"Shocked/’ Really? Ever read Gore Vidal? Or Norman Mailer?

I’d like to live in the town that would publish poetry in the local newspaper.

Interesting that a very few, rather blunt words, certainly not as lethal as they could have been, struck such a chord. The tenor of most of the disagreements with what I posted seems to be that I’m not being "nice," or "polite." I thought we were beyond the requirement that women should always be ladies; always be nice.

How does the saying go? "Washington is Hollywood for the unattractive?" Maybe the people there think they look good enough for what they do. Maybe they don’t care how they look.

The Obamas look hot, no argument there.

I think Lucy is right. Will the witness please answer the question?

Responding is not the same as answering.

That last part is spot on.

I think you came late to this tempest in a teabag, so just to let you know; I never said she was a bad person. In my opinion she belongs in the Academy of the Overrated.

It bugs to see her celebrated as a poet, because for the majority of people, who will never read "real" poetry, she BECOMES a poet because she’s called one. I think bad poetry tends to drive out good; and I love good.

I love this phrase: "Nevada’s glitterati …"

Nevada HAS no glitterati.

Thank you for noticing that my post was "deliberate and provocative." I don’t believe either of those is a bad thing; both of them are good for writing poetry.

However, I was curt and brusque as well, and you are correct in pointing out that when I was curt and brusque, I could not know how it would strike (aggressive word, that) other readers, some of whom, like yourself, had only one nerve left to be struck. I apologize for striking it.

Please note, I was not unmodulated, unreasoned, or uncivil. And I applaud your preference for the kitchen table guest talk; however, this is the big world, not the kitchen table. I understand you wouldn’t invite me to yours, but I’m here with you in the big world.

Undoubtedly. Will you moderate your opinion if I tell you truthfully that I’m a many-times published poet who’s made quite a bit of coin from my writing? Not enough, of course, to keep me out of full-time employment, but I’ve got chops. I hope I always have a lot to learn, but I know a thing or two about a thing or two.

Poetry or any art form that does not adhere to a structure, an ideal, or a paradigm, no matter how heartfelt in its creation or how popular in its reception, is just mental masturbation.

In this world there is, it seems to me, the sacred, and there is the profane.

The sacred is that which is set apart to be devoted to God.

The profane includes that "not devoted to holy or religious purposes; unconsecrated; secular," in other words, the everyday. (I know it also includes that which is blasphemous, but I’m not using that definition here.)

One is not better than the other; one needs the other.

I do understand that a married priest might be better able to identify with and understand the everyday problems of married people, but that’s not what priests ARE (and not what I want them to be). A married priest more properly belongs to the world of the "profane;" like the rest of us, he’s everyday.

A celibate priest is more properly devoted to the world of the spirit, to the things of God. As I understand the difference between a priest and a minister, imam, or rabbi (words with different meanings), a "priest" is one who makes sacrifices (not only the sacrifice of celibacy, but the sacrificial offering of bread and wine to be transformed, literally, into the body and blood of Christ. That’s why they do it on an altar.) Someone who is called on to make that sacrifice every day, in my opinion should be celibate, set apart.

Now, priests being by definition human, they will fail, they will succumb to the delicious and profane world of the everyday. But for me, it’s important that the idea of a celibate priesthood exists, and that most priests attempt to adhere to the practice of celibacy.

We practice a form of celibacy in our everyday lives when we save things "for good;" things like dishes we only use on special ocassions. If we used them in our everyday life, they would become everyday dishes. We make them, in a sense, "holy," by saving them for "holy" occasions.

However, I don’t really have a dog in this fight.

Who said anything about rhyme?

But an image or two would be nice, some rhythm a bonus.

Don’t make assumptions.

I see I struck a nerve.

I thought I had a right to my opinion.

Your verse is better than that of the Naked Empress, anyway.

I know what free verse is; it should have irregular cadences and is characterized by an extremely loose rhyme scheme, or none at all. However, it should HAVE cadences and rhythm. A few images would be nice, too. Maybe a metaphor?

There ARE rules.