Pray Christ Isn't Listening

Spent the morning listening to my top twenty-five videos on my mac. They are all music videos. Too bad I can't focus on my music more, but I made the mistake of sharing my personality last time and none of the stars, especially among the comedians, seem to have personalities of their own. When a piece of your personality gets stolen and turned into fraud, you don't rest until it is recovered. Lacking their own personalities, none of the stars or their helpers would know this. Can't say I enjoy listening to my music very much after I share it on YouTube. When I listen to a song that Nickleback stole from me, I must be reminded of how they called me a faggot. When I listen to a song Blue Rodeo stole from me, I have to think about the troubling posts in my the Unmentionables blog, in which I complained about their January 27-28 concert, which was being promoted with hits they stole from my YouTube account in 2007. When I watch a live video of me doing a good job of playing and singing a song in my room, like Linger or Hairball, I must think of the lies that are told by stars and their helpers to diminish its appeal, such as telling people that I am either cheating or that it is someone else performing the song in my place. When I listen to an instrumental like Orcastra, I must think of Mike Myers and his comedy crimes. Or if I listen to Juice, I must be reminded of Wise Hall Flea from last year. If it's a playful video, like my Denial Moves, I get called a goof. So many hours of music I shared with YouTube and look what I get in return for it. They must have made a lot of money stealing my music and comedy. Did they donate their dirty profits to charity and expect Christ to forgive their sins for it? That's a 75 percent tax deduction, too, isn't it? I'm sure charity doesn't care if their donation is clean or dirty, but God certainly does. If my work was so popular that it made millions of dollars, I could have made a large charitable donation of clean money from the profits. But I can't do that if I am opposed by businessmen who want to keep using charity as a means to launder their dirty narcotics and fraud profits. Such businessmen have too much of a grip on the workers who have grown dependent on the proceeds of crime for jobs and/or bribes. Do you think Christ always wants your prayer? I learned otherwise in 2010 when I altered the words to one of my prayers along the lines I'd heard someone else saying it. I heard Jesus say he hated it. He said he hated it because it was not sincere; I was imitating someone else with him instead of being myself. That was enough to make him reject my prayer. If that was all it took to make him reject my prayer, imagine how offended he is by unrepentant sinners making a show of praying to him. They're praying their way straight to damnation. Maybe God will use their piles of fraud profits and narcotics profits donated to charity to stoke the furnace for them. At least I have some new songs that I haven't shared on YouTube. They have no lyrics yet and so I can still enjoy listening to them myself, as incomplete works which lazy frauds need me to complete before they take all the credit for them. And how's the rock radio station that calls me a faggot after making millions of dollars from stealing my music? Do you listen to it? How's the TV that made stars out of dozens of jerks who tore my personality to shreds between them? Do you watch it? Do you also harbor an inexplicable resentment towards me? What a coincidence! Maybe I should have stayed offline. I'm in a foul mood and that means that someone like George Carlin will scoop up these words and use them for stand-up comedy.
More Statements	Scripts	Songs
© 2017. Statements by David Skerkowski. All rights reserved.

The Measure of Folly

7:24pm: Be on the lookout for web treachery by my crooked and cowardly assailants. It's the only way they know how to 'win' an argument against their victim. And, true to Rochefoucauld's maxim, they receive at least the same protection as the innocent. If I have exposed any web fraud with my statements of late, as I tend to do with my comedy scripts, please flag the offenders or inform the police of them and rid the web of their abomination. MEASURE THIS How to pass the days and hours How to fake eternal bliss Here's an answer for you sharpies Grab a rule and measure this Measure dollars kept in gold bars Count the channels on your screen Put a figure to the old stars Human eye has never seen Fathom ocean's darkest depths Add up fluids in my brain Poll the people to assure you I'm the one who is insane And when done there's only one thing Left for you before you're through Measure for a cozy fit The coffin that's awaiting you ©2004. Verses by David Skerkowski. All Rights Reserved I wrote the above verses in March or April 2004. I was stuck in my parents' home, unable to secure a good job even with my web skills and diploma. A few years earlier I'd found my best friend and room mate hanging from a ceiling hook in my living room. Slightly before that, I'd lost my job, girlfriend, and car all within the span of less than two weeks. There are two kinds of writers, I guess: the first is one who fancies a career as a man of letters; the second, like myself, is one whose writing is a mere afterthought to the turmoil in his heart. (Does that qualify as a maxim? Or is it a proverb? How about an aphorism? No, I think it's too peculiar to be an aphorism.) And the turmoil which generates my writing has been greatly and deliberately increased by stars, web frauds, and the corporate media since I shared this poem in my Blogger account in March or April of 2004 and then observed it being subtly shot down on that boring science show by the bearded man and his string bean of a co-host. (What was that show called again? Oh, yes, the Daily Planet! Daily Plummet is more like it. The only 'intelligent' thing to watch on over a hundred channels and it totally sucked.) One who fancies a career as a man (or woman) of letters is one who desires respect - and seeks payment - for his or her superior intelligence. One, like myself, whose writing is a mere afterthought to the misery of his life, simply spills everything that is inside of him from a wish to somehow alleviate his suffering through the act. And yet, all those who plagiarized my work were persons who strictly wanted others to see them as intelligent. After all, the work was produced by my suffering, not by theirs. What am I criticizing in this poem? I'm criticizing the superficiality of measurements. They tell you if something is bigger or smaller, but they fail to tell you if it is good or bad. The general consensus is that bigger is better, but that is completely wrong. For example, for starters, the smaller vessels of the Royal Navy made mincemeat of the Spanish galleons when England faced Spain in the sixteenth century. And men with great IQ's are capable of even greater errors. If you want an example of how a genius can be a fool, look at Tesla with his death-ray. As he struggled pointlessly to invent an electric 'death-ray', Tesla mocked Einstein's theoretical breakthroughs. Tesla wanted to save us from world wars with a doomsday device that would assure mutual annihilation, but it turned out to be the very equations he mocked which led to its development. In the end, Tesla's mighty tower, paid for by $150,000.00 of George Westinghouse's money at a time when a ballroom gown cost $3.50, was outmatched by the awesome power of a particle so small that it is invisible even under a microscope. I recall reading in Warhol's diaries that he was invited to take an IQ test and refused. He said he didn't want people to know how stupid he was. It was an intelligent decision, even though he probably would have aced the test. I believe he would have aced it because he was Andy Warhol, not because he was overly intelligent. I'm quite certain they have two types of tests for measuring intelligence; one for those whose membership to the elite club of intellectuals is desired and one for those deemed unfit for membership, regardless of their intelligence. My certainty arises from comparing the difficulty of questions on Celebrity Jeopardy to their usual level. If it's a normal show, the question might be something like, 'From which war did the Star-Spangled Banner emerge as a patriotic hymn?' Does that sound typical? But if it's Celebrity Jeopardy, the question is modified: 'Which war, which broke out between the years 1811 and 1813, produced the Star-Spangled Banner? Tom Hanks! (Hanks' answer: The War of 1815!)' Then there is the illusion of intelligence which can be cast by being able to answer questions on a test whose subject matter is restricted to a peculiar or specialized field. Who would be able to explain terms like parsing and concatenation but a computer programmer? And yet those who lack a computer programmer's education and training are humiliated by open demonstrations of this knowledge. My greatest beef with measurements at the moment is the lie presented on my YouTube videos to represent their number of views. While I don't share my music to be popular as much as to express my heart, I certainly don't share it to be disrespected by a crowd whose respect for me is directly commensurate with the number of views they find on my web pages. Why does one of my poetry videos show no views but my own after I suffered being called Casper by a stranger in the street who obviously viewed it? Shouldn't the video show at least his views? This withholding of my real number of views has not only cost me dearly, in terms of winning local support for my efforts, it has encouraged continuous assaults against my copyright for the last ten years. I am sick to death of being called a 'hack' after sharing my most unique insights in my own words with a world that already received them from someone else who stole them from me the last time I shared them. Now, I have had to spend the better part of the last two days hearing feedback from my last post, especially with respect to La Rochefoucauld's maxims regarding cleverness. Did someone really leave a comment on my cartoon that says toon years old? Where's his view? Where's his comment? Sounds like someone who is intimidated by my 'intelligence' when my cartoons are works of my heart, more so than of my brain. It also sounds like someone who is desperate for others to find him clever. How unfortunate that my posts attract so many people of this type. And what sort of books are my detractors talking about? Do they read anything at all outside of my blogs? If all they want to do is bash the author of everything they read, why don't they go pick on Charles Dickens and give me a break? I hope that you have explored La Rochefoucauld beyond what I have shared here about him. His book is small but extremely concise. As such it is recommended by the author of its foreword as an antidote to fuzzy thinking. Television viewing causes fuzzy thinking and I think we are in dire need of this antidote. Also, as an aristocrat, he offers useful insights into the behaviour of the upper class. His truths are as relevant today, with respect to the folly of stars and their upper class friends and supporters, as they were four hundred and fifty years ago, especially with maxims like few know how to be old [the Rolling Stones?] or the most dangerous folly in elderly people who have once been attractive is to forget that they are no longer so [Goldie Hawn?]. For the poor, however, he offered little comment but to say that their physical labours free them from their minds and thus afford them happiness - the kind of comment that might have led directly to the guillotine of the French Revolution. Nonetheless, I have measured my will and found it sufficient, not only to do without smoking for the rest of my life, but to follow through with a career on the stage in the years to come. Mark my words. But who is capable of measuring the human heart? Only God. And it is the only measurement which would give us a true estimation of person's worth.
More Statements	Scripts	Songs
© 2017. Statements by David Skerkowski. All rights reserved.

Maxims and Introspections

Into my second week of non smoking and I spent the night reading La Rochefoucauld's Maxims and Reflections. The author was a seventeenth century aristocrat who came to believe that we are utterly and hopelessly ruled by self-love. While his glaring insights into the the human soul seem, for the most part, to be accurate, I find myself refraining from wholly adopting his deeply cynical mindset. This is a good book for anyone approaching a career on the stage, I think, because it helps the reader to view praise in the proper light. The duke explains, quite rightly, that praise for another is ultimately an expression of self-love. It is a person's reward handed out for confirming some attribute he sees in himself first. When you wear a band on your shirt, for instance, you are really saying that you are like that band more than that you like it. (Actually, I stumbled on this truth a long time ago, but I never bothered to write about it. On second thought, that line about wearing a band on your shirt strikes me as familiar from my past posts.) If stars could only keep this thought in mind when they are being cheered by crowds, they might not become so deluded that they would believe their fans would support them in the act of committing fraud. But praise is still nice, isn't it? Even though I'm aware of praise's source, I would still enjoy being praised for my work. There's good advice for aging stars in his book, as well: the most dangerous folly in elderly people who have once been attractive is to forget that they are no longer so; the vivacity which increases in old age is not far removed from folly; few know how to be old; and old fools are more foolish than young fools... He obviously thought about it at length. Love, too, says the author, is more beneficial to the giver than to the recipient. It feels good to fall in love; it's like a pleasant drug trip. It feels good to lose oneself in the admiration of another person. On the other hand, those who receive this kind of attention very often find it a nuisance. Much of what he had to say is true, but I'm not sure he thought it through far enough in places. For instance, he says - in his own words - that reason places unfortunate limits on happiness and ambition. He is right; euphoria is a state of total abandon, and he criticizes moderation as a kind of ogre that suppresses us. But if we all let go of our moral restraint to follow him to bliss, we'd end up with a world submerged in chaos, which would please no one. So moderation is actually more of a wise compromise than an ogre. And he says that he is wise who is nettled (irritated) at nothing. Did he mean to say that wisdom provides comfort from troubling thoughts? What about troubling wisdom? I find that the wiser I grow with knowledge of the crimes committed with my work, the more nettled I become, so I think he is totally wrong on this point. I also encountered a few small semantic shortcomings in his work. According to him, humility is often a feigned submission which we employ to supplant others. No, it is not. That is obsequiousness, not humility. I would have written instead, do not confuse humility for obsequiousness. And again in his maxim, pity is often a relocation of our own evils in the ills of others - - - we help others that on like occasions we may be helped ourselves, I would rather warn my reader to not confuse pity for fear based sympathy. If he wanted to utterly do away with, or at least radically redefine, the concepts of humility and pity, then I suppose his phrasing is sufficient, but I think that is a rather destructive goal, even if they are qualities to which we are largely incapable of aspiring. I still think that this is a good work because it smashes hypocrisy and, above all, forces its reader to a pattern of introspection. I won't let quitting smoking go to my head or expect any praise for it because now I have read that when our vices leave us, we flatter ourselves with the idea we have left them. It reminds me that I was silly enough to start smoking in the first place and that there is no real praise due for merely correcting a fault. With respect to another thought from this sage, in which he credits fortune over virtue for most of our good, I might say that I have not conquered my vice at all, for I still pine for the evil comfort of a puff and am only quitting because of my advancing age. This is the kind of effect that Christ would likely be pleased with, I think, one which keeps my feet firmly on the ground and steers me away from self-deceit and hypocrisy. 11:30am I have more to add to this post but must leave to get something to eat first. 12:44pm I've reread up to the point I have left off and I do indeed think I am safe from self-deceit and hypocrisy, but certainly not from vanity. Vanity is a favorite target of La Rochefoucauld's maxims. The more you ponder them, the more vanity you see in your life. Why did I initially share my music and art and writing on the web? Vanity. Yes, that is why. I figured I was doing you all a favor by telling you what I thought and sharing my creations with you. I had not the slightest altruism in my heart at that time, really. However, once I learned that there were fans who depended on me for a laugh or a song, I think my actions became more selfless. And in order to save large numbers from being deceived to their hearts by the ten years of fraud committed with my work by major stars, I must continue with my posting, whatever my true motives. I'd like to list the remaining maxims from this book which resonated strongest with me now and attach a little personal note to each. The moderation of those who are happy arises from the calm which good fortune bestows upon their temper. People who have good jobs and comfortable lives are more polite and civil than I am. The moderation of men at their greatest height is only a desire to appear greater than their fortune. A US president may wish to revel in his superiority but avoids doing so, in order to sustain the approval of the population. The evil that we do does not attract to us so much hatred and persecution as our good qualities. I am most hated for my talent. If we had no faults we should not take so much pleasure in noting those of others. As the Lord said, look not for the speck in your brother's eye, but take the log from your own. If we had no pride we should not complain of that of others. We find the pride of our neighbor unbearable while we wallow in our own. Sincerity is an openness of heart; we find it in very few people; what we usually see is only an artful dissimulation to win the confidence of others. I think I have been very open with my heart in front of the world. And I think those stars and broadcasters used the apparent sincerity of my work to deceive the world for profit. Truth does not do as much good in the world, as its counterfeits do evil. The harm done by plagiarizing my work outweighs the truths my work were meant to express. If we judge of love by the majority of its results, it rather resembles hatred than friendship. I may suffer a miserable life more for being loved than hated. We do not give our hearts away for the good we wish to do, but for that we expect to receive. I'm still waiting for my orgy. Great names degrade instead of elevating those who know not how to sustain them. Who's the greatest rock and roll band in the world? Whomever that is will be headed for a downfall at some point - if not already - because such a lofty title is unsustainable. As for the greatest band in history, I think most are agreed that that would be the Beatles, who broke up at the peak of their fame. To understand matters rightly we should understand their details, and as that knowledge is almost infinite, our knowledge is always superficial and imperfect. People fly off the handle, including myself, before seeing the whole picture. The fame of great men ought always to be estimated by the means used to acquire it. Treachery diminishes stardom. The world oftener rewards the appearance of merit than merit itself. Whoever looks good on TV gets the reward, regardless of their merit. The desire to appear clever often prevents our being so. Please don't try to make a pun out of the first thing you see. Perfect valour is to do without witnesses what one would do before the whole world. Witnesses give us a purpose for our valor. Some disguised lies so resemble truth that we should judge badly, were we not deceived. The rock radio was right to praise my music - even in the hands of frauds. Those only are despicable who fear to be despised. The corporate media prove this to me every day they let pass without admitting their fault in crimes with my work. No people are more often wrong than those who will not allow themselves to be wrong. Leads me to the same thought as immediately preceding. Ridicule dishonours more than dishonour itself. I may have provoked a backlash in 2007 for writing and sharing such effective parodies. This still does not excuse my enemies for plagiarizing me. We admit small faults to persuade others that we have not great ones. Bless me, father, for I have sinned...I once coveted my neighbour's dog... Most young people think they are natural when they are only boorish and rude. Take a look at some of the comments on my YouTube videos - if you can see them. We may bestow advice, but we cannot inspire the conduct. From the outset, I have advised people to avoid plagiarizing my content. There may be talent without position, but there is no position without talent. This is an even better comeback for that billboard slogan that said: We're in the business of music for business. Talent is very foolishly undervalued by this money culture, especially by the authors of that slogan. Some bad qualities form great talents. My 2006 and 2007 temper tantrums, so bitter that I felt I needed to erase them soon after sharing them, formed a hilarious stand-up routine for George Carlin. The most certain sign of being born with great qualities is to be born without envy. If you sense greatness in yourself, you will feel no inclination to envy others. Our envy always lasts longer than the happiness of those we envy. In my case, as envy's victim, my assailants' envy may outlast my very life. No fools so wearisome as those who have some wit. Is Davelies a funny sketch? Sometimes we meet a fool with wit; never one with understanding. Ultimately, the wit of fools is insufficient to spare them from being rejected. We should gain more by letting the world see what we are, than by trying to seem what we are not. When you try to seem what you are not, you may advance on the outside, but you retreat on the inside. Innocence is most fortunate if it finds the same protection as crime. This is both true and hilarious.
More Statements	Scripts	Songs
© 2017. Statements by David Skerkowski. All rights reserved.

God Is Always Right

So I took a couple days off from posting and what filthy lies have they been telling you about me? Did they tell you I'm in jail? I heard someone say I was weak when I announced that I needed a break to concentrate on breaking my smoking habit. Do you all think I'm weak? How would you fare against so many big stars and corporations and foreign governments by yourself? Why do you listen to these people? Do you hate me or something? I find my life has been ruined so thoroughly by the crime of fraud, which the broadcasters call 'just business', that I can't think about my life for even a few seconds without flying into an uncontrollable rage. That's quite a severe psychological injury these TV stars have been allowed to inflict on an innocent man. But I have found a way to escape my misery for long periods as I struggle with my withdrawal symptoms. (Not even a puff for the last three days.) I have returned to my childhood habit of reading novels. Alif the Unseen was recommended to me by my next door neighbor, another bookworm. He must have known a little about my passion for web code. I loved this book. I read the whole thing, cover to cover, in less than two days. It's about an Arab-Indian hacker who stumbles into a very colorful netherworld in his fight against the corrupt practices of his tyrannical government. I couldn't stop turning its pages and I think G. Willow Wilson is brilliant. The dialogues were a teency too hostile for me and not as philosophic as I would prefer, with the exception of the lead character's conversations with a sheik and with jinn - intelligent spirits of lower rank than angels, such as genies - but it's her book and she can write her dialogues as she prefers. I do admire middle eastern people for their profound faith in God. I wish we could be more like that here. As I read Wilson's book, my own miseries became trivial. I wonder how many people were able to escape their miseries through something I wrote in the last ten years and who all thanked lying frauds for it while they hated my guts and added to my miseries. Maybe the media knows. If so, we certainly never will. So I'm back in the library to find more novels to distract me as I fight for full control of my will. Since no one wants to pay me any money for my work after it earned millions of dollars on the radio and TV, I must quit smoking to save my disability cheques. And I was rewording a few things from my last couple of posts in Statements of Fact this afternoon when I saw that line I wrote about God's truth. Let me explain it a little better here. First of all, I believe in God. So I believe that my authoring and artistic talent is God's gift. So God's truth, in this respect, is that He made me so that I can write funnier scripts than certain corrupt TV stars. And it is that He made me so that I can write more rocking music than certain corrupt rock stars. And it is that He made me so that I can draw better than Matt Groening. (No one mocks that name, eh? How do you pronounce that? Groining? Sorry, I think that's fair payback for being called a cow by his fans.) In one of his parables, Christ said that some of the workers only worked two hours and were paid the same as those who had worked eight hours. Is this not very similar to Tina Fey struggling for eight hours on a comedy script and producing next to nothing while I work on one for two hours and get a good result? Christ said that we must not question God's judgment in how He chooses to hand out His gifts. And if you have a problem with me being more talented than Jon Stewart or Ellen Degeneres, you are arguing against God's judgement. When you argue against God's judgement, it doesn't matter who you are, you lose. You can be a big TV star that everyone loves, but if you argue against God's judgement, your TV show will be cancelled and you will lose your fans. Are the Simpsons still on the air? Family Guy? The Daily Show? Are the Crystalids still on the radio? Is Blue Rodeo still playing my songs on the radio? Where is Blue Rodeo? Is Nickleback still playing Fool's Paradise on the radio? As for George Carlin, I can only guess that he is far worse off than his living fellow offenders. These are just a few examples of how you lose when you argue against God's judgement. If you don't believe in God, then you could say that you were arguing against nature by dismissing my superior talent in favor of superficial televised image peddling. Arguing against nature doesn't seem very wise either. Is everyone able to see my last few posts? Maybe It's YouTube's Fault is where I point to YouTube's obvious culpability in handing my hit songs over to rich rock stars and talk about how their view counter is meant to manipulate and not to inform. Can you read that all right? Or did something happen to it behind my back? These deadly cowards always attack me behind my back and that's why I have to ask you this question. And I added Jon Stewart's perverted crime of poetry fraud to my post Perverse Acts of Evil. Can you read all that okay? Stealing poetry is an evil crime and the broadcasters are being even more evil now by hiding it at the victim's expense. I think broadcasting and the internet are talent's worst enemies, but that's another blog.
More Statements	Scripts	Songs
© 2017. Statements by David Skerkowski. All rights reserved.

Learning from the Past

I've been reading Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. It is truly a literary masterpiece. His style of writing is beautiful. He spent twenty years perfecting his language in that book. It takes a while to break through the time barrier posed by the idioms of his eighteenth century day and it is also a good idea to read the foreword so that you may correctly identify this student of Voltaire's cynicism wherever it might pop up, but, like Shakespeare's work, once you've read a few dozen pages, you have no problem understanding the author. This book has some interesting findings to share with modern day Christians. Gibbon blamed the fall of Rome largely on the rise of Christianity, which on first glance suggests the religion as a poor choice for an empire. However, according to him, the Christians of ancient Rome followed the teachings of Christ much more closely than we do now. Even by Gibbon's time the Protestant reformation had introduced the concept of a 'holy' work ethic to enable the rise of the middle class around which our whole modern capitalist society is structured. Christianity will not weaken America the way it weakened Rome because it is not the same Christianity. It has been reformed to fit neatly into our world by the belief that he who works hard and is careful with his money demonstrates virtue by doing so. This is quite a radical departure from the words of the Lord who said give no thought to what you should eat. Isn't the need for food largely why people apply for jobs? And with so much middle class culture dictated as fashion trends, doesn't that clash with the words of the Lord who said give no thought to what you should wear? As for the Roman empire, the Christians of that time rejected it as evil. They avoided the sacrifices to pagan deities and may have also been reluctant to go to war. They rejected the bloody arena games and brutal punishments on which their strong empire had been originally founded. In short, they became a people who were too nice to sustain an empire. I can't argue with the fact that we have made life better for ourselves at least in this world by not following the teachings of Christ too closely. I only pray that we have not compromised our fortunes in the next world by taking this step. April 24: I thought about what Jesus said about giving no thought to what we should eat or wear last night and I hope I don't offend anyone by saying I think he overestimated us. Jesus had so much faith in God that he could make food appear out of nothing and he seemed to think we could do the same. He would often invite his disciples to perform a miracle before he did it himself. It is quite typical for a person to think that his abilities are commonly shared. While the Lord is perfect, he did appear to us as an entirely vulnerable human who was capable of error. So maybe it's okay not to follow this teaching from the Gospel of Luke too closely, as is the case with our popular work ethic.
More Statements	Scripts	Songs
© 2017. Statements by David Skerkowski. All rights reserved.

What Time Is It?

I need to come back here today to reconcile some of the things I've been saying about our origins with the more traditional beliefs I've been sharing here. I am grateful to my church for giving me the freedom to contemplate the question of our existence to the wildest potential. It has clearly learned its lesson about suppressing such activities. Maybe I should start by asking people not to read my scripts as statements. I have gone to considerable trouble to separate my comedy scripts from my serious statements because comedy scripts are not meant to be taken seriously. Comedy scripts can't be funny when they are taken seriously. For instance, Wyle E. Coyote would be a tragic figure if we burst into tears every time he got crushed by a falling boulder. People who tell you to read my scripts as though they are statements have a problem with the fact that my scripts are funny. A comedy script usually demands that I distort my true thoughts on a subject one way or the other. For instance, it is funnier to say that aliens see us as pets (I Know All About It) than it is to say that they see us as children. And I am not my fictional characters. I am too sulky to be amusing. That's why I must invent fictional characters to populate my comedy scripts. Apparently I must repeat myself over and over about this because others who are not funny spend all their time trying to ruin my comedy behind my back instead of trying to produce their own comedy. And if you subtract my comedy scripts from the TV in the last ten years, there is nothing left but a big empty space to prove it for me. I was not putting down Catholics or implying that they can't work hard by saying that the Catholic contestant in Work Ethic would not have won his competition, I was making a joke around the fact that the work ethic was invented in the early 16th century by a Protestant reformer named John Calvin. That is why it is popularly known as the Protestant work ethic. Calvin believed that if you work hard and save your money, it is a sign that you are saved by God. I'm unimpressed by his findings, though I've not read his paper. It is also of note that Calvin laid the foundation for modern capitalism with his treatise. I can't say I'm very grateful to him for that either at the moment. This punchline was simply a play on words and if I didn't know better I'd say that people who want to be comedians when they're not funny were trying to start a holy war out of it instead of letting you all enjoy it for what it is. Foremost I wish to add more to what I said about the moon. I do not think that the moon is natural, I think it is artificial. I do not think that it fell into an orbit that lies in perfect alignment with the sun by accident. Scientists do. This is one area where they reject their own mathematics. What are the odds of that moon accidentally occupying the one small corner of our vast sky which is occupied by the sun? Have they calculated the probability of such an accident? And they still want to think it's an accident after that? Now who's being unreasonable? From there I think it is reasonable to assume that we may be living in artificial timeline. Any intelligence that can cross the vast distances of the universe would also have command of time. They could go anywhere they like and change the original timeline of each world to suit them. They could come here a mere five or ten thousand years ago, find this planet dead, put the moon in orbit and alter our timeline to give us what we have now. Physicists must admit that this is entirely possible in theory. While the Bible is not a book of science, it does offer some profound comments on our origins. For instance, in the Gospel of John it is written that in the beginning was the Word. This suggests to me that there is an abstract realm that predates the whole physical universe and I think it agrees with my hypothesis about having an artificial moon and living in an artificial timeline. I also think that we are creatures of energy. Energy never dies, it just changes form. [April 23/2017: Our bodies hold two types of energy: a dormant energy which may be released by burning the corpse and an active energy which drives the heart and regulates bodily functions like breathing, etc. Of these two types of energy, the active one departs from the body at the point of death. (End of insertion.)] If we are designed for eternal life, then we must be careful how we live our lives. We must not be seduced by the temptations of this passing world for we may pay a high price for it later on.
More Statements	Scripts	Songs
© 2017. Statements by David Skerkowski. All rights reserved.

When to Forgive

While forgiveness is the root teaching of Christianity, it is not always advisable to forgive. Only God can forgive unconditionally. In our case, we may actually cause more sin by forgiving if we do it unconditionally. The condition is repentance. Don't forgive a sinner until he repents. I won't be forgiving any of the many sinners who violated my poetry and music and art and comedy until they repent. It is unsafe to do so otherwise and would likely just lead to further crimes with my work, such as I expressed in my script Le Miscreant. Saturday Night Live needed to make you think that was just funny. No, it had a message in it about how I was being treated by that show when I decided to forgive their first round of violations of my comedy. Hey, if Saturday Night Live is off the air, do you think they might be in prison? (And if Ellen is off the air, do you think she might be in prison?) What were the locals doing here while I was rewriting 2048 lines of rhyming verse in my Octiverse that were all stolen by Saturday Night Live? I guess they were all busy watching CFOX and the Peak try to launch the career of a new fraud band with my music and web views. But the rest of the world must have been paying attention to me instead because, geez, it looks like Saturday Night Live went to prison. Finally.
More Statements	Scripts	Songs
© 2016. Statements by David Skerkowski. All rights reserved.