Lindsey Graham "Dangers of Limitations on War"

Well as Bob Dylan says, "I guess it must be up to me"

if I want to get thing typed.

Lindsey Graham came out today with the shocking statement likening Mitt Romney and other republicans to having a "Jimmy Carter" foreign policy in that they attack this President from the left, on the dovish side. It's pretty much Tea Party doctrine to want to be careful about money and to follow the constitution (some of the time) and not have indiscriminate bombing of Libya and such. John Mc Cain echoed Lindsey's sentaments yesterday saying that what a Pity is was that no Republican candidate supported our President and this whole "perpetual war" doctrine we have had for so long. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said a big reason why he's resigning and getting out of the whole business is because he can't relate to an era where people actually don't have unlimited money for war expenses. He's used to the Constituted being flouted routinely. Even Bill Clinton said of Kosovo, "The war powers act is wrong because the Constitution gives me the power". Pat Buchannon and all the Mc Laughlin crowd agree that the President is in violation of the law if he doesn't get congressional approval for the Libyan campaign. The Administration responds that "We are not doing the bombing ourselves but we turned that job over to NATO". Most on the Mc Laughlin group agree "right now the whole Libya thing is a mild minus for the President. But if Quadafi gets killed or ousted that it could quickly turn into a big plus for this President in his chances next year. Some say Quadafi is a mad man and will "take over all of Africa starting with Egypt" if the us and "our side" does not "WIN" this current conflict. Quadafi has had forty years to do that if he wanted to. Hillary Clinton was at the A O or Aftican Organization (?) of nations yesterday trying to get them to oppose Quadafi. But the concencus is that the Organization is not deisposed to oppose Quadafi because he has supported them in the past and is their friend. Of course yesterday we all got to see Texas Governor Rick Perry in that New Orleans conference on C-Span. He has more charisma than either Tim Pawlente or Rick Santaurum. He has that old time Southern evangelist flair. He has that "fire in the belly" that Sarah Palin talks about. At this point I'm be tempted to peg him as thee number one candidate to best next year, and this guy will supplant Romney for first place, if he hasn't already.

They raised a "difficult question" that no Republican wants to answer on "Meet the Press" this morning. And the question is "Aren't there other ramifications to all this budget cutting you people want to do in Medi-Care and in Social Security? Don't such cuts inherently styfle the economy and slow it down and risk the process of the recovery continuing in genera'? At this point Lindsey Graham went off on some irrelivent rant, the way Christians like to do. Of course you know this economy is a basket case and perhaps terminal. It's like a man who's had a bad stroke going into the hospital. He can't be at all sure he's coming out. This economy has been likened to a drug addict. When you are really addicted to a lot of dope you run the danger of dying if you continue using the drug, or find it ever necessary to up the ammount, much as the Fed keeps pumping the money supply. But if you get off the dope you could die that way, too. If you're hooked on Vallium or a barbituate you could die of convulsions. I don't know if it's even possible to "walk that tightrope" and wean the economy off the money hype, and still have it survive it at all. Our next President will have to face difficult questions like this.

Some of you have more questions about that dimensions stuff. One question is "Isn't that whole astral projection thing you talked about really TWO dimensions of Ordenary Space, and ONE dimension (not two) in the psychic realm? You know something? You're right. Of course some will say "Isn't it possible there are unimigined geometric shapes such as Cones, that can occur. Another question is "Why restrict yourself to just SIX dimensions in the psychic realm? Wouldn't the number of dimensions be virtually unlimited, after all it's all mental to begin with". Well I stuck with the number six for three reasons (a) because six dimensions would already be complicated from a geometric standpoint (b) there are six little divisions in the big ball at the top of the triangle of dimensions, which are also six. Also someone told me that the greatest shape involving all polygon faces in a cube would be six. I'm told such a structure had 72 faces, whereas a five sided one has but twelve. Some ask "What about the whole Time and engrams thing. Do engrams really "travel" through time? From a strict determinist point of view any "travel" through Time is problemical. Bending Time is out of the question. Perhaps think of Engrams as "not time sensitive" like a canned good or a Hostess Twinky. In English the present tense has the "always" feel about it. Like "this building Always is fourteen feet tall" or "the blood of Christ - -ALWAYS cleanses from sin. It's true yesterday, today, and tomorrow. We in English and also in Spanish have the "progressive tense" that isolates the present more precisely in terms of Time. But engrams may not be time sensitive. Meaning that if you commit any act it is an Eternal act, and never goes away, even ones you haven't comitted yet. Finally there is the question about the psychic chessboard and "isn't this really two dimensions in the psychic dimension, and not that other thing". You know, you might be right. One needs to discern between my meanings for "Materiality" and "Physicality". If you think there is "pyhsicality" to the chessboard thing, you just might be right. Another may even say "Do you have anything against three dimensional chess?" Well, Mal Evans says that "basically it's just a two dimensional thing- - in terms of the psychology of the conflict. It would be too easy to hide in three dimensions".

If it were me I'd have kept the guitar overdubbing on "The End"

and also I rather like that extended version of "Her Majesty"

First I want to note the passing of Bruce Springsteen's saxophone player. He was an original member of the E Street band since 1973 and was intrinsic to the band's sound. Also of course Bruce Springsteen was card no 21 on the original Burt Lombard ZAC Tarrot Card deck. Some say when you die you instantaniously acquire the knowledge of God, knowing everything about everything, including things even theologians admit they don't know about God. As you know my position is that death is not "eternity". Time marches on. And I imagine there is some sort of a steep "learning curve" you have to get used to. But I want to talk about this whole Beatles and money thing raised on KRTH this morning. John Lennon was in it for the money. When the Beatles first met Brian Epstein it was John who said "We heard about you as a man who can Make It Happen for us". I have done three "stints" as John Lennon. The 3rd one was when they were about to do Abbey Road and John Lennon said "I need you". We wrote "Come Together" together. The whole idea for the "You Can't Catch Me" theme was my idea, and also for the little lead guitar bits in the song, like at the end. John was mainly responsible for the lyrics, but he bounced ideas off of me to see if I liked them. As for "Because" that was basically my idea. The whole "Because the wind is high it blows my mind" and all is just a little too hippy-dippy for John's taste. As for Yoco playing the Moonlight Sonata- - - she was just some woman as far as I knew. I don't know if it was backwards or not but the whole tune just Came to me. [late addition: The whole bit about John not liking "Maxwell's Silver Hammer" is one I find perplexing and can't explain. Also I suggest sources reconsider whom they think plays lead guitar on 'Come Together"

Also when Lennon said "Oh, I'll take care of the overdubs" I don't believe he was referring to the vocal track. If you listen closely to the vocal it's artificial re-verb. I believe he was referring to the lead guitar part.] [John Lennon – lead vocals, twelve-string acoustic guitar, rhythm guitar, hand-claps This is the line-up for Polytheme Pam, lest there be any questions. The accent is a "Walrus" accent, in case you didn't catch that, Wickepedia] As to the long three years Beatle stint you know about that one in the mid 'sixties. But lets go back to July of 1960 now. KRTH says there was a time when "John wasn't sure he wanted to spend his life as a musician". But not just for three weeks after his return from Hamburg. And I thought it was Paul who was pissed-ff but maybe George and Pete, too- - that he was back in town and they said "we could have been earning money all this time". As to the whole name of Beatles thing my recollection somewhat differs. I was standing on a pier, probably in Liverpool, looking out into the harbor. It was an overcast day and perhaps unseasonably cool for a July. It was more like a voice that came to me "You are BEATLES with an A". It was sort of an occult or numerological thing, or anagrams. I think because of the anagrams BET SALE and BEST ALE. You take a bet on us and we'll make the sale. I didn't like the whole Buddy Holly "insect" connection being the Crickets, which spawned the whole Long John Silver and the Silver Beetles title. Tommy Moore was our first drummer and Johnny Hutchenson was our second. I thought it was John rather than George who bitched about bassist Ken Brown getting paid for not working. But the real John "wanted to think about the direction of his life a little" kind of like Jim did years earlier. (see previously) The spelling thing is kind of akin to "It's ZACHERY with an E". Mal Evans gave me that one. Previously on September first or so 1976 Zachery was the name of a character in a Romulan skit. It was some months before that that Pete Richards said to me, "If I ever have a son I think I'd like to name him something shiek like "Ziek" or "Zack". Anyhow you know about the Hamburg thing. The whole argument with management thing goes like this. We were unhappy with Bruno Cunsler (?) who owned the Indra and the Keiserkeller clubs. When I first got there I saw the Keiserkeller club with sort of a navel ship decore and I thought "this is a cool place" then Bruno says we will be working in this other place that's a dump. Now Bert Kemphert owned the Top Ten club. So we decided to move our things to the second floor above the club, and make more money and have a better boss. But Bruno didn't like that. As to who was filling in for "Me" all this time I rather suspect our old friend "Bo". Go back to the Rocca Rolla file somewhere and we talk more about "Bo".

I'd like to field a question on demon possesion. Can it happen? I define that as a "hostile takeover" of a body. Is Jesus correct? "When an evil spirit comes out of a man it roams the land looking for new habitation". We know a bunch of pigs became demon possesed at one point and Jesus allowed that, even though it costs the farmers their livelyhood. The other possibility is what I refer to as a "hostile acquisition" where you are "drafted" to possess a body you didn't want or intend to. Check around March 28, 2011 in whatever blog and search "Bingo" in Firefox to get it. (I'm too lazy to provide a link.) You get more background material even I myself have partially forgotten. (That's why it pays to write things down) Some would argue that you know the end of a Life before you chose incarnation in it. I don't agree. Sixth dimensional people have no absolute, innate foreknowledge of the future. (Only God knows that) Hence you can gauge for "environmental factors such as income and race and neighborhood. But you can't always predict what events will either swing your way or contrary or what people will become your allies or adversaries. These decisions are for those others to make alone, and they will be accountable for them later. Bad karma hinders your "orbital speed" and good karma increased it, Hence you will rise in the funnel and have more "space" to play with, and more options. For many if not most, such a "hostile acquisition" would be impossible if they were born with the same soul they have now. In my case I doubt this, so I might be vulnerable if the soul that was "Me" when I was born ever wanted his body back. As to the other "posession" or hostile takeover" I think I have seen demon possesed mental patients. The human brain is capable of a lot of strange things but at times even the modern Church thinks "something else is going on".