The Walking Dead: Rick killed Shane in "Better Angels"

In “Better Angels,” the next to last episode of Season 2 of The Walking Dead, we see Shane push the boundaries farther than he ever has, and we see him pay the price. Unfortunately, others get caught up in the wake of his actions.

Shane hasn’t been himself since he shot Otis and left him behind for the walkers—and let’s face it, Shane’s original character left little to commend. Leaving people behind for dead wasn’t new to him. Sacrificing others for his own good wasn’t new to him. But this act seemed to stain whatever good might have been present, and he became nothing but a destructive malignancy within the group.

Were you surprised when Shane led Randall off into the woods and broke his neck? Nope. Me neither. I was surprised, though, when Randall showed up as a walker. What the heck? We knew how he died, and it wasn’t as a zombie meal. So what’s up? The last episode reveals that answer.

When Shane slapped himself upside the head after killing Randall and then rammed his face into a tree, his deterioration became even more apparent. When he and Rick took off together to try and find the “escaped” Randall, did you have that sinking feeling in your gut that they both weren’t coming out of it alive? Me too. Were you ready to say goodbye to Shane? I was. It was time for him to go.

When Rick finally faced off with Shane and stood seemingly defenseless against him, his gun innocuously outstretched in his left hand, I thought maybe Shane was going to get away with it. (How could the show go on without Rick, though, you ask? I don’t think it could. That’s why I said “maybe.”) The knife Rick drew and shoved up into Shane’s torso surprised—and thrilled—me. I am so glad he’s gone.

He almost wasn’t, though, was he?

What the heck is up with these dead people coming back as walkers? Again, the final episode reveals the truth—and it’s a doozy.

I’d be negligent if I didn’t comment on Carl’s well-timed appearance and his amazingly good aim with Daryl’s gun. Carl saved his dad’s life, but again, at what cost? Carl loved Shane. When will all the baggage that boy is carrying become too much for him to handle? The growth of his character has been one of the most interesting ones in the show.

There’s only one episode of Season 2 of The Walking Dead left to blog about. And there’s a mob of walkers on the way.

The Walking Dead: Kill Randall? in "Judge, Jury, Executioner"

If you had been part of the group in The Walking Dead episode “Judge, Jury, Executioner,” how would you have voted? Should they have killed Randall or kept him prisoner?

There were convincing arguments to kill him: he’s got 30 scary friends, he knows where Rick & Co. are hiding, and he’s another mouth to feed. There were convincing arguments not to kill him: if they’re civilized, they wouldn’t do it; he hadn’t done anything to them; they saved him in the first place.

The arguments to kill him came mainly from Shane. Dale spoke up—mostly alone—against killing Randall. Sounds true to both characters, doesn’t it?

For the record, I was in favor of keeping him prisoner. I wouldn’t have been comfortable killing someone who hadn’t hurt me or the people I love. My daughter felt the way I did. My husband didn’t want to kill him either, but he did want to take him far away and drop him off.

We’ll never know which would have been the best choice.

But it is interesting that the voice of morality and reason is the one that was silenced in this episode. Will others wear the hat? Will they honor Dale as they said they would?

And what about Carl? The lost boy…the boy who doesn’t believe in God or heaven. The boy who antagonized a walker. The boy who stole Daryl’s gun, who intended to kill that walker. The boy who blames himself for Dale. And, finally, the boy who took the gun his dad offered him. What is going to happen to Carl? Who is he becoming and who can control it?

There was also one sweet moment, wasn’t there? When Hershel gave Glenn the watch—and his approval? Did that give you the warm fuzzies? It did me, which is nice because usually The Walking Dead only gives me the creeps…in a really good way.

The Walking Dead: Live or Die in "18 Miles Out"

Tonight’s episode of The Walking Dead, “18 Miles Out,” had at its center the choice we make to live or die when faced with extraordinarily difficult circumstances. If you lived in a world where there were more zombies than live human beings, would you continue to fight for some sort of life or would you give up and welcome death?

I just finished reading The Giver with my eighth graders. If you haven’t read it—don’t worry—we’re beginning to live it. It’s the world of Sameness. Everyone lives in the same kind of dwelling. There is no upper, middle, or lower class. The government chooses your job for you. The government feeds you. The government chooses your spouse for you and provides children for you via “birth mothers”—surrogates who are impregnated three times in three years and then become laborers. (I enjoy the irony in that every time I read it.)

No one wants for anything because the government provides it all. No one has to think for himself or herself. There is no creativity. There is no color. There is no music. No one minds because it’s been like that for so long that the only person who remembers anything different is The Giver.

The government also decides when you’ve outlived your usefulness, when you’ve become a burden on society, and they “release” you from the community. They put a syringe in your arm and kill you. Anybody remember Obama’s statement when he was campaigning about giving Grandma a pill when she’s diagnosed with a terminal disease?

It’s a horrible world in The Giver when contrasted with the world we still have—the world where we can educate ourselves, choose our own paths, get up off our own asses and make our own lives. My eighth graders still recognize that the world of choice and personal freedoms is a better place to live than the community of Sameness in the world of The Giver.

When we finished the book, one of my students asked me if I would “apply for release” if I lived in The Giver’s world. (The community members can do this; they don’t know they’ll be killed.) Would it be better to die than to live in such a world?

I think in both instances I’d choose life. I’d believe that somehow, someway, we’d make a life and the zombies would eventually really and truly die. We’d be able to start over.

I think if I lived in The Giver’s community and I knew the difference between Sameness and a world of personal freedoms, I’d fight against a government that denied me the life I have now.

In fact, that’s what I’m doing.

Cherish the choices you have. Guard them. The government does not know better than you what is best for you. You do not need them to take care of you. You are not entitled to a better life simply because you’re living and breathing. You’re entitled to the best life you can carve out for yourself. And you’re living in the best country in the world to make the best life for yourself because of the Constitution of the United States.

Don't choose the easy way out.

Government knows better than Mom what preschooler should eat?

With the new FDA guidelines that schools have to adhere to, we are now living in a country where the government can tell school-age children that their parents aren’t feeding them properly, but the government will take care of them and do it right.

When a school-age child brings a sack lunch from home, food inspectors have to check that sack lunch to ensure it meets dietary guidelines. If the inspector decides it does not meet those guidelines, then the school “supplements” the child’s sack lunch with a school lunch, often charging the parents for that school-provided meal.

I’m not making this up. Read this article from the Feb. 14 issue of the Carolina Journal. A preschool child had a sack lunch with a turkey and cheese sandwich, a banana, potato chips, and apple juice. The inspector said she also needed a vegetable and made her take a whole tray of food from the cafeteria. What did the child end up eating? Three chicken nuggets from the tray. Nothing else. She took her sack lunch home, untouched.

The issue is not whether or not the lunch provided by the mother met the guidelines (which it did). The issue is that there are guidelines that parents have to follow when packing their children’s lunches. The issue is that the government has the power to say, “You’re not feeding your children right. We know better. Let us take care of you.” That is the issue. That is the message this government wants our children growing up to believe.

I treasure my personal freedoms provided to me by the Constitution of this great country. The same great country, may I remind—or inform, if you didn’t know this before—my readers that was maligned by Barak Obama’s “former” preacher. The preacher whose church the Obamas attended for more than 20 years. The preacher who married Barak and Michelle Obama. The preacher who was caught on tape saying, “God bless America? I say, ‘Goddamn America!'”

And I would say our president is taking that message to heart. He is damning our country and those of us who live here. He and his policy makers are stepping all over our freedoms. He is hell-bent on making us dependent on the government for more and more and more. He is hell-bent on dividing us and pitting us against each other. He is hell-bent on creating a generation of citizens who believe they are entitled to things they haven’t earned simply because they exist.

I work. I strive to be successful. I take pride in my work and in my success. I don’t want a handout. I want the FREEDOM to grow and live and learn. I want to know there are people who have accomplished more than I have because they give me something to dream about, not just for me but for my daughter and for her future children.

I want to continue to live in a world where I’m allowed to write a blog like this, knowing I won’t be arrested for it. In many countries in the world, I couldn’t do this without risk of great harm to myself and those I love.

Don’t give away your freedoms. Don’t ask for the government to provide for you. Before you know it, the government will be deciding where you live, where you work, and how many children you can have. It’s what he wants.

Be scared. Be active. Vote him out.

Stephen King's 11/22/63: Lengthy, but worth it

The size of Stephen King’s behemoth 11/22/63: A Novel put me off it at first. It might you, too. At 850 pages, I wondered if it would hold my interest for the entirety of the book. And when I hit about 60 percent (I read it on my Kindle), I almost put it down. I’m glad I didn’t. Let me tell you why.

In case you’re unfamiliar with the premise of the story, Jake Epping travels back in time to attempt to prevent the assassination of JFK. My first attraction to the book was to Jake’s time-traveling. I really like the way it happens—and the way it un-happens. (I won’t explain that further; you need to read it.) I will say that my affection for the time travel itself remained constant throughout the book.

The book is as long as it is because when Jake travels back in time, he steps into 1958, putting a gap of five years between himself and his purpose for taking the leap. King has to fill those five years with narrative, so Jake assumes an alias and begins a whole new life in the past. He reinvents himself to a certain degree—which is fun to witness—and he makes choices that both resonate with his “prior” life and rebel against it.

A whole new story, separate from and yet ultimately connected to the Kennedy storyline, develops in those five years. Jake moves around the country and meets people who become important characters both to him and to the JFK assassination. It’s during this part of the story that I almost gave up on it. King writes it well, and he made me care about the new characters being introduced, but I felt as if we were never going to get to that fateful day in November 1963. What I didn’t realize at the time was that we needed all that middle stuff to make it to the goal. (I trusted Uncle Stevie that it was necessary, or else I wouldn’t have kept reading. But I have to admit to cussing at him a few times in the process.)

I won’t give away whether or not Jake succeeds in his goal of preventing JFK’s death. After all, that’s what kept me going when I wasn’t sure I wanted to keep going. I wanted to know if he was going to be able to do it.

What I ended up caring about more, when it was all said and done, were those characters King introduces in the middle and Jake’s relationships with them.

It will take you a while to read, but 11/22/63 is worth the effort. King knows what he’s doing, which is why, I guess, he does what he does.

Sons of Anarchy - To Be, Part Two (Season Finale)

Did you watch the season finale of Sons of Anarchy this week? What surprised you the most? What are you still wondering about? And how are you going to pass the time between now and the beginning of Season 5?

Probably the biggest surprise for me was when Romeo & Company revealed their association with the CIA. We knew that Romeo had “a guy inside” the CIA—he’d told Jax that in the prior episode. What we didn’t know was that Romeo was working with the CIA. That was a great plot twist because it complicated everything enough to tie Jax’s hands and prevent him from killing Clay.

Because of Romeo’s connection to the CIA, the RICO sting that would have arrested many of the Sons was thwarted because the CIA needs the gun/drugs deal to go down between the Sons, the Irish, and the cartel. But the Irish will only deal with Clay. They want nothing to do with Jax. When Romeo revealed the truth of it all to Jax, it became obvious to Jax that Clay had to live to make the deal go down. If Clay died, the Irish would walk away from the deal, the RICO sting would be back in play, and Jax and his brothers would go to prison. Jax was forced to stay in Charming.

We wondered here at home if Jax would tell Tara the truth about the CIA and the RICO sting. We were happy when he told her everything, but we expected her to leave. (And yet, we couldn’t really see Maggie Siff leaving the show.) When Tara walked into the chapel at the end of the show and put her arm possessively around Jax, staring Gemma down, the juxtaposition of Tara and Jax with Gemma and JT was a great effect. Jax is at the head of the table; Tara’s his old lady; Gemma’s looking on from the periphery.

I loved, loved, loved it when Jax prevented Tig from taking the Sergeant-at-Arms position to his right and instead asked Chibs to take that place. It was a brilliant move—Tig is way too loyal to Clay to take that seat, and Chibs is an upstanding dude. The noticeable hole at the table was the empty VP seat. Will Opie show up? Will he take the office? I think he will, but it was cool that they didn’t wrap that up for us in this episode.

We all knew that Jax wouldn’t really be able to kill Clay this season. Ron Perlman’s portrayal of Clay Morrow is much too integral to the whole plot of the show to lose him. But it wouldn’t have been true to Jax’s character to just have him change his mind and not do it. The disclosure of the CIA’s involvement in the deal and the threat of RICO arrests hanging over the Sons was a perfect vehicle to prevent the murder. Jax would never sabotage his club.

The next best thing to killing Clay, though, was Jax stripping the president’s patch from Clay’s cut. It was even better than the minor slice he gave to Clay’s neck. Gemma almost got everything she wanted—Jax is staying in Charming, and he’s sitting at the head of the table. But Clay isn’t dead, and I can’t wait to see what that means for Season 5 of the Sons of Anarchy.

Sons of Anarchy - To Be, Part One - Gemma plots!

Did you really think part one of the season finale for Sons of Anarchy would answer more questions than it asked? I actually thought we’d know … something. Ha! That’s what I get for thinking!

I suppose it did answer one of the biggest questions left hanging in the air from the previous episode—Clay’s not dead. The sadistic part of me that is thrilled by his evil ways is happy he’s still with us. The side of me that sympathizes with all of his victims thinks, “Really? He’s still alive? Really?” We’re led to believe it’s a temporary state of affairs as Jax is determined to do away with his stepdad—with the help of Tara and her medicine bag. But things never seem to go the way you think they’re going to, and I just can’t imagine Sons without Ron Perlman. Can you?

The jewel of the episode, though, was Katey Sagal. Oh my gosh! Gemma is the most manipulative, scheming bitch I’ve had the pleasure to watch on TV. Would she know the truth if it came up and bit her on the ass? I’m thinking not. Last week, we were wondering what was up with the kiss she gave Clay and her telling him that she loved him when only the week before she’d told Wayne that Clay needed to die. Now, this week, she tells the surgeon to keep Clay alive—with about as much interest and enthusiasm as I show for a bologna sandwich (not much)—so that she can manipulate Jax into killing him. It didn’t surprise me that she wanted Jax to kill Clay, but what a convoluted path we took to that point.

Then, we also have Gemma and her double-dealing with Jax and Tara. First, she convinces Tara to cough up JT’s letters and promises Tara that she’ll give the letters to Clay so that he’ll calm down and stop killing people. When Tara asks Gemma if Gemma understands that she and Jax are taking the boys and leaving Charming, Gemma says yes. And she says it without a hint of anger—only resignation evident on her face as if she knows there’s nothing she can do to prevent it.

A couple scenes later, though, we have Gemma walking into the chapel at the clubhouse where Jax is sorting through Clay’s paperwork. She hands Jax the letters and tells him everything—well, almost everything. She conveniently leaves out the part about JT’s death that implicates her and Wayne. After she tells Jax about Clay killing JT, about Clay killing Piney, and about Clay putting out the hit on Tara, there’s nothing left for Jax to do but kill Clay. And then, Gemma says, after he does, he has to take his rightful seat at the head of the table. So much for being resigned to Jax and Tara leaving Charming, right?

Next week—the season finale—will hopefully answer some of our questions. Will Jax kill Clay? I don’t think so. We need him around. Will Jax and Tara leave Charming? Jax won’t, but I think Tara might. Will the ‘Niners retaliate for Tig’s rogue attack that killed Laroy’s woman? What’s gonna happen to Opie, Bobby, Juice, and Otto? And what will my favorite bitch do for kicks next week? Gemma is the epic mother figure, isn’t she? Don’t mess with her family and don’t try to upset her happy home. Hell truly hath no fury as a pissed-off Gemma.

I don’t know what I’m gonna do when Season 4 of Sons of Anarchy ends next week. I guess I’ll have to re-watch the earlier seasons to get me through until next year and Season 5 begins. Maybe we should form a support group or something—share our favorite scenes, lines, murders, laughs. But I digress … we’ve got one episode left and I’ll bet Kurt Sutter’s got a helluva story planned. See ya next week!