Andrews Answers

Revelations

2008-10-15T07:33:00.000-07:00

Question: I have just recently learned that Obama has been running television ads that totally distort the record of John McCain. The media have not reported this. His associations with Acorn and their illegal voter registrations have not been reported in the mass media. The polls that the media are reporting all show him ahead. He has been caught in numerous lies lately and those have been glossed over by the media. His place of birth has never been substantiated. Why won't the media at least do their job regarding that? The more I learn about Obama, the less it seems that he has any business being anywhere near the Whtie House. You clearly pointed out his lack of achievements but his character is awful. I now know what you mean by the media protecting him. It is a shame we have come to this. It makes me wonder what will be revealed about him next. Why would the media so strongly support one candidate over the other? You seem to imply that only stupid people will vote for Obama and I guess that is true. Is it?
Kari Bambrough, Irving, Texas

Answer: Kari, the media selected Obama back when the primaries were beginning and they dumped Hillary Clinton. They are stuck with him as is the democratic party. I think many people have come to the conclusion that the more they learn about Obama, the less they like him. While his lack of conviction and character is important for me, the main thing that makes me not support him is the fact that he is a socialist. I will not vote for a socialist. Since I have known he was a socialist for a long time, it has made my decision obvious for a long time. I will not bother to watch the debate tonight because I already know for whom I will vote. Why waste any time watching a debate when I already know how I will vote? The media will, from now until the election, try to make everyone think that Obama already has won. He is so far ahead in the polls, that McCain might as well give up the race and his supporters might as well not vote because Obama is going to win anyway. It is a tactic that can work for some non-thinking people. There are, Kari, reasons that people will vote for Obama other than being stupid. Some people will vote for him because they are misinformed, are intellectually lazy and have not examined his dismal record, are racist, are so deeply ingrained with the democratic party that they can only vote democratic, are so far left that they are hoping Obama will take the country to a socialist place and some will buy into the media hype about him. There are many Americans like you who have figured out that this guy is totally wrong for our nation and realize that his policies would be a major mistake for the United States. This race should actually not even be close. If it were not for the media being on his side, I think Obama would not have any chance at all. Even with them, I think McCain will win by a nice margin.

Supportive and Protective

2008-09-30T14:37:00.000-07:00

Question: You said the the media has been supportive and protective of Obama. I can see the supportive part and I suppose by protective you mean that the media have not asked him tough questions. When did this media bias start? How widespread is it? Nancy Lea, Bakersfield, California.

Answer: Nancy, I can't really say exactly when it started. I suppose that there has been media bias to some degree throughout history. I first noticed the media being openly supportive of Bill Clinton. But it wasn't completely protective of him. This was when CNN (Clinton News Network) was going strong. Again, during Al Gore's run for the Presidency, the media were supportive but not protective. The media, I noticed, began to be slightly protective of John Kerry when he ran for President. Now, with Obama, the media have sided completely with the candidate. They totally support and protect Obama. I wouldn't mind it so much except that they claim to be objective. That is, of course, total nonsense. They are completely in Obama's camp and completely support his candidacy for President. I think it is wrong (and sad) that America's media have given up any pretense at objectivity and have come out in support of one candidate over another. Of course, being leftists liberals, they always support the Democrat.

The correct choice for America in 2008

2008-09-09T16:22:00.000-07:00

Question: Okay. You said in one of your earlier responses that you would tell everyone, after the conventions, who you are going to vote for for President. So how about it? Who has your support? Walt Jenkins, Salem, Oregon.

Answer: I am totally serious when I say that I do not think any objective thinking person could possibly vote for anyone other than the McCain - Palin ticket. So yes, I will be voting Republican this year. Why? In my view, in the Presidency, character counts. Both McCain and Palin have character. Neither Obama nor Biden do. In my view, in the Presidency, experience matters. Both McCain and Palin have it. Obama does not. In my view, in the Presidency, judgement is valuable. Both McCain and Palin have demonstrated good and sound judgement. Obama has not.

I have seen no evidence that Obama has ever had an original or creative idea in his life. I do not think he is a very intelligent man. Every single thing that this person has proposed for the future of America would actually be bad for America. By this, I mean his higher tax proposals, his education proposals, his military proposals, his economic proposals -- everything would be detrimental to the welfare of this nation and its citizens. In short, I cannot find a single reason to support Obama.

On the other hand, I am not a huge McCain fan. I will vote for him because he is clearly the better of the two choices. He does have several strong points. And he is a man of honor who has real beliefs. Obama does not. I don't have to agree with a person's beliefs but I think a President should have real core beliefs that guide him or her. McCain does and Obama does not.

Biden said that we could not question Obama's patriotism. He then continued by saying that several of Obama's relatives had served honorably in World War II. When I heard that, I thought, "What a load of crap." I also thought, "I most certainly can question Obama's patriotism." Not only can I but I do! He is an American who proposed that we surrender the war in Iraq. He is an American who was a member of a church in which the pastor preached anti-American sermons for 20 years. He is friends and associates with a man who bombed the Pentagon. I most certainly do question his patriotism. There is absolutely nothing about this person that makes me think he would be any good as President.

Obtaining the position of President would be considered a promotion by anyone. A promotion is usually given for a job "well-done." In Obama's case, his time as a "community organizer" was a complete and total disaster. He had a mediocre if not undistinguished time in the Illinois state senate. And he has spent his entire brief time in the U.S. Senate running for President. The man has not one single outstanding accomplishment in his lifetime. He has basically done nothing. Why should a man with a record like that be rewarded or promoted? He should not.

This campaign has, more than any other, shown the American people just how totally bias the media has become. Obama is, in reality, a socialist. History has clearly proven that socialism never works. But the media never points that out. The media never questions Obama's associations, judgements or lack of experience. They never question his proposals. Why? The media has been supporting Obama from the beginning of the primaries. The media has been a willing supportive participant in the Obama campaign. For example, just yesterday (September 8, 2008), the USA/Gallup poll showed McCain 10 points ahead of Obama among likely voters. However, the article did not state that until the 8th paragraph. If it had been Obama ahead, that "news" would have been in the headline. That is a prime example of media bias. I really think the media has done an excellent job of promoting, supporting and protecting Obama. I doubt he would have received the nomination without it. However, the more people begin to learn the truth about Obama, the less they like him. But the reality is that there simply is no reason to be for Obama except that he is not a Republican. Some people will put their political party above their country and vote for Obama for that reason.

Among the four candidates, my first choice for President is Sarah Palin. My second choice is McCain, then Biden and lastly, Obama. I know I've rambled on here, Walt, but I hope this answers your question about who I am voting for and why.

No to Political Conventions

2008-08-25T12:09:00.000-07:00

Question: Now that the political conventions have begun, I am curious to know how much of them do you plan to watch? Will you watch one more than the other? Or both about the same? Don Rain, St. Petersburg, Florida.

Answer: I will watch them both exactly the same -- not at all. None. I like to think that I have more important things to do with my life than sit in front of a television and watch propaganda. I guess one of the sad things about this is that many people don't realize they are watching staged propaganda shows.

Party Girl

2008-08-13T08:23:00.000-07:00

Question: What do you think of the John Edwards' mess with the party girl? Stevie Carr, Los Angeles, California.

Answer: I have literally received dozens of questions about this subject so I have chosen one to respond to and, hopefully, end any additional such questions. I think that the deceit involved is typical of politicians. Anyone who believes any politician is extremely naive. But more importantly to me, this episode has absolutely no impact on my life. I have never thought that John Edwards was anything more than a bag of hot air. He is a meaningless person to me. Consequently, I treat him, as I do all politicians, with complete indifference. His fooling around with a party girl really does not change my opinion of him because my opinion of him was already so low that whatever he does cannot make an impact. Stevie, I think that you should spend your time on things that influence your life and ignore things like this.

Complicated

2008-07-16T07:40:00.000-07:00

Question: I am writing to ask what I should do. I am in love with a man at work. He is not aware of my feelings for him. He is just the nicest, sweetest, kindest person I have ever known. If I were married to him, my life would be complete. I would be so happy. Now, the big problem. I just found out about two weeks ago that he is married. At first I couldn't believe it. It was like someone had died. But I've thought about it and realize that, if he is unhappy with his marriage, we could still be together in the future. He is several years older than me but I want to be with him more than anything and am willing to wait. "Real love is rare. It is also not logical. It is emotional. But it is real." (This is what my best friend told me.) She encouraged me to pursue my love for this man at least to see if he has any feelings for me. What do you think I should do? Bunny Stratham, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Answer: Bunny, you sound like a nice person yourself. I'm sure you would not want to be responsible for destroying a good marriage. Suppose you were married to this man and some other woman decided she should be married to him? Now you said it yourself: if he is unhappy with his marriage. The only possible chance I see of this working out as you wish is if the man's marriage is already in trouble. If he is already considering divorce or has already filed for a divorce, then you may be in a position to "step in" when the time is right (assuming that he is not getting a divorce for another woman). Men are normally extremely secretive about such things at the office. But there ought to be some way of finding out the real state of his marriage. If it is sound, then you need to find someone else. I know that love cannot be turned on and off like a water faucet. But you have kept your feelings in check thus far. It would probably be best for everyone if you could find a single man to love. Good luck.

Comments

2008-07-02T08:30:00.000-07:00

Question: A friend and I were discussing your blog. He and I agreed that you usually "hit the nail on the head." But we couldn't decide why you don't get more comments. For example, your June 16th answer has only one comment. I would have thought that it would easily have a dozen. Do you filter out most comments? My friend's girlfriend read your blog and we asked her. She said you don't have many comments because your answers are so good. With the June 16th answer, she said, "what more do you want? He answered everything." But do you simply not run a lot of comments or do you not receive many? Tyler Ware, Miami, Florida

Answer: Thus far, I have used every single comment I have received. I do not receive many. I like your friend's girlfriend's reason. And, thus far, I have not had to edit any comments. I have polite readers.

A Harmless Nut?

2008-07-01T12:04:00.000-07:00

Question: A friend of mine suggested I write you. Honestly, I had never heard of this blog. I haven't read all your answers but I have read some. You do make a lot of sense. My situation is this -- my husband and I have been married for 19 years. We decided not to have any children. But I do have an extremely cute little dog that I truly consider to be my child and I treat her as my child. Her name is Heather. I have clothes for her and a cart that I push her around in. I have been offended when some stores and restaurants do not allow me to bring my baby girl in with me. Heather is completely house-broken and better behaved than most other children. I prepare special meals for Heather because she is so special to me. My husband likes Heather but thinks I'm obsessed with her. My friend (the one who told me how to write you) thinks I'm nuts over Heather. She says I'm a harmless nut but a nut none-the-less. Do you think I'm a nut? Markie Evers, Boston, Mass.

Answer: Yes.

Discover an Interest, a Purpose or a Meaning

2008-06-16T13:25:00.000-07:00

Question: I have read all your answers like so many others that have written to you. I think my favorite is the Feb. 2007 answer. And I like all the comments to it too.

Sometimes I feel like I am wasting my life. I am getting older but I am not doing anything constructive. I work at a dead-end job. I need my paycheck to pay my bills but there is little left over. I am divorced (no children, thank goodness). I was so fooled by my former wife, I admit that I don't really trust any of the women I date. I don't want to get into a serious relationship with any woman. I don't want to ever marry again.

I am now in my early thirties. I don't feel as if I've ever accomplished anything or that I will ever accomplish anything. I am bored by my life.

Do you have any suggestions for me? Rob Combow, Amarillo, Texas.

Answer: Yes, Rob, I do. The answer to your problem is for you to accomplish something. Now you cannot do this overnight but you can begin to do it overnight. A man is his early 30s must have some interests or hobbies. Learn what it is that interest you and pursue it. Become an "expert" in it. For example, if you are interested in UFOs, study them. Join a local UFO group. Read books about them. When a sighting in your area occurs, volunteer to investigate it. This is just an example. But the concept can be applied to anything in which you are interested. Another way to proceed is to enroll in a local college. Even if you do not yet know what you want to major in, you can still enroll. There are several general education courses you may take before you declare your main area of study. You do not have to enroll as a full-time student. Even if you take one or two courses at a time, you are moving toward graduation. There are plenty of financial aid programs around to help students attend college. Once you have earned a college degree, you can say that you have accomplished something major. Another thing you can do is to become a community volunteer. Again, find something that interests you and volunteer. This could be, for example, at an animal shelter, a food bank, the library, Little League baseball or any number of things.

Do you see what I am saying? There are many many things that a young man can do to accomplish things. Helping a child to learn is a major accomplishment. Helping an elderly lady lift and move something may seem a minor thing to a young man but it would be a major gift to an elderly woman. There really is no end to what you can do to be a community volunteer. And that is a wonderful accomplishment.

Rob, you simply have to tell yourself that you want to do something and then do it. The key is doing something that you are interested in learning more about and becoming truly knowledgeable in that area.

Oh, and Rob, lots of guys have been "fooled" by women. A lot of women have been fooled by men. Unfortunately, it happens. A lot. I think the key to having a good strong relationship with a woman is to become real friends with her first. Try this. At the very worst, you make new friends. And that is a major accomplishment. None of them may develop into a romantic relationship but don't look at them like that. Having a female friend can be wonderful. All by itself, Rob. With no romance involved. If romance follows the friendship, it will happen. If it's there, she will usually be the one who will subtly let the male know. Often, however, the male cannot pick up on her subtle signs. Sometimes (and if it is meant to be) she will have to be more obvious. He is often afraid to make the first move because he thinks it will ruin the friendship. And, if she is not interested in romance with him, it may. So leave it up to her. Love will find a way.

I wish you all the best, Rob.

Oil Mess Stinks!

2008-05-13T12:37:00.000-07:00

Question: What do you think of all this oil mess? Richard Walton, Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Answer: It stinks. Unfortunately, no matter who wins the Presidential election, none of those running have yet proposed anything that would be of benefit to America or Americans. The Democrats want to tax oil companies even more. That is totally the wrong thing to do. It will do nothing positive nor will it produce a single gallon of gasoline. Oil has been politicized and that always hurts. Government has no reason to be involved. It should allow the free market to operate. The free market or capitalism would never have introduced a corn-based gas supplement that cost more to produce than it's worth. It was required by Congress and is a total disaster.
What we need, Richard, is more American oil. And we have plenty of it in the ground. We need to pump it out of the ground and we need new American refineries to turn it into gasoline. We have enough oil under American soil to be energy self-sufficient. However, we do not have the refining capacity to handle our own demand. Consequently, at the same time we begin a large drilling operation (Alaska, North Dakota, off-shore), we need to start building additional refineries. This would be a good thing for our nation (to rid ourselves of dependence upon foreign oil suppliers and stem the huge flow of American money to nations that do not like us and wish us harm), both politically and financially. It would also be a good thing for American consumers. So who would oppose something that would be good for our country and our people? Democrats stand in that line all the time. And, of course, our totally socialist friends, the environmentalists, would oppose both drilling for oil and refining oil.
Richard, I think that this is what we need to do. It is not what I think will happen anytime soon. The politics against it are too strong right now. And it takes about ten years to build a refinery and about ten years to begin getting oil from a new project. I suppose it will have to get a lot worst before enough Americans wake up and realize that environmentalists and Democrats do not have America's best interests at heart.

Except for Evil

2008-04-24T11:48:00.000-07:00

Question: I just heard today about Syria being bombed by Israel last September. Apparently, it was to take out a nuclear processing facility in which the Syrians had help from North Korea. What about Iran? And while I have you, why don't you do more answers? I have read all of your answers (as many people seem to do) and I wish there were more. I realize you have answered this before but we really would like more answers. Rick Essex, Brighton, Mass.

Answer: What about Iran? I feel reasonably comfortable that Israel will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear processing facility. They may allow the Iranians to spend a lot of money and get close. But once the facility is close to being operational, I expect that the Israeli government will take it out. Yes, I also heard about the connection between North Korea and Syria today. Except for doing evil, what on earth could these two countries have in common?
Regarding the quantity of my answers, I have to receive questions that interest me. The majority of the questions I receive deal with politicians or celebrities. As I have already mentioned, I do not care about either of these two groups. I will vote in the general elections in November and, after the political conventions, I will answer the question of who I will vote for and why. I do sincerely appreciate, Rick, that you enjoy my answers and wish there were more. Thank you.

How to Handle Compliments

2008-03-17T09:16:00.000-07:00

Question: I would like to ask you if you have some witty or clever way to handle compliments. When someone gives me a compliment, I usually try to deflect the compliment. I say things like "Oh no. Not really." And I get embarrassed. And then I usually try to give a return compliment. It all becomes an awkward situation. I appreciate the compliment but I wish people wouldn't give me any. April Borovy, Decatur, Alabama.

Answer: April, you answered your own question. You said you appreciate the compliment. I remember doing just as you are doing. I finally learned the best response to a compliment is simply to say "Thank You." That's all. You do not need to give a return compliment. You do not need to be witty or clever. Just sincerely say "Thank You."

How Easy It Is

2008-03-04T13:40:00.000-08:00

Question: It took me a long time to figure out how to ask you a question. I know you explained it early on when you first started the blog but you need to explain it again. Please tell everyone how easy it is to ask you a question. Sue Bellard, Miami, Florida.

Answer: There is no question, Sue. To ask me a question, go to any answer and click on comment below it. Ask your question as though it were a comment. Your question will appear as a new question and answer, not as a comment. That's all there is to it. It is easy.

Best Novelist

2008-02-21T07:48:00.000-08:00

Question: Okay, you seem to be pretty good at answering who is the best (legs, singer, etc.). Who do think is the best novelist today? Again, don't count dead people. People whose books are being published today. Who do you enjoy reading? Marcia Reinhart, Manchester, N.H.

Answer: For a pure relaxing fun and entertaining read, I like the novels of Byron Edwards. But after you've read them, you realize Edwards has snuck a point in on you. I've never met him but, like me, he seems to enjoy flying under the radar.

Best Actor

2008-02-18T07:52:00.000-08:00

Question: I really liked your answer to the question about who the best male singer in the world is. Now I want to ask you who do you think is the most talented or best actor or actress who is currently acting? By this, I mean don't include dead people. Who is today the best? Sharon Alexander, Carrboro, N.C.

Answer: Kevin Spacey

Don't think you can have your cake and eat it too.

2008-02-12T11:21:00.000-08:00

Question: I have a situation. My boyfriend lives with me (the apartment is rented in my name). I don't really remember agreeing that he could move in. It just seemed to evolve into this situation. I don't want him to live with me anymore. But I don't necessarily want to break up with him either. How can I tell him to move out of my apartment but not out of my life? I think I still want to date him. Priscilla McGranahan, Oklahoma City, Ohlahoma.

Answer: Priscilla, to be honest, I'm not sure you can. This will depend upon the character of your boyfriend. And how deeply he loves you. (I'm presuming that love is involved here.) I have heard of this before you. But it was always with a bride-to-be. I knew of a woman who lived with her boyfriend for over three years. But after he proposed and they set a date, she wanted him to move out until the wedding day. I don't think I'd go into the circumstances of how he wound up as your permanent roommate. Rather, I'd simply explain that you have become uncomfortable sharing your apartment with a man who is not your husband. This way, you are not dumping on him specifically but on the situation. You are not blaming him; but rather, stating how you feel. One of his first thoughts will be that you think he is an awful sex partner. I'm presuming that you do not think that since you want to keep him as a boyfriend. You may tell him that it has nothing to do with your sexual relationship, which is good. The second thing he may think is that you are pressuring him to marry. Again, dispell this by simply stating that marriage is not part of this decision. It is simply the way you feel. And every woman is entitled to her feelings. Since it is your apartment, give him a reasonable amount of time to find his own place -- but the sooner the better. Let him know that you would like to continue dating him. He may be shocked by this. You may even begin this "talk" with that statement. In any case, he is not likely to understand. But, if he loves you, he will respect your feelings. However, to be honest with you, once he moves into his own place, I would expect that he will stop dating you. You should expect it also.

Vote for Whom?

2008-02-04T13:09:00.000-08:00

Question: Tomorrow is "Super Tuesday." Our Governor has endorsed McCain and the Governor's wife has endorsed Obama. What do you think of the remaining candidates for President? Can you give me any advice on who I should vote for? Pam Farmers, Fresno, California.

Answer: For over a year now, people have been asking me who I liked for President. The process of elimination has brought it down to, realistically, four people. Three of those four are socialists. Socialism has never, in the history of mankind, worked. Socialism always results in failures and a weakened government. I hate to see the U.S. go down that route. Both democratic candidates and republican John McCain are socialists. McCain would have made a good democratic candidate. The only choice, Pam, that I see remaining for any thinking American is Mitt Romney.

It's a Gimmick!

2008-01-31T09:33:00.000-08:00

Question: I am curious as to your take on the new economic stimulus package in which the government is going to give out checks for people to spend. What do you think of it? Sam Borders, Dover, Deleware.

Answer: I think it is a "gimmick" that will make people think the government is doing something. I think its long-term impact on the economy will be small. Indeed, prior to the ckecks actually arriving, it may hurt the economy. Government officials have a great knack for ignoring human nature. Many people, I think, will put off purchasing items now. They will wait until their government check arrives and then use that to buy things they may have purchased earlier. Sam, the economy is really not in bad shape. The present "crisis" has been generated by the media. If they repeat something over and over -- it takes on an air of reality. It becomes self-fulfilling. If the government wanted to spur the economy by giving taxpayers money back, it would be cheaper for the government and quicker for the consumer for the government to just take X amount off of everyone's 2007 tax bill. There would be no expense of actually writing and mailing out checks. How does it make sense to send money to the government, have the government process it and then cut checks and send a small part back? Now I know some socialists (i.e., democrats) would say that that is not fair -- what about the people who don't pay any taxes? How will they get a refund? A refund from what? I think this is more of a political stimulus package than an economic stimulus package.

Facts are the Difference

2007-12-13T10:43:00.000-08:00

Question: American Al Gore was recently awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for his work in sounding the alarm about global warming. I have read your responses on October 6, 2006 and May 29, 2007 about global warming. For those who are beginning to question the validity of man's involvement as a catalyst for global warming, you were way ahead of the curve. But what makes you right and the Nobel Prize judges and Gore wrong? Amy Peabody, Ottawa, Quebec.

Answer: Facts, Amy. Facts make me right and Gore wrong. The number one determining factor in the temperature of the earth is the sun. (That is an undisputed scientific fact.) The sun goes through regular cycles of relative brightness and relative dimness. (That is an undisputed scientific fact.) Man has absolutely no control over the sun or its cycles. (That is an undisputed scientific fact.) If somehow we could magically turn off all the vehicles and manufacturing plants, the difference it would make to the earth's temperature is so small that it is totally insignificant. It would not matter. (While this is not a scientific fact, computer models have shown it to be accurate.) The entire man-made or man-caused global warming issue is nothing more than a scam. (My personal conclusion.) And twenty or thirty years from now it will be as obvious to everyone else as it is to me today. People of the near future will look back at today's newspaper, television and magazine articles and wonder how we could "all" have been so gullible.

Witches?

2007-12-05T13:59:00.000-08:00

Question: Are there such things as real witches? Ron Smali, Silver Spring, Maryland.

Answer: If you are referring to modern-day wiccans, the answer is yes. If you are referring to broom-riding people with magical powers, strange hats and an affinity for black cats, the answer is no.

What's Wrong With "Give Peace a Chance?"

2007-11-02T12:37:00.000-07:00

Question: A couple of weeks ago, I attended a lecture (I was required to by a professor for a grade in a course) about ecology. Instead of ecology, the speaker talked mostly about how stupid President Bush is and endorsed the John Lennon song "Give Peace a Chance." Personally, I think President Bush is a lot smarter than the speaker and there is something about that song that irritates me. I'm not sure what. What do you think of that song? Richard Hardin, Knoxville, Tennessee

Answer: Richard, it is probably your common sense that causes you to be irritated by that song. The words to that song simply don't make any sense. There are several ways of looking at it. One of the most obvious is to ask, what were we doing on December 6, 1941? What were we doing on September 10, 2001? WE WERE GIVING PEACE A CHANCE! And what happened? We got attacked. We got attacked while giving peace a chance. Another way to look at this is that by suggesting giving peace a chance, the implication is that war is our fault. If only we would surrender and go home, then there would be peace. The problem is that our enemies don't want peace. They want victory. They want to hurt us. They want to kill us. They don't want peace at all. The song implies that we are the evil ones and if we would only quit, then there would be peace. It is total nonsense. It is the attitude of a non-thinking person. That's what I think of that song.

Evil mother-in-law!

2007-10-05T10:33:00.000-07:00

Question: My wife's mother is plain evil. When we were dating, I thought she was "out-of-touch," meddlesome, opinionated and stubborn. But, over the years, I have come to realize that this woman is evil. She intends to do others harm. I have seen her cause more problems and stir up more bad feelings that any one person should ever be responsible for. My wife calls her horrible names and agrees that she is evil. I think, although she does still pretend to like me, she would love to break up her daughter's (my wife) marriage. We do allow her to babysit our 4-year-old son. Sometimes, after she has spent an afternoon or a day with him, he says things that makes me think she is trying to turn our own son against us. We live in a small town near Duluth and she is capable of ruining our lives if she chooses to do so. I have thought of confronting her over her tyrannical ways but, frankly, am afraid of what she would do. It wouldn't be violence but we could be destroyed in this town through her efforts. Do you see a way out of this situation for us? Dan McCoy, Duluth, Minn. (Not real name and we only live near Duluth)

Answer: Listen, if you don't think you can outwit this woman at her own game, (which I think would be fun) why don't you, your wife and your son move to another state? I don't know the nature of your work but there are plenty of opportunities for a young man in the South and out West or maybe in New England. Your mother-in-law's control and power sounds like it stems from her contacts and connections in your home town. If you sever those connections, you should eliminate most of her power. However, her evil intentions will follow her wherever she goes. In the meantime, I would not allow her to be alone with my four-year-old son, if I were you. Always find a reason why it is not the right time for her to babysit alone. I don't like advising someone to "run away from their problem." However, in your situation, I do think that this may be the best possible solution for a bad situation. You and your wife can start anew in a totally different community. Sometimes, fleeing evil is the best course of action. I sincerely wish you and your family (wife and son) the best. Good luck.

I wouldn't let her wear it.

2007-09-17T13:48:00.000-07:00

Question: I really like your personal advice. I have such a question for you. But first some background: I am a 19-year-old female student at a large public university. There are about 14,000 female students here, ages 18 and older, and I seriously doubt if there are three virgins among them. We are simply more sexually active than our mothers were and at younger and younger ages. Several of my dorm mates and I stayed up late one night discussing what is the proper age for a girl to begin having sex. We could not agree. Most of us started at 14 or 15. Older girls here say they usually started at 16. I am saying all this to get to my question. I went home recently during a break and found my 12-year-old sister wearing a tee-shirt that said "12 is the new 16." My mom thinks it's cute. I think it sounds like an invitation by my little sister for sexual activity. (She told me she hasn't started but is ready.) I don't think so. What do you think of this shirt and when do you think a girl is old enough to start having sex? Ashley Greer, Santa Barbara, California

Answer: Regarding the shirt, if she were my daughter or my little sister, I would not let her wear it. I agree with you. It is suggestive.
Regarding the age question, that is a lot more complicated. At the same age, girls are much more mature than boys, both physically and emotionally. This means that younger girls, say 15 or 16, are dating (and having sex) with older boys, say 19 or 20. In many states, such an arrangement could result in the boy going to jail for statutory rape. You say your age group started at around 14 and 15. Were you having sex with boys who were 14 and 15? Not likely. You were probably having sex with boys who were three to six or seven years older. Sex, as you obviously know, is a wonderful and fun thing to do. But it can be full of danger. Pregnancy is a possibility. The transmission of diseases can always happen. And if both partners are not in full agreement about the relationship, it can cause emotional problems. While a 12-year-old girl may be physically able to engage in sexual activities, can she be prepared socially, emotionally and psychologically for such activity? How will she feel about herself the next day? How will those feelings influence her future behaviors? Everyone is different, both intellectually and physically. There is no right answer to your question about an exact age. It will vary from individual to individual. Some people still think that both the female and the male should wait until they are married to engage in sexual activities. However, while that may be an ideal for those people, it is not realistic. When those hormones begin raging, activity will begin. Just because there is some law on the books or because some church doctrine says to wait, people, being people, will do what their hormones tell them to do. As long as force is not involved, I think that there needs to be a relaxation of some of the "sex laws." If force is involved, then I think the "sex laws" should be even stronger than they are now. I could still bring up another dozen or so issues that your question has prompted. I can only answer by saying that the "right" time will vary according to many factors. Age is only one of them.

Boring

2007-08-29T12:32:00.000-07:00

Question: If you absolutely had to vote for one of the democratic candidates for President, which one would it be? Art Holden, Manchester, New Hampshire

Answer: I think everyone knows how boring and meaningless I find these type of questions. However, several people have asked me this or something similar to this. Honestly, I think the candidates, from both political parties, are extremely weak this election. If I had to choose someone from the democratic side, I suppose it would be Joe Biden.

Don't confuse fantasy with reality

2007-08-24T12:14:00.000-07:00

Question: I am a married mother of two wonderful little girls. I am 32 years old. I met, online, a man who is a 20-year-old college student. He is engaged to be married. I have talked with him on the phone several times. I have fallen in love with him. My husband is a nice man. I seriously do not know what to do. I dream of us being together. He lives almost 800 miles away but I have planned out several ways that we can get together. He told me upfront that he wants to have sex with me. I want to have sex with him so that is not a problem. I do not want to mess up things with my daughters. A friend told me of your blog and that is why I am writing you. What do you think I should do? Elsie W., St. Louis, Mo.

Answer: Elsie, at first I thought your question was a "joke" question. But several ladies at work assured me that it could certainly be real. My view is that it is not likely that anything good can come from this relationship. You say you don't want to mess up things with your daughters. If you separate them from their father, the nice man, you will be "messing things up." How old are your two girls? I don't know that I would trust a 20-year-old to be around young teen girls. I think that lust, not love, is the primary thing involved here. This man may have sexual intentions not only for you but also for your daughters. I think that sometimes we create fantasy situations in our minds. If those fantasies ever become reality, they almost always disappoint. Why would a 20-year-old college student want to get involved with a 32-year-old married woman with two children? Unless he sees an opportunity for a grand sexual adventure, what is the attraction? You live 800 miles away. Is he going to drop out of college and move to be with you? In the real world, the one of reality, none of this makes sense. You say you have fallen in love with him and yet, you have never met him. I love love. I am the last person to put down love. But this situation does not describe love to me. I am not saying that an older woman/younger man relationship cannot work out successfully or that two such people cannot be in love. But you two do not really truly know each other. What of your husband? What of your daughters? Do you give them up for this man? If you just want a sexual fling, I'm sure that there are plenty of men in St. Louis. Perhaps you want the sexual activity but by picking someone from so far away, you have found an "excuse" so that you cannot have the sexual activity. There are too many possibilities involved here. My advice is to see if you cannot find a way to fall in love with your husband all over again. Make him your sex slave or be his sex slave or whatever works for the two of you. Enjoy the life you have with your current family. Have fun with your husband and with your daughters. Have fun as a family. Don't spend any energy and time pining away for some man you don't even know. Leave him alone and don't ever look back and wonder, "what might have been?" That is only a fantasy. You have to live a real life in the real world. Don't confuse the two.
Elsie, I genuinely wish you a happy life.

Those are for non-thinking people

2007-08-10T12:59:00.000-07:00

Question: I have been checking your blog for some time now. I have read all your answers ( really top-knotch stuff, Doc) and some of them several times. You haven't quit have you? I really enjoy reading your blog. Please keep writing it. Howie Kemp, Cleveland, Ohio

Answer: Thank you, Howie. No, I have not stopped answering questions. The problem has been that the majority of questions I have received lately involve politicians or celebrities. As you know from reading my other responses, I care very little for either group. Those who do seem interested in both groups are, in my view, generally among the non-thinking crowd. An individual with a gnat's brain might have some interest in what a politician might say now as he or she runs for political office. An individual with a gnat's brain might actually care about some movie starlet's latest date with some Hollywood "hunk." But for people who actually use their brains for thinking purposes, these two groups are a total waste of one's time. Now I do encourage everyone to vote. I vote. But there is absolutely no point in getting excited, one way or the other, about any potential candidate at this stage of the game. And it is all a big game. Most of it is a waste of time for everyone involved. Life is simply too brief for me to waste any of it on such nonsense. When people ask me questions about comments of specific politicians or about celebrities who are in rehab or who are divorcing, etc., I simply do not care. Consequently, I don't respond to such questions. Those items are for non-thinking people. Since I consider myself a thinking person, they do not interest me.

2012!

2007-07-12T12:58:00.000-07:00

Question: I have been reading about predictions of catastrophes that are supposed to happen to the planet in December 2012. What do you think will happen in 2012? Thomas Club, Columbus, Georgia.

Answer: Geologically? Nothing. Emotionally? Some people will work themselves into a "frenzy." Scientifically? Our solar system will enter the galaxtic center. It is a long natural cycle that has happened before and will happen again. The most intriguing question about all this is "How did the Maya know about this?"

Bomb Iran?

2007-06-19T13:44:00.000-07:00

Question: Should the U.S. bomb Iran? Bob Strum, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.

Answer: The fact that people are asking the question should tell everyone that there is a serious problem going on with Iran. I definitely think that Iran having access to nuclear weapons is an extremely bad thing -- not only for the United States, but for the Iranian people, the countries of the Middle East and the rest of the world. I do not think that Israel will allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons. They certainly should not. Nor should we. I do not think that the world can allow Iran to have nuclear weapons. If it comes to it, we should bomb Iran to stop the development of their nuclear technology. It has become apparent that Iran is assisting terrorists to fight us in Iraq. Perhaps we should attack Iran to stop that supply of munitions and terrorists to Iraq. Perhaps more specialized bombings could do the same thing. Iran is a nation whose current leaders are intent on causing harm and discontent throughout the world. Most of the Iranian people are good people who do not share the idiotic views of their leaders. However, if the leaders get control of nuclear weapons, they will use them. We cannot allow that. Consequently, I hate it for the Iranian people but I think that, ultimately, Iran is going to have to be bombed. To sit back and pretend that Iran does not represent a real and serious threat to people everywhere is the action of either a fool or an American Democratic politician. It is not an answer I like but it is an answer that I think is inevitable -- someone needs to bomb Iran. I think it should be selective bombing with genuine threats of additional bombing to follow. For example, either the government of Iran does "this," OR "such and such" facility will be destroyed. This way, we could achieve our goals with Iran while keeping the loss of life to a minimum. It's not nice but then the Iranian government is not nice nor do they have kind plans for the rest of the world. Until they are taken out, they will continue to cause problems and strife throughout the world. If they would sit over there and mind their own buisness, then I'd say "leave them be." But we know that they are exporting terror to Iraq and other areas of the world. Their own stated intentions include the destruction of Americans and America. Ideally, they would be removed and replaced with a democracy.

Rosie and Carbon Offsets are Bunk!

2007-05-29T14:26:00.000-07:00

Question: I don't understand this thing about planting trees instead of conserving energy. Can you explain it? And also, what about Rosie O'Donnell's statement that America is a terrorist nation? Do you think there is anything to it? Ramona Moore, Columbia, South Carolina.

Answer: I used your question, Ramona, because the carbon offset issue is real and because I have received over a dozen questions about Rosie O'Donnell. Regarding Rosie O'Donnell, please see my response on February 26, 2007. I absolutely do not care at all what Rosie O'Donnell says about anything. From the little I have seen on news clips, she is an extremely ignorant and a not very intelligent person. I simply do not care anything about her and will not waste any of my time watching or reading about her.
Regarding planting trees instead of reducing one's pollution, it is all a scam. For information about global warming, see my answer on October 6, 2006. This tree planting scam is called carbon offsets. Supposively, one can keep polluting and using excessive energy and offset their carbon "footprint" by paying some company to plant so many trees to offset one's carbon input into the atmosphere. It is all bunk. Ignore it. And certainly do not plant trees or pay anyone to plant trees as an "offset" for you. I love trees and plant many myself. I encourage you, Ramona, and everyone to plant trees. But not as a carbon offset. Rather, plant them for their beauty and the homes they provide for wildlife. Carbon offsets are only for non-thinking people.

Wrong on Illegals

2007-05-03T14:04:00.000-07:00

Question: Like many other new readers to your blog, I have gone back and read all your answers. Well done, by the way! You seem to support President Bush's positions. My question for you is: Is there some policy or area in which you think President Bush is completely wrong? Barry Johns, Bakersfield, California.

Answer: Thank you, Barry. I expect that, 75 - 100 years from now, President Bush will be recorded in history as one of our better Presidents. His unyielding support for freedom and liberty will be a strong legacy. However, there is one area in which I think President Bush is wrong and that is with illegal immigration. I certainly have nothing against legal immigration but I have genuine concerns over the manner in which illegal immigration has been tolerated. The mass media and the Democrats refuse to see the word "illegal" in front of the word immigration. They try to make anyone who opposes illegal immigration to be a racist or bigot or something. But I expect that from them. I think that President Bush should be tougher in his enforcement of the current laws regarding illegal immigration. I think that there are realistic alternatives to pardoning millions of illegal immigrants who are already in this country. I think President Bush is wrong with the way he had handled this problem and with his proposals for granting them "temporary" work permits. No other nation in the world would accept millions of illegal immigrants nor should they. We should not either!

How to Diet and actually lose Weight

2007-04-20T06:57:00.000-07:00

Question: Like so many of your readers, I just finished reading all your answers. I too am blown away with the diversity and the excellence of your responses. I especially like the way you answered the question about a birthday gift. Now I have a question for you. I have tried literally dozens of diets and none of them have had lasting results. Can you tell me how to really lose weight? Donna Hughes, Tacoma, Washington.

Answer: Yes, I can. Your body will lose weight when you consume less calories during a 24-hour day than your body uses during that same 24-hour day. If you burn more calories than you take in, you will lose weight. If you take in more calories than you burn, you will gain weight. It is really that simple.
I am not a medical doctor but I don't believe you need to be in order to have some common sense and figure this out for yourself. Now if you are a diabetic or have some other serious medical condition, you should check with your physician before beginning any diet. But for people without a medical condition, what I am saying about dieting should be all right for you.
The less calories you consume each day, the faster you will lose weight. But you need to be reasonable about it. Let me say this: the absolute most important ingredient in losing weight is willpower. You must tell yourself that you are going to do this and then you must stick with it. During the first two or three days, you will be extremely hungry and you will be tempted to, for just one time, to leave your diet and eat a big meal. If your willpower fails you, then you have to start all over again. Here's what you do: set a calorie intake goal. The lowest goal should be around 1,000 calories per day. A more moderate goal would be around 1,500 calories per day. You will lose weight with either of these goals. What you do is simply count every calorie you consume. Now here is a surprise for many people: the source of your calories does not matter as long as you stop eating when you reach your goal. For example, if your goal for each day is 1,200 calories, you could eat 600 calories of mashed potatoes and 600 calories of ice cream as long as you stop at 1,200. Of course, that is not a recommended way of getting your 1,200 calories. Instead, a bowl of oatmeal (160) and a grapefruit (100) with a cup of coffee (0)or hot tea (0)(both taken black) for breakfast. At lunch, an entire can of crabmeat (60), a couple of trail mix bars (180) and a fruit cup (110). It is not essential to consume a drink with every meal. If you must, consider water, unsweetened tea or a diet soft drink. I don't like some of the things in diet soft drinks so I don't recommend them but they are great as far as the calories go. In the afternoon, you may want a small box of raisins (130). You are now at 740 as you head into supper. You could eat an entire can of soup (200 - 250) and still be just under 1,000 for the day. Have another fruit cup (110) before going to bed and you are still under your 1,200 goal for the day. There are many options in which you can eat food with low calorie content.
This process has no choice but to work. You will lose weight. But it does take willpower. Now you should not eat like this for the rest of your life. You should only do this for about three to six months at a time. You will actually be eating healthy food. You do not need to do exercises or run for miles. Your body has no option except to drop weight. Now a word of warning: during this diet, you will lose weight on a regular basis but, all of a sudden, you will stop losing. You will eat the right amount of calories but you will stay the same weight. Don't worry. This is normal. Your body has adjusted. If your weight doesn't change for about four days in a row, one thing you can actually do is eat more than usual for a day or two. This will jumpstart your body. But then you need to go back to your calorie diet. If you keep counting your calorie intake and stay on goal, you will soon reach your desired weight. Many people lose 15 pounds during the first month of this diet.
After you reach your desired weight, this is the time to begin exercising and running. You now want to go back to eating without having to count every calorie. But don't binge on "fatburgers, fries and ice cream." Eat with common sense. Have lots of vegetables (go ahead and put butter on them). Eat fish and seafood. Don't pig out on desserts. But don't deny yourself on special occasions like birthday parties or anniversaries. You can maintain your desired weight using some common sense.
Dieting is not fun. And you have to be the one who decides it is what you want to do. No one else can decide this for you. This is true primarily because, for it to succeed, your willpower is required. Try this calorie-counting diet for a month. You won't like it. But at the end of a month, you can step on the scales and notice that you weigh less than you did a month ago. Stay on it for two or three months and you will notice a big difference in your weight. And so will your family, friends and co-workers. But best of all, you will notice it in your mirror and with the clothes you wear. The longer you stay on this diet, the more drastic your wardrobe will need to change. Bottom line: this diet actually works.
Donna, I wish you all the best as you lose weight. Several people have suggested that I write this up as a diet book. But really, there isn't much more to say about it. And it is not original to me. I'm sure many people have discovered this on their own. You simply burn more calories than you take in each day. The result: you lose weight. That's all there is to it.

Favorite Music

2007-04-18T11:34:00.000-07:00

Question: I have just finished reading all of your answers. I find the variety of topics to be amazing. I saw one music question which you answered with a response that I cannot disagree with. I have a music question. I am curious to know what is your favorite piece of music or your favorite song. Stephanie Bilcourt, London, England.
Answer: I think (and understand that one's choice of music is subjective) the best piece of music ever composed in the history of mankind is the first ten minutes of the 4th movement of Beethoven's 9th symphony.

Best and Worst U.S. Presidents of the 20th Century

2007-03-26T18:20:00.000-07:00

Question: I am currently a college student majoring in American History. A friend of mine and I came up with our list of the five best and the five worst Presidents of the 20th Century. We would really like to know what your list would look like. Will you please tell us your five best and five worst Presidents of the 20th Century? Bill Landry, San Jose, California.

Answer: By "best" and "worst," I am going to interpret that to mean Presidents who were effective at accomplishing things that history will prove to be in the good interests of the United States. This is, of course, my view. But I do have a good history of being proven correct and I think history will bear me out with these lists also.
My top five Presidents of the 20th Century, from 1-5, with 1 being the best, are: Ronald Reagan (R), Woodrow Wilson (D), Theodore Roosevelt (R), Dwight D. Eisenhower (R) and Harry Truman (D).
My bottom five Presidents of the 20th Century, from 1-5, with 5 being the worst, are:
Richard Nixon (R), Lyndon Johnson (D), Warren G. Harding (R), Bill Clinton (D) and Jimmy Carter (D).

Tattoos and Piercings!

2007-03-15T18:08:00.000-07:00

Question: I am a male who served four years in the military. I am now a college student. We have students from 18 years old to 60-something years old. I am 23. On the first day of class, I was walking behind a female student. I thought, walking behind her, that she looked terrific! She had one beautiful body. The more we walked, the more I realized that she might be in my class. Just before we entered a classroom building, she turned around and I was dazzled . . . by the reflected sunlight from her face. She had piercings in her lips, her ears, her eyebrows, her nose and she even had some spike sticking out from her chin. She was in my class. I sat one row over from her and looked at her. If she didn't have all those piercings (she also had one in her tongue, I noticed), she would be an extremely attractive woman. I lost all interest in asking her out for a date. I looked across the room and noticed a woman around 30 who had tattoos all over her arms. Her blouse hid what appeared to be more tattoos that continued under her blouse. They looked gross to me. Now I started looking for them. I saw tattoos on ankles, legs, the back of the waist and on arms. I saw piercings all over both women's and men's faces. I even saw one guy who had ear plugs like the Mayans used to wear. Totally gross to me. My question to you is what do you think of all these piercings and tattoos that people are putting on their bodies now? Michael Whitfield, Trenton, New Jersey

Answer: As long as it harms no one, to each his own.

Andrews Answers: Why not more?

2007-03-06T10:09:00.000-08:00

Andrews Answers: Why not more?

Why not more?

2007-02-26T12:50:00.000-08:00

Question: Why is it, Dr. Andrews, that you do not answer more questions? I really like your blog and visit every day. I am always hoping that there is a new answer. But usually, there is not. Why do you not do more with this blog? Why don't you have an answer everyday? Mel Perth, Nassau, Bahamas

Answer: There are several reason why I don't have a more active blog. Primarily, I only answer questions that either interest me or through which I think I might be able to help someone. Most of the questions I have recently received deal with politicians or Anna Nicole Smith. I have absolutely no interest in Smith and very little in politicians. While the blog is international in scope, in reality, it has become more of a blog for people in the United States. You Mel, being from the Bahamas, may have some interest in Smith. But I do not. You Mel, being from the Bahamas, may not have any interest in American politicians. And I have very little. But most of my recent questions have dealt with American politicians who are already running for President of our country. For me, it is simply way too early to be bothered by such nonsense. I really do not begin to get interested until after both political conventions. And I almost always already know by then for whom I will vote. Consequently, American politics is boring and pointless for me. I do vote but I waste very little of my time reading about politicians or watching them on television.

This reminds me of a question I just received about Al Gore and the Oscars. I have addressed the issue of global warming in a previous answer but this reminds me of Benjamin Franklin's saying "Don't waste time . . . for that is the stuff that life is made of." I simply will not give Al Gore and the Oscars any of my time (any of my life). I say this because I do not think that they are worth any of my life (time). Al Gore is completely and totally irrelevant to me as are the Oscars. Neither mean a single thing to me. Why would I spend any of my time (life) considering either of them? Do you see what I mean? This is why I chose not to respond to the question about the Oscars and Al Gore. This is one of the major reasons I do not have a daily blog answer for you.

I do appreciate that you enjoy my blog and wish it were done daily. But I have no interest in doing a daily blog. I am content to answer one or two questions a month.

Ready for black and female!

2007-01-30T17:41:00.000-08:00

Question: Do you think America is ready for a black President? How about a female President? Jean Montgomery, Alburquerque, New Mexico.

Answer: First of all, Jean, I think it is way too early to even be discussing American Presidential politics for the 2008 campaign. I like to wait until after the conventions. To respond to your question, yes, I think most Americans would accept either a black person or a female as President. Personally, I think our current Secretary of State, Condi Rice, would make an excellent President. She is both black and female. I would vote for her. I do not think that someone should vote for a person primarily because that person is black or female. I do not think someone should vote against a person primarily because that person is black or female. While I would vote for Secretary Rice, who is black, I would not vote for the Senator from Illinois, who is black. While I would vote for Secretary Rice, who is female, I would not vote for the Senator from New York, who is female. Neither of those two people have the intelligence, the character or the experience I would prefer to see in a President. Secretary Rice has all three. That is why I would vote for her, not because she is female and black.

Become best friends before you become lovers!

2007-01-17T18:14:00.000-08:00

Question: For four years, I lived with "Roger." I pretty much supported us both. He had odd jobs, off and on, over the four years and helped occasionally with the groceries. It is my house so I guess I should say "for four years, Roger lived with me." Once, I had somewhat minor surgery but had to stay in the hospital for three days. I found out later that Roger cheated on me while I was in the hospital. Another bad thing he did was to take my ATM card and clean out my account. He said he was going to pay me back but he never has. This is the truth: four day before our 4th anniversary, he tells me it is over between us and that he is moving out. And he does. He now lives with a woman who works where I do. She has quite a reputation and two-year old son. My question for you is why do I still feel love for him in my heart. Why do I even care about him? Now that we are no longer a couple, all my friends tell me that he is an awful person and I am lucky to be rid of him. But I miss him. And if he wanted to come back to me, I probably would agree. What should I do? Allyson Post, Cleveland, Ohio.

Answer: Allyson, Allyson, Allyson. Bless your heart. You sound like a person with a kind heart and anyone would be lucky to be in your life. What should you do? You should wait until you meet a man who will love you for you. You should never settle for a jerk like "Roger." It always surprises me when I hear of a woman who tolerates such treatment at the hands of men like Roger. They are so many "Rogers" out there who treat women so poorly. My advice to all of them is simply not to ever accept it or tolerate it. The first time it happens, say goodbye. Allyson, you should consider yourself fortunate that you dodged a jerk like Roger. Think how awful your life would be if you and Roger had married. Someday, love (real genuine love) will come your way. Find a man with whom you can be best friends. Fall in love with this best friend and marry him. Forget about Roger! He is a part of your past. Learn from your mistakes with men like that and resolve never to make the same mistakes again. Never ever consider taking Roger back into your life! There actually are decent men out there, each of whom wants to find a woman who will be their best friend and whom they can fall in love with and marry. Become best friends before you become lovers. You'll both appreciate it more if you do. I wish you all the best, Allyson.

Next Year?

2006-12-27T13:51:00.000-08:00

Question: Do you think the war in Iraq will be finished during 2007? Who do you think will win the Republican and Democratic Presidential nominations next year? Thank you. Joanna Calvert, New York, NY
Answer: Sorry, Joanna, but I am not a prognosticator (I can not predict the future.)

Genius get-together?

2006-11-21T13:06:00.000-08:00

Question: Why don't a bunch of you genius types get together and solve the world's problems? I think if the world would send genius representatives to a genius conference that many of the world's problems could be solved. Conrad Strayer, Cincinnati, Ohio

Answer: Conrad, I have heard this question several times. Many years ago, I used to think the same thing. I have often thought of all the genius personalities who were alive in the year 1800 and the remarkable things that were achieved by them. The reality is that, in today's culture, genius is neither respected nor appreciated. If a group of true genius level people were organized to help solve the world's problems, who would accept the results of that group? If I had a solution to a major specific problem, how would I get that information to anyone in a position to do anything about it? And even if I did reach the people in authority, they would not accept my solution. On a worldwide basis, politics has permeated our society. If someone tried to organize a group that only contained people of genius level, some legal and/or politically correct group would try to sue saying that dumb people had been left out of the group. I could reply that dumb and stupid people have their own group. They are called politicians. But it wouldn't accomplish anything so I won't. To answer your question, the reason that a genius group doesn't form and try to help with world problems is because no one would accept the solutions of the genius group. It simply is not practical. And this group of people are intelligent enough to know it would not work.

They are real!

2006-11-02T14:19:00.000-08:00

Question: I have read all your answers and truly believe you give good responses to difficult questions. My friends and I got together to come up with a question for you. Don't give us a long drawn out response with lots of quotes and facts. Just tell us yes or no. Okay? The question is: are UFOs real? And is their a government coverup of UFOs or not? Thank you. Hank Shepherd, Charleston, S.C.

Answer: Yes, they are real. Yes, the United States government has been involved in an official "coverup" since at least 1947.

Find someone else

2006-10-30T15:47:00.000-08:00

Question: My boyfriend and I argue all the time. What should we do? Katy McGlynns, Alexandria, Va.

Answer: This may sound like a flippant response; but it is not. Find yourself someone else. Find a new boyfriend with whom you do not argue all the time. Life is way too short to spend it arguing. There are too many wonderful things you could be doing istead.

Media are democratic allies

2006-10-19T10:37:00.000-07:00

Question: I have noticed that you do not speak favorably about the media of the United States. What are you referring to and do you think the media are not objective? Susan P., Napersville, Illinois.

Answer: There are several reasons, Susan, that I do not refer to America's media in a favorable light. The primary reason for this is that they have, in reality, given up any pretense of providing objective journalism. I am referring to the national media — network television and major daily newspapers. Without the support of America's national mass media, the democratic political party would not, I am convinced, have even a remote possibility of gaining any seats in Congress in the upcoming elections. Based upon pure facts, Susan, I think, on a national level, most Americans would agree that the republican political party supports concepts that are better for our nation that the ideas of the democrats. However, the media clouds the facts and bombards Americans with speculations that they present as news. The media are also excellent at ignoring facts.

Let me give you some examples. A few weeks after President Bush took office in 2001, there were numerous stories in the media about how the economy was entering a depression and it was all Bush's fault. The man had literally only been in office for a few weeks and obviously had nothing to do with the economy going sour. The media knew this. They also knew that the downward slope was a direct result of the previous administration's (Clinton's) policies. But rather than report the facts, for the next two years, the media repeatedly told Americans it was President Bush's fault. Now, after Bush's policies have been enacted and enough time has passed, the economy is booming. But the media cannot find it in themselves to give Bush credit. The market is at record highs, unemployment is way down and, in the last two years, over six and a half million new jobs have been created. This is all a direct result of Bush's tax cuts and economic policies. And if the democrats were to gain control of Congress, despite the fact that the tax cuts are working, they would repeal them. But you would never know that Bush's policies are working or that the democrats would repeal them from the media. They simply don't report it. They don't report that the democrats' plan for Iraq is surrender. But they do report that the democrats have a wonderful plan for Iraq. When gasoline prices were around $3.00 a gallon, it was all Bush's fault. It was all over the media. Now that gas prices have dropped to around $2.00 a gallon, there is no credit to Bush. It is usually not mentioned in the media. When there is a scandal involving a republican, it is all over the media for weeks and weeks. But when there is a scandal involving a democrat, it is barely mentioned.

The American media has literally become a supporter and an arm of the democratic political party. They have placed themselves in the same position as the democrats. When something bad happens to America, it is good for the democrats and the media. The media reports on the bad news extensively. When something good happens to America, it is bad for the democrats and the media. The media tends to ignore the good things and, if they do report it, it is a secondary story and only mentioned once.

I think it is clear that the media is extremely bias. They report things, global warming is a good example, that they support as though they were proven scientific facts when, in reality, they are not. The American mass media simply cannot be trusted to be either objective or accurate. I hope this explains, Susan, why I speak unfavorably about America's mass media.

Global Warming is BUNK!

2006-10-06T12:09:00.000-07:00

Question:I have been reading your blog for a couple of months now. I have been trying to think of a really good question for you. I told a friend about you and he immediately said, "Ask him if global warming is real?" I thought, "great question." Is global warming a real thing or a political thing or both? Jeremy Jones, Lexington, Ky.

Answer: Global warming is primarily a "political thing." It is a ploy of the American democratic political party, with former Vice President Al Gore taking the podium, to create fear and guilt among non-thinking Americans. Most of the "science" that these people espouse is, to say the best about it, suspect.

One ironic thing about all this is that many of the "experts" who are now predicting a global warming trend were, in the early 1970s, predicting an ice age by the year 2000. The American democratic party was on that bandwagon also. Look back at magazines from the early 1970s and you will be shocked at all the articles of "doom and gloom" for the upcoming ice age. And, of course, it was primarily man's fault (mostly that of Americans) and there was nothing we could do to stop it. I thought it was all a bunch of baloney then as I am convinced that global warming is now.

Jeremy, there are literally dozens and dozens, if not hundreds and thousands, of real scientists who think extremely little of Al Gore's "science." Look at what some say. Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at Cook University, in Australia, said, "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. The man is an embarrassment to U.S. science. His propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science." This is not a republican politician speaking. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Atmospheric Science at M.I.T., said, "Don't believe the hype. Al Gore is wrong. There is no consensus on global warming." On Friday, September 21 (a date I will mention later for another reason), at the United Nations, Gore stated that cigarette smoking is a "significant contributor to global warming." And he was serious. The man is an absolute joke. Professor Tim Patterson, a paleoclimatalogist at Carleton University, said, "Change in the brightness of the sun correlates with the Earth's temperatures. The sun has been brighter than normal lately." Professor Wibjorn Karlen, of the Department of Physical Geography at Stockholm University, said, "The mass balance of Antartica is positive. More snow is accumulating than melting off." One of the major concepts of the global warming people is that ice is melting in Antartica. It is melting but it is being replaced at a faster rate than it is melting. There is a net positive gain. I could present dozens more examples of scientists who find no scientific support for the concept of global warming but I think the point has been made.

Briefly, Jeremy, let's look at the democrats' willing allies in this global warming "thing." The mass media has jumped on this and completely supports it and talks about it as though it were an established scientific fact. They hope to make it a fact through repetition rather than science.

The media, as the democrats' mouthpiece, present things to the public as though they were scientific fact when, in reality, they simply are not. For example, the media repeatedly presents the Kyoto Accords as a scientifically-based treaty. Only the "backward republicans" kept the United States from agreeing to this "wonderful forward-looking" treaty. The truth is that, in April 1998, over 17,000 scientists with academic degrees, signed a petition in opposition to the Kyoto Accords. But the global warming people and the American mass media do not want the general public to be aware of this fact.

Let me give you another simple example of media bias regarding global warming. During the summer of 2006, there were numerous reports in the media of record high temperatures. The summer of 2006 is now in the record books as having the second highest temperatures on record. (The highest summer temperatures on record are for the year 1934.) However, on September 21 (still officially summer), six states had record low temperatures (Arizona, Utah, West Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky and Georgia). Did the media have big headlines telling about record low temperatures? Of course not.

Jeremy, changes in temperatures are a natural cycle of nature. There is plenty of scientific evidence that most glaciers, around the world, are growing in size, not decreasing as the global warming people and the media would have us think. In Norway, Canada, Switzerland, Ecuador, Russia, New Zealand, Argentina, Greenland and the U.S., glaciers are all growing in size. This is not a political opinion but a scientific fact.

Another interesting scientific fact that the global warming people and the mass media do not want the general public to know is that a single volcano can produce more toxic emissions into the atmosphere in one single week than all human activity combined produces in a year. When there are several volcanoes erupting around the globe, it is easy to see how insignificant the human contribution to atmospheric conditions actually is.

I could continue like this for a long time but I hope you get the point. I could have simply stated that the concept of man causing global warming to the Earth is bunk. But I wanted to give you some scientific facts and the thoughts of other scientists to support why I think it is bunk.

I honestly don't care about this

2006-09-28T16:59:00.000-07:00

Question: What do you think of former President Clinton's actions on Chris Wallace's interview? Corey W., Hartford, Ct.

Answer: I almost decided, Corey, not to respond to your question simply because I have no interest in Bill or Hillary Clinton. However, I realize that many people are still fascinated with them. Whether or not Clinton's "fit of anger" at Wallace was contrived (as some suspect) or not doesn't really matter. Clinton is a narcissist, a manipulator and a proven liar. He easily becomes upset when things don't go his way or when anyone questions his "brilliance." It is too late for Clinton, or his wife (also a proven liar) to build onto his legacy as President. It is now totally in the hands of History. He (and she) can rant, rave, protest and plead his case but it is all in vain. History will determine his legacy. The book was closed on his Presidency when Bush was sworn in as the new President on January 20, 2001. History will evaluate Clinton's Presidency based on what he said and did during his time in office. All his protestations since he left office will have no bearing on History's evaluation of him. I do not think History will be kind to Clinton (or Mrs. Clinton). I say that because he History will eventually be written based upon facts and not the editorial opinions of the liberal left media in the U.S.

Stay!

2006-09-21T18:49:00.000-07:00

Question: Listen, I need a short answer to a situation that is truly bothering me. I am a junior in college and doing well. I have been offered a job that has a future and pays well. Should I leave college and take the job or stay in college and go for my degree? Stan N., Boston, Mass.
Answer: Stay in college and graduate!

I question their patriotism

2006-09-18T18:04:00.000-07:00

Question: I saw, on a TV interview program, where a democratic senator got all bent out of shape, diverted the question and accused the interviewer of questioning his patriotism. What do you think of this tactic? Blake S., Albany, NY.

Answer: I think, Blake, it is a tactic that has been working. It is not politically correct to question a liberal's patriotism. Nonetheless, I do. Democratic Congressmen has basically proposed that America surrender in our current war with terrorists. Because of that stance, I question their patriotism. The results of their "cut and run" strategies would be damaging to the United States. Consequently, I question their patriotism. Whether they admit it or not, we are at war. How can you call yourself a patriot when everything you propose would hurt your country and help your country's enemies? A democrat politician may be able to call himself a patriot under such conditions but I cannot. I seriously question his patriotism.

I realize, Blake, that this answer makes me sound like a conservative republican. I never considered myself as such. It's simply that the democratic party has moved so far left of mainstream America and mainstream American values, that I have no choice but to support republican candidates.

The War on Terrorists

2006-09-11T09:30:00.000-07:00

Question: Hi Scot. I have read all your answers and have found them all to be excellent responses. It got me to thinking. Why couldn't you or some group of geniuses like you come up with a solution to the problem with the terrorists? Can you think of a way to deal with the terrorists? Jared K., Boston, Mass.

Answer: Thanks, Jared, for the kind comments and an excellent question. I have thought of a plan that I think would be successful in stopping terrorist activities. I cannot be certain it would work because of the nature of the people involved. We are not dealing with sane and rational people. Consequently, it is difficult to determine how they will respond to different strategies. I do not think that I should publicly reveal such a plan. It is not likely that President Bush will be calling me; but still, I do not feel comfortable revealing such a plan to which anyone could have access.

However, Jared, let's look at this "problem," as you call it. It is actually much more than a problem. While several nations in Europe (France, Spain, Italy and others), the American democratic political party and the American mass media refuse to acknowledge it, the terrorists have declared war on America. And, in reality, we are at war with terrorist groups around the world. President Bush said we need to hunt them (terrorists) down and kill them. To date, I have not heard anyone offer a better solution. (Although, as previously mentioned, I think I have one.) And this is from someone who is a vegetarian primarily because I am opposed to killing anything (except mosquitoes, ticks and fleas - God's mistakes). Now while I choose to eat vegetables, I have friends and relatives who consistently eat hamburgers in front of me. That is fine. I would never infringe upon their right to do so. As long as sportsmen obey hunting laws and hunt only where they have permission to hunt, I have no problem with them. That is their right as it is my right to choose not to kill any animals. But we are not dealing with people who practice democracy. These terrorists have said they want to kill us and our way of life. History clearly demonstrates that you cannot successfully compromise with such people. How can good compromise with evil? How can America compromise with people whose goal is the destruction of America?

Simply because the American democratic political party refuses to acknowledge that we are at war with a very real, though unorthodox and irrational, enemy does not lessen the reality of our situation. We are at war - and, most likely, will remain at war for many years to come. Perhaps someone in the higher ranks of our military or government will think of my plan and use it. Perhaps it will work. But it may not. It involves getting Muslim nations like Saudi Arabia, Egypt and others actively and directly involved as our allies in the war on terror. But they would not like the involvement I have in mind. The entire plan requires America to go more on the offensive and play a less reactionary role.

This is the fifth anniversary of the terrorists' attacks of September 11, 2001. It should always remind us of the terrible destruction that our enemies are capable of performing and of the deaths they hope to replicate. It is obvious that the terrorists are constantly planning additional attacks on America. Enough said.

It's easier than you think!

2006-08-18T09:11:00.000-07:00

Question: I am confused over the differences between the Democratic and Republican political parties. I am not a stupid woman. I have graduated from college and work as a professional. I voted in my first two presidential elections in 2000 and 2004. In both cases, I voted for George Bush. My parents would be horrified to know this. They are life long democrats. But I could not bring myself to vote for Al Gore or John Kerry. They both seem like such shallow men. I admit it had nothing to do with political parties; rather, it was simply that I had a hunch that Gore and Kerry were not up to the job. We have an election for U.S. Senate in my state. The democratic candidate comes from a political family of crooks in Memphis. I cannot vote for him. Again, by elimination, I will be voting republican. My parents would have a fit. Can you please explain the differences between the two parties? Can you do it in a way that is easy to understand? Lori M., Jackson, Tennessee.
Answer: Lori, there are several things to address from your question. First of all, you should know, and your parents should know, that the democratic party of today is not the democratic party of forty years ago. I have heard it said that if John Kennedy were coming along today, he most likely would be a republican. Your parents need to reevaluate why they vote democratic. Lori, perhaps you have heard the saying "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." Simply put, this describes the difference between the democratic party and the republican party. The democratic party gives a man a fish. The republican party teaches the man how to fish. Also, look at how the democratic party has positioned itself. When someone good happens to America, it is bad for the democrats. When something bad happens to America, it is good for the democrats. For me, that is simply a terrible position for a political party to place itself. Like you, I felt I had no choice but to vote for Bush in the last two elections. Does that make me a republican? Since then, I have voted for a democrat for Governor of my state. Does that make me a democrat? Like you, Lori, I try to vote for the best person for the position. I think your woman's intuition (your hunch) has done you well. I am familiar with the Senate race in your state and think that you have come to a wise decision. In the last 25 years, I think that history will prove that the republicans, on a national level, have been far superior at handling the welfare of our nation than the democrats. The democratic party has been taken over by extreme liberal leftists and special interest groups. This has not been a positive either for the party or our nation. The reason, Lori, that it may seem confusing to you at times is because the three traditional television networks and nearly all of the large newspaper operations are also liberal leftists. They report the news with a liberal slant. They have a perspective that is the same as the democratic party. But the truth is out there. And it always works its way to the surface. It may takes years sometimes but the truth has a way of making itself known. An example of what I am referring to is Bill Clinton. He had always been the media's guy. But I am convinced that history will record his presidency as most likely the worst one of the 20th century. In some cases, we simply have to rely on our "hunches" and hope for the best.

World's Oldest City?

2006-08-12T10:39:00.000-07:00

Question: I recently read about some ruins that were recently discovered in the deserts of western Egypt that are supposed to be extremely old. Where is, in your opinion, the world's oldest city? Stephen C., Lincoln, Nebraska.
Answer: When one is dating things, Stephen, it should not be a matter of opinion but simply fact. However, in archaeology, facts are not concise nor are they generally agreed upon. The ruins you refer to are mostly likely those at Nabta Playa whose stone astronomical alignments give a date of 17,700 B.C. or almost twenty thousand years of age. Also with astronomical alignments that point to around 20,000 years ago are the ruins at Tiahuanaco in Bolivia. This place is now frequently referred to as Tiawanaku. The original name was Taypicala. In addition to the alignments that indicate an extreme age, there are intricately carved stone monoliths that have been transported to this site that weigh in excess of 400 tons. How they were transported, we do not know. Some of the stonework shows precisely cut grooves and drill holes that look to be the work of modern technology. They were not chipped by hand. How they were produced we do not know. Based on what has thus far been recovered (and fully realizing that much is yet to be discovered), it is my opinion that Tiahuanaco is the world's oldest city.

Move on

2006-08-09T08:06:00.000-07:00

Question: My boyfriend and I have been living together for almost seven months. We are both in our mid-twenties and both have good jobs. We plan to marry but I am having serious doubts. We get home from work at about the same time. I do all the housework and all the cooking. When I come in, I begin fixing supper. When he gets in, he watches television. After supper, he spends the entire evening playing video games. I mean like four or five hours straight until he goes to bed. We rarely have any sexual contact at all anymore. If this is to be my future with this man, I don't want it. What do you suggest? Can I change him? Trina C., San Diego, CA.
Answer: Can you change him? Not likely. And, if you did, the process you would go through to accomplish a positive change would not be worth it. The process would also change you — most likely in a negative way. A man in his mid-twenties who prefers video games to having a sexual relationship with a loving woman has some real problems. I have read of people, always males by the way, who have become obsessed and consumed by these interactive games. If you were a close friend of mine or a relative of mine, my suggestion to you, Trina, would be to "move on." And, if I were you, I would thank my lucky stars that you had not already married this man. If you were married to him, my suggestion would be different and much more complicated. However, since you are both young and independent, there is no good reason for you to continue this relationship. Even if you still love this man, it is obvious that his concept of love is different from yours. Move on — get your own apartment, continue in your job and follow your heart. Someone else will come to you. Everyone deserves to be happy. Your current boyfriend may be happy with the situation he has now but you obviously are not. You certainly should not continue in such a relationship. You will find someone who will love you and whom you will love. And the two of you will be happy together. And that is as it should be.

Pyramids were not tombs

2006-08-01T09:29:00.000-07:00

Question: I am confused about something. In elementary school, in high school and in college, I was taught that the Egyptian pyramids were built as tombs for the pharaohs. I just read a book that stated there was absolutely no proof that the pyramids had ever been used as tombs. What is the correct answer? Peter van Doorst, Chicago, IL.
Answer: The book you just read, Peter, is correct. There has never been any evidence or even any indication the any of the ten Egyptian pyramids were ever used as tombs. When you look at the design of the pyramids, especially that of the Great Pyramid, you quickly realize what a foolish notion it is that they were built as tombs. They have nothing in common with the real tombs that have been discovered in Egypt. I distinctly remember questioning my 6th grade teacher when he told us that the pyramids at Giza were built to be used as tombs for their pharaoh builders. The truth is that they were neither designed as tombs nor were they ever used as tombs.

Rain on the Great Sphinx

2006-07-17T12:10:00.000-07:00

Question: I have recently come across an article regarding the erosion on the Great Sphinx in Egypt. It is apparently a quite controversial topic. Do you know about this and what are your views regarding it? Rod, Birmingham, Alabama.
Answer: Actually, Rod, I am rather familiar with this subject. It leads to fascinating questions. There have been numerous books written on this subject. You should read some of them. The most conclusive research of which I am aware was done by a British engineer and geologist, David Coxill, in 1997 and 1998. He determined that the rounded erosion of the Sphinx, the Sphinx enclosure, the Sphinx Temple and the Valley Temple were all caused by rainfall. The "experts" refute this. They now say the erosion was caused by salt erosion. What this is is the flaking off of very thin layers of rock caused by dew that reacts with salt in the limestone rock and results in a flaking off of the outer surface. Over many years, this results in erosion. While this is certainly a proven method of erosion, it leaves a distinctive pattern in the rock face. That pattern is not present at the Sphinx. Also, and most damaging to these "experts'" version, is the fact that only the Sphinx, the Sphinx enclosure, the Sphinx Temple and the Valley Temple (both these temples were built from the rock that was removed to carve the Sphinx) show the distinctive style of water erosion that is now present in Giza. If the salt erosion method was the cause of erosion at Giza, then other structures would also show evidence of such erosion. They do not. Rain erosion causes a very distinctive pattern. That pattern is clearly obvious at the Sphinx. Only an "expert" with a political bias is unable to see it. Because of the climate conditions of that area, recognizing that the erosion of the Sphinx was caused by rainfall means that the age of the Sphinx would have to be more than twice the "accepted age." That is why the "experts" cannot accept rainfall as the source of erosion. If they accept rainfall, then they have absolutely no explanation for who built the Sphinx. But to answer your question, Rod, they is no doubt in my mind that the erosion of the Sphinx, the Sphinx enclosure, the Sphinx Temple and the Valley Temple is the result of rain.

Birthday surprise

2006-06-27T11:01:00.000-07:00

Question: Hi Scot. I have read all your answers to all the questions put to you. I love your answers. I really do. You say you will answer most any question and I have kind of an unusual one. I would like to get a woman I know a special present for her 60th birthday. I want to get her something different and something she would enjoy. But I don't know what. She likes nature, Elvis, and her grandchildren. She is divorced. Do you have an "answer" for me? Thank you. Rhonda, Dallas, Texas.
Answer: The best Elvis book ever written is called Lips. The author is Byron Edwards and he has a website at www.byronedwards.net . You can order the book through his website and, if you have enough time before the birthday, you can get the author to personalize the book. I know she will enjoy this book and, if you have time to get it personalized, she will appreciate your efforts in that regard.

Best Country Music Artist

2006-06-12T13:01:00.000-07:00

Question: I noticed your reply to the question about the best male volcalists. I am a big country music fan. I wonder who you think is the absolute best all around country music performer today? Thank you. Karen Simmons, Horse Cave, Ky.
Answer: Martina McBride

A Suggestion

2006-06-09T08:46:00.000-07:00

Question: I enjoyed your response to the question about the "Da Vinci Code" book. However, you mentioned that you have not read this novel. Why did you chose not to
read this book and do you have any recommendations for a better book in this genre?
Patrick, New York, NY.
Answer: The reason I chose not to read this book is because, from the reviews and promotions of the book, it was obvious to me that the author had not done a very good
job of researching his "facts." I like to read novels that, where possible, use accurate historical facts. I do have a suggestion for you for a well-researched novel in this genre. It is "Decipher" by Stel Pavlou.

He only slapped me once!

2006-05-26T11:31:00.000-07:00

Question:
Hi Scot. My name is Rachel. I am 17 years old and have been dating the same man (in
his early twenties) for the past seven months. I think I am in love with him. He treats me very nice. He is a bit domineering but I suppose that is due to our age
differences. A friend of mine told me to quit dating him. He did slap me in the face once and that hurt but he did apologize for it and has not done it again. I think he is very masculine but my friend thinks he is arrogant. I just want to know what to do. Yes or no, should I continue dating him?
Answer:
No.

Da Vinci Code is a novel

2006-05-14T11:03:00.000-07:00

Question: I read The Da Vinci Code about a year ago. I did not understand it or like it very much. I know it caused some bad feelings among certain religions. Now that it is being released as a movie, more people seem to be upset. Would you please explain what all the fuss is about? Margie, Roswell, Georgia.

Answer: Margie, I have not read The Da Vinci Code but I still think I can answer your question. I have read some brief parts of the book and am somewhat aware of some of the historical aspects of the story. First, and perhaps most importantly, this book is a novel. About 20 years ago, a non-fiction book was written using pretty much the same theme. The authors of that book sued the author of this book for plagerism and lost. The primary reason they lost is because this book is a novel. It is "make-believe." It is not written to be believed as real. Suppose I told you that I was going to write a novel and I gave you a brief summary of the story. I told you that a young man was driving down the road with three sexy college coeds. The one is the front seat leaned over and whispered in his ear, "I'm horny." The two in the back seat heard what she had said and they both agreed that they two were horny. The young man smiled. Suddenly a beam of light transported them through space to other planet in the galaxy. The people on this planet looked like humans from Earth but wore very little clothes. In order to fit in, the four Earth people had to also go around almost naked. Their were dragons on this planet that could fly. Using their wits and a lot of luck, the four Earth people were determined to return to Earth. Margie, you might say that is a totally unbelieveable plot. I could act surprised by your response and say, "what part do you find unbelieveable?" You could say, "that all three of those college girls would be horny at the same time." In any case, the book would be fiction. It might be a fun read but it would not be something anyone should believe. The same is true for The Da Vinci Code.
In this book, the author makes several mistakes of fact. He also has Jesus Christ married. That is, in my view, simply poor taste. But his "facts" are easy to expose. He says that "Shekinah" was the powerful female consort of the male Yahweh and that there was ritualistic sex in the Jerusalem Temple. This is enough to make Jewish people upset with the book. Shekinah refers to the glory that attends Yahweh. Yahweh is never described as being either male or female but spirit. There is absolutely no historical evidence of any ritualistic sexual activity in the Temple. But perhaps the author's biggest factual errors involve the events surrounding the Roman Emperor Constantine's Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. The book says that the Council passed by a very narrow vote a resolution affirming the divinity of Jesus. Totally not true. It never happened. The deity of Jesus had been affirmed from the earliest writings and was never a question. According to the book, the Council voted to move the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. Not true. No such vote ever took place. Sunday was the original day of worship for early Christians (Acts 20:7 and I Corinthians 16:2). The book says that the Council voted to make the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John the only "acceptable" gospels and all others were to be excluded. Again, not true. No such vote was ever taken. The four traditional gospels had pretty much been accepted by 200 A.D. Another big error of fact in this book is that it states that the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi documents both proved that assertions in the Bible are wrong. The book also says that the Vatican has supressed these documents. The Dead Sea Scrolls contain no Christian documents. They do not mention Jesus. They are a library of Jewish literature from the Essenes. They do contain parts of the Old Testament but there is nothing really controversial about them. The Nag Hammadi documents were found in Egypt and are considered Gnostic information. They contain nothing to do with the New Testament gospels. They contain nothing about a grail story as this book states. The Vatican has absolutely no control over either these documents or the Dead Sea Scrolls. Regarding Jesus being married to Mary Magdalene, the book says it is "a matter of historical record." Not true. The book bases this on the Aramaic word "komonos." This book translates that word as "spouse" and says that is proof that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married. However, all scholars translate komonos as "associate" or "friend." There is never any translation that is means "spouse." Despite being able to show that the book uses factual errors to make its points, we need to remember that it is just a novel. You didn't enjoy it but I'm sure many others did. I'm sure many will enjoy the movie. But remember, Margie, it is a work of fiction. It is like going to watch Forrest Gump. It may be a good movie, but it is all fiction. I realize this is a long answer but I hope you can see why Protestants, Catholics and followers of the Jewish faith would all be offended by the statements in this book. At the same time, there are a lot of things "out there" that are in poor taste. We should not allow them, Margie, to upset us. This is one reason it is so important to know what is real historical fact and what is not. This book may provide many with an excuse to do some research of their own to find genuine factual information.

Best Male Singers

2006-05-02T10:47:00.000-07:00

Question: I found your response to the "best legs" question to be excellent. You did not go for the obvious and I am sure that dancer has beautiful legs. My question, since you answer these type, is who do you think has the best male singing voice? My husband was saying people like Frank Sinatra and Bing Crosby. I was thinking of Ed Ames. I am really interested in your view.

Answer: The best male vocalists are Elvis Presley and Roger Whittaker.

Most beautiful legs in the world!

2006-04-29T08:21:00.000-07:00

Question: In your opinion, what woman has the most beautiful legs in the world?
Sam, Los Angeles, California

Answer: Jennifer McNamara of the Nashville Ballet

How do I ask you a question?

2006-04-28T11:21:00.000-07:00

I realize that it is somewhat difficult to pose a question directly from this blog. But the way to do it is to simply click on "comment" at the end of any previous answer and use that space to ask your question. I will receive all such questions.

Dump her!

2006-04-22T08:42:00.000-07:00

Question: You said that you answer questions about relationships. I have been dating a woman for four months. We have had absolutely terrific sex for the past three months. But the last three or four weeks, I have noticed that she has less interest in me. At the same time, I think I am
beginning to fall in love with her. Last Friday, she cancelled a date and on Saturday, she said she was not feeling well. But on Sunday afternoon, we had a session of fantastic sex. She could not have been better. But still, I
have noticed that she is not as caring as she was earlier in our relationship. We aren't fighting; I just have noticed that the atmosphere has changed. I would like for the relationship to progress to a deeper and more meaningful level but she seems primarily interested in the sex. I want more than a physical relationship with her but I feel it slipping away. What should I do?
— Gary, Dallas, Texas

Answer: First, let me say that I respect you, Gary, for saying that you want a real love relationship with this woman. You didn't tell me your ages and that can be an important factor. One of the most difficult things in any relationship between two people is to realize, no matter how much one may wish it, if both are not on the same page, it is not likely to succeed. In other words, it takes two. One cannot have a happy relationship without the total commitment of the other. You sound as though the two of you have a successful sexual relationship. Many couples, often married, do not even have that. But you have found, or are finding, that sex alone is not enough to have a happy relationship. Love is either there or it is not. In your case, I think you and I both can tell that it is not there on the part of your sexual partner. My advice to you is, before any more time passes, go ahead and dump her. I don't think she is going to be too upset. And you will be doing yourself a big favor. There are many many other women "out there" who are also seeking what you (and everyone else) is seeking — love. Sex is a wonderful expression of love. But sex without love is simply a physical act — good, but not nearly as fulfilling as making love. I remember a guy once bragging about all the women with whom he had made love. I immediately told him that he was lying. He had not made love with any of them. He was flabbergasted. He insisted that he had and I did not know what I was talking about. I told him that he had had sex with those women but he had probably never made love in his life. There is a world of difference and it is worth the search. Perhaps you will find it easier the next time if you establish a real friendship with your partner before you hit the sheets. It depends upon what you are seeking — simply a physical act or the art of making love. I think, Gary, that you are truly searching for genuine love. She's out there! I know sometimes you think you will never find her. But you will. The one you are meant to spend the rest of your life with is definitely out there. You may have several "first dates" before you find her but when you do, you and she will know it. You won't have to write for advice because you both will know it. Good luck to you, Gary.

Celebrities' opinions

2006-04-19T13:37:00.000-07:00

Question: I am concerned about all the media attention that certain celebrities have been getting regarding their political
opinions. What should I do?

Answer: First, quit being concerned. Second, realize that the media has their own agenda to pursue. When a celebrity sounds off in agreement with that agenda, the media are going to publicize it. In reality, it is meaningless. Do as I do and ignore both the mainstream mass media and celebrities.