it other than bring something to my readers that I think they might find interesting, might not normally be exposed to, or just to get them to think a little.

However, when I do add my thoughts and opinions to a post, I try to approach it reasonably and with an open mind, and above all, try to be rational - and being human, I do fail at that at time. But in this case, this was just nothing more than me just making a post.