sitting here, i can hear the rain beat the roof of this place. U2 sings in the background and i think melancholy describes the mood here. i have not got a good feel for this town, and don't believe i will this time either. but this isn't about this place any more, actually not much in life has grand importance like getting to chicago. there is a world between me and the future now... but this is the first time i have ever been able to calculate its time table. 12 days, 2 hours, and a couple of minutes. i have been humbled these last few shows where people come up to me and tell me that modesty "says what they feel" amazing and humbling all at the same time.
so let me expound on my new theory of "everything in balance", which aaron from me withoutyou said was a good philosophy (often denoted by rumi) but can get misinterpreted with being warm and neither hot nor cold on any one idea. i agreed, a little miffed that someone had found a weakspot in my new life's mission statement. but he is right, when it comes to religion, politics, or love one should not be simply warm, but constantly at arms for what they believe. But is there such thing as being overly religious? i believe so. for if one thinks that he is greater, or because of his religion he is better than another human being, than i would say he is not true to his beliefs. (sorry friend)
in politics... ?. just because you believe that abortion is wrong you should not go and bomb a clinic. if you think it is right you should not participate to prove you have choice. che/misconstrued communism/
bay of pigs/vietnam/hitler/lenin/hussein/osama/ etc. men from any political party can falter to left or to right. but that begs the question of where they wrong? one would say yes because we look at other forms of government and other forms of leadership and declare it wrong or "evil" simply because we live in a capitalistic (some would argue with that theory)- democratic society. for instance look at CHE', he believed his cause was just and right, and yet the world deemed him as wrong because he was... well winning in his effort to do what he thought was right (or simply put; it was truth to him, so how can one argue that it was wrong) but i am simply playing the devils advocate because i do sincerely believe (like ravi zacheria) that their is inherently good and inherently evil in this world.
in love? GK Chesterton, i believe, would agree with my theory of "everything in balance" because of his statements made in "orthodoxy" about optimism vs. pessimism. but i would have love to have asked him of love. can one be in love to far? can one love to much? where is the balance between falling in love to fast and not letting yourself fall fast enough? this is my struggle with my own theory, i feel this is where i diprove my own theory of balance because my heart wants no balance. i want love how it is... a sleep deprivation pain in my chest that is only filled when her voice rings through my ear, touches my hand, or slows down to catch a red light so we can have one more second in each others eyes, and lips.