Inmates Running the Asylum

California

LARGEST INSANE ASYLUM IN THE WORLD

Interesting that the LA Times did this. All the others are staying away from it.  Whether you are a Democrat or Republican, this should be of great interest to you!

Just One State - be sure and read the last part... try for 3 times.

If this doesn't open your eyes, nothing will!

From the LA. Times: 

1.    40% of all workers in LA County (10.2 million people) are working for cash; and not paying taxes. This is because they are predominantly illegal immigrants, working without a green card.   (Donald Trump was right)

2 95 %of 
warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.

3.   75%  of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal aliens.

4.  Over 2/3 of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien Mexicans on Medi-Cal, whose births were totally paid for by taxpayers.

5.  Nearly 35% of all inmates in California detention centers are Mexican nationals; they are here illegally.

6.  Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in garages.

7.  The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most likely illegal aliens from south of the border.

8.  Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal

9.  21 radio stations in LA are Spanish-speaking.

10. In LA County,  5.1 million people   speak English; 3.9 million, speak Spanish. (There are 10.2 million people, in LA County.

(All 10 of the above facts were published in the Los Angeles Times) 

Less than 2%   of illegal aliens are picking our crops, but over 29% are on welfare.

Over 70% of the United States' annual population growth, ( and over 90%   of California, Florida, and New York), results from immigration.

Also, 29% of inmates in federal prisons are illegal aliens.

We are fools for letting this continue.

HOW CAN YOU HELP?

Send copies of this letter, to at least two other people. To 100, would be even better.

This is only one State... If this doesn't open your eyes  nothing 

will, and you wonder why Nancy Pelosi wants them to become voters! 

IF YOU DON'T AGREE, JUST DELETE -- IF YOU DO PASS IT ON!

WHERE DO WE GET THESE MORONS? 

Windfall Tax on Retirement Income   ... 

Adding a tax to your retirement is simply another way of saying to the American people "you're so darn stupid that we're going to keep doing this until we drain every cent from you."

 Nancy Pelosi  wants a Windfall Tax on Retirement Income.   In other words, tax what you have made by investing toward your retirement.  This woman is a nut case!   You aren't going to believe this.

Nancy Pelosi wants to put a Windfall Tax on all stock market profits (including Retirement fund, 401K and Mutual Funds)! 

Alas, it is true - all to help the 22 Million   (only 22 million?)   

Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed Minorities! 


This woman is frightening.   She quotes...   'We need to work toward the goal of equalizing income,  (didn't Marx say something like this?) in our country; and at the same time limiting the amount the rich can invest. (I'm not rich, are you?)

When asked how these new tax dollars would be spent, she replied:

We need to raise the standard of living of our poor, unemployed and minorities.  For example, we have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in our country who  need our help along with millions of unemployed minorities.

Stock market windfall profits taxes   could go a long way to guarantee these people the standard of living they would like to have as Americans.

(Read that quote again and again and let it sink in) 'Lower your retirement; give it to others who have not worked, as you have for your money.

This woman is out of her mind!!! --

The "Green thing"

Checking out at the store, the young cashier suggested to the much older lady that she should bring her own grocery bags, because plastic bags are not good for the environment.   

The woman apologized to the young girl and explained, "We didn't have this 'green thing' back in my earlier days."

The young clerk responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment for future generations."

The older lady said that she was right -- our generation didn't have the "green thing" in its day. The older lady went on to explain:

Back then, we returned milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over.  So they really were recycled. But we didn't have the "green thing" back in our day.

Grocery stores bagged our groceries in brown paper bags that we reused for numerous things. Most memorable besides household garbage bags was the use of brown paper bags as book covers for our school books. This was to ensure that public property (the books provided for our use by the school) was not defaced by our scribbling. Then we were able to personalize our books on the brown paper bags. But, too bad we didn't do the "green thing" back then.

We walked up stairs because we didn't have an escalator in every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks.

But you're right. We didn't have the "green thing" in our day.

Back then we washed the baby's diapers because we didn't have the throw away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy-gobbling machine burning up 220 volts. Wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing. 

But that young lady is right; we didn't have the "green thing" back in our day. 

Back then we had one TV, or radio, in the house -- not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief, not a screen the size of the state of Montana. In the kitchen we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us. When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity.

But you're right; we didn't have the "green thing" back then.

We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water. We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blade in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.

But we didn't have the "green thing" back then.

Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service in the family's $45,000 SUV or van, which cost what a whole house did before the"green thing." We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 23,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest burger joint.

But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn't have the "green thing" back then?

We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to piss us off... Especially from a tattooed, multiple pierced smart-ass who can't make change without the cash register telling them how much.

The MacKenna Saga

As I said in my last post my five book series is completed. Book three is with my editor and as is book four. Book five is with my beta readers. From all reports it's a fantastic conclusion to the saga.

With its completion I came to the end of a twenty year task. Please don't misunderstand, it didn't take 20 to write. I started the story in 1990 and published the first version under the title The Adam Eradication in 2009. The book, to be polite, I'll just say was terrible. I pulled it from the market. In 2010 I started attending a critique group, and learned just how bad my writing was. At that point I had two choice, dump the whole project or do a complete rewrite. I chose the ladder and in 2014 I published book one of the series.

As I worked on the rewrite, the story improved and grew in size to over 190,000 words. I divided the story into two books, 
Dream and Deceptions 











and Plots and Prophecies, 







both available at:
Mystic Publishers Inc  or in ebook format at Smashwords or at Amazon and Kindle

The third book titled The Open Circle is with my editor and we're about a third of the way through the first pass. The fourth book, working title, Filling the Circle, will be with my editor by the Friday and the fifth book Closing the Circle as I said at the beginning is with my beta readers. One beta reader has already finished I will post her comments later. 

At this point I am pouring over the journals (See my website to learn about the journals) to uncover more of the back story so I can write Kalen history and how this all came to be. The series is titled Lives of Futures' Past  
Book One Tyree and Marisol: Reawakening.

The book is a combination of Kalen's continuing story while he reads to his children the account of their ancestors struggle to restore Asperia to its rightful government.

Never Never Land

After many false starts, The MacKenna Saga is wrapped up. I would beg your indulgence as I complete the entire story by going back to the beginning and relating how it all started. My thanks Mayla and Kalen for their meticulous journals. Also my deep appreciation goes out to my benefactor for allowing me access to copies of the records and books, extolling the lives of these extraordinary people, so their story could be told and maybe lessons learned. Not to be forgotten are my family and friends who have put up with a lot while I struggled getting these stories from my head onto paper.

“Second star to the right and straight on 'til morning. ”

― J.M. Barrie, Peter Pan

Neverland is a real place. As children, whether sleeping or awake, we instinctively know the way and go there whenever it suits us. The portal to that marvelous world is available every day, through the pictures we love, games we play, the stories we read, or are read to us, and the tales we tell one another.
That gateway never really closes, but life dictates we grow up. As we do, we lose the ability to see the way back, or seeing it, tragically most refuse to reenter that blessed realm. Fortunate for the world, there are those who stand with one foot on each side of the rift, bridging the way for all.
For all those who wish to return, one has but to listen to the good songs of the minstrels, hear the rhyming words of the poet, study the lives of champions past or present, or read the flights of fancy from those minds and hearts who still dwell in Neverland.
If you still find your way barred, there is another gate, a back door so-to-speak. You unlock it through the pure imagination of children, be they your own, your nieces and nephews, or grandchildren and so on. Open your heart, tamper not with their innocence, and they can, for brief moments, transport you there, and fill your soul with wonder.

Richard R Draude

Stick to said.

I started to write an article on dialogue, but in research, I found this article on the Reader's Digest site and I could never say it better than Ms. Trupkiewicz. This is a copy of her article on dialogue. The link to the article is:http://www.writersdigest.com/editor-blogs/there-are-no-rules/keep-it-simple-keys-to-realistic-dialogue-part-ii

The following is the second in a two-part, guest blog post from Eleanore D. Trupkiewicz, whose short story, “Poetry by Keats,” took home the grand prize in WD’s 14th Annual Short Short Story Competition. You can read more about Trupkiewicz in the July/August 2014 issue of Writer’s Digest and in an exclusive extended interview with her online. In this post, Trupkiewicz follows up on her discussion of dialogue with an impassioned plea: stick to said. 

Welcome back! Part I of this two-part post talked about two key aspects of writing dialogue. First, the dialogue isn’t usually the place to use complete sentences because most people in everyday conversations speak in phrases and single words. Second, effective dialogue takes correct punctuation so the reader doesn’t get yanked out of the story by a poorly punctuated exchange.

Remember, the goal in writing fiction is to keep the reader engaged in the story. But don’t give up on writing to spend the rest of your life doing something easier, like finding the Holy Grail, just yet. There’s one more key aspect that makes dialogue effective for fiction writers.

Problem: The Great He Said/She Opined Debate

In Part I, I mentioned learning from my grade school English teacher about complete sentences. Another subject she covered in that class was the importance of using synonyms and avoiding repetition.

To this day, that discussion drives me absolutely crazy.

Thousands of budding writers all over the world heard those words and deduced that they would be penalized if they repeated the word said in any work of fiction they ever wrote. So they dutifully found thesauruses and started looking up other words to use.

I’d like to submit that thousands of budding writers have been misled. Here’s my take:

Stop!

Do not touch your thesaurus to find another word that means said.

The attribution said is fine. In fact, when readers are skimming along through a novel at warp speed, the word said is just like a punctuation mark—it doesn’t even register in readers’ minds (unless used incorrectly, and it would be hard to do that).

But if you draw attention to the mechanics of your story with dialogue like this, you’re guaranteed to lose your reader in total frustration:

“Luke,” she opined, “I need you.”

“Raina,” he implored, “I know you think you do, but—”

“No!” she wailed. “Please!”

Luke shouted, “You don’t know what you’re talking about!”

“You’re being so mean to me,” Raina wept.

With an exchange like that one, you might as well run screaming out of the book straight at the reader, waving a neon sign that says: HEY, DON’T FORGET THAT THIS IS ONLY A WORK OF FICTION AND THESE CHARACTERS AREN’T REAL!!!

Why would you nail yourself into your own proverbial coffin like that?

Here’s my advice. Don’t reach for the thesaurus this time. Leave it right where it is on your shelf. You might never need it again.

Instead, if you need the attribution, us said. If you must use something different for the occasional question, you could throw in “asked” for variety, but not too often.

An even better way to use attributions in dialogue is to use a beat of action instead, like this:

“I just don’t know anymore.” Mary folded her arms. “I think I’m afraid of you.”

Harry sighed. “I’m sorry.” He shook his head. “I’m not very good at this.”

That way, you know who’s talking, and you’ve even worked action and character traits into the conversation. It makes for a seamless read.

Two final thoughts:

First, dialogue cannot be smiled, laughed, giggled, or sighed. Therefore, this example is incorrect:

“Don’t tickle me!” she giggled.

You can’t giggle spoken words. You can’t laugh them or sigh them or smile them, either. (I dare you to try it. If it works for you, write me and let me know. We could be on to something.)

Of course, if you’re using said exclusively, then that won’t be a problem.

Second, let’s talk about adverbs. If a writer can be convinced to use said instead of other synonyms, then he or she becomes really tempted to reach for an adverb to tell how the character said something, like this:

“I don’t want to see you again,” Lily said tonelessly.

“You don’t mean that,” Jack said desperately.

“You’re an idiot,” Lily said angrily.

The problem with using adverbs is that they’re always telling to your reader. (Remember that old maxim, “Show, don’t tell”?)

An occasional adverb won’t kill your work, but adverbs all over the place mean weak writing, or that you don’t trust your dialogue to stand without a qualifier. It’s like you’re stopping the movie (the story playing through the reader’s mind) for a second to say, “Oh, but wait, you need to know that Lily said that last phrase angrily. That’s important. Okay, roll tape.”

Why rely on a telling adverb when you could find a better way to show the reader what’s going on in the scene or inside the characters? Try something like this:

Lily turned away and crossed her arms. “I don’t want to see you again.”

“You don’t mean that.” Jack pushed to his feet in a rush.

She glared at him. “You’re an idiot.”

Beats of action reveal character emotions and set the stage far more effectively than an overdose of adverbs ever will.

Conclusion

While a challenge to write, dialogue doesn’t have to be something you dread every time you sit down to your work-in-progress (or WIP). The most effective dialogue is the conversations that readers can imagine your characters speaking, without all the clutter and distractions of synonymous attributions, overused adverbs, and incorrect punctuation.

When in doubt, cut and paste only the dialogue out of your WIP and create one script for each character. Then invite some friends (ones who don’t already think you’re crazy because you walk around mumbling to yourself about your WIP if you still have any of those) over for dessert or appetizers sometime. Hand out the scripts, assign each person a part, and then sit back and listen. Was a line of dialogue so complicated it made the reader stumble? Do you hear places where the conversation sounds stilted and too formal, or where it sounds too informal for the scene? Does an exchange sound sappy when spoken aloud? Are there words you can cut out to tighten the flow?

And don’t give up your writing to search for the Holy Grail. While the search would be less frustrating sometimes, writing dialogue no longer has to look demonic to you. You know what to do!

Questions

In your current WIP, what sticking points and challenges do you find about writing dialogue? Is a character’s voice giving you trouble? Do you worry you’re overusing an attribution? Do you have a totally opposite opinion about adverbs? The rule about writing fiction is that there really aren’t many hard-and-fast rules, so don’t hesitate to share!

*     *     *     *     *

Eleanore D. Trupkiewicz is an author, poet, blogger, book reviewer, and freelance editor and proofreader. She writes full-length thrillers as well as short stories, flash fiction, poetry, and creative nonfiction. Her blogs are Engraved: All About Writing (http://eleanoretrupkiewicz.blogspot.com) and Daily Poetry Prompts (http://dailypoetryprompts.blogspot.com) and you can find her on one of her websites at www.eleanoretrupkiewicz.com or Refiner’s Fire Editing (www.refinersfireediting.com). Follow her on Twitter: @ETrupkiewicz. She lives and writes in Colorado with cats, chocolate, and assorted houseplants in various stages of demise.