After Benazir Bhutto was brutally murdered last week, the Pakistan People's Party was left without a leader.
She had named her husband Asif Ali Zardari to head the Pakistan People's Party in her will, which was read on Sunday, but he handed over the position to the couple's son, PPP official Makhdoom Amin Faheem said.
How can you ‘will’ political power to another person? And how can you just ‘hand it over’ to another person? This is not the way of true democracy.
Blood is not a deciding factor on the ability of a person to run a country. But, then again, neither is a democratically held election.
I suppose one could say that if the party accepts the person presented as the leader then democracy, in its truest sense, does exist.
This sense of true democracy is struggling in the U.S.
Bush and Cheney have created a stronger presidential office much to the detriment of democratic freedoms. Their own reasoning for their actions, of course, is to protect those same freedoms, but those freedoms are not in danger from anyone other than these two power hungry old men. This is a case of where their egos got in the way of doing what is right for this country. They have lost faith in Democracy and decided they know better than our forefathers on how to maintain and nurture democracy.
In their zeal to appear as if they were putting this nations’ security first, they grabbed a bunch of people of Arabic dissent without solid evidence of any clear terrorist ties and then held them for six years under the guise of guilt. Their guilt has never proven and habeas corpus suffered because these two old men refused to admit they could have made a mistake.
This administration has condoned torture. Sure it cannot be proven in a court of law because the very people we need as witnesses are all involved. But citizens of this country and of the world know the U.S. participated in it and perpetrated it.
I present this question to the world: which is worse, Saddam Hussein, who we all despised for his use of torture to control his citizens and ensure his reign of power, or a democratically elected president, by the way that election was disputed and not decided by the public, who looks the other way as long as torture is used for our purposes?
If any other country took American citizens and held them in prison as “enemy combatants” without proof, without any clear date set for prosecution, and used torture to extract information from them, would the American government sit back and not do anything?
This president and vice president have seen fit to set up an illegal spy network on its own citizens that reflects the FBI era of J. Edgar Hoover. This was done in the name of ‘protecting’ our freedom. As U.S. citizens learned they had their privacy invaded by this illegal network and wiretapping practice, lawsuits were filed against the communications companies that this administration used to realize their plan. The response from the administration is to change legislation to protect the communications companies! Unbelievable, but typical, Bush/Cheney tactics.
If we extend the Bush/Cheney ‘reasoning’ for warrantless wiretapping to every law enforcement entity in this country there would be spying taking place on every U.S. citizen based on whatever reason law enforcement would choose. A giant leap towards George Orwell’s 1984.
People who believe in the ‘freedom’ that our forefathers granted us should be outraged that these practices are taking place and even more outraged that they are not being stopped.
The expectation of freedom in this country has diminished greatly since these two took office.
The main danger with granting power to someone is that they don’t want to give it up. The main danger of granting power to egotistical, delusional madmen increases the danger of us losing even more of those freedoms that we have cherished for so long.
Given the general trend that this country seems to be following, that being that people are becoming more unethical, more immoral and more willing to do whatever it takes to get what they want and to hell with everyone else, will only solidify the bleak Orwellian prediction and may very well place George Orwell as a greater prophet than Nostradamus.
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Another lesson learned
In the headlines this morning I saw this article: “Girl wins concert tickets with essay faking dad’s death in Iraq”.
This is what we are teaching our children.
They are learning that in order to get what you want you have to lie and embellish and dramatize to stand out from the crowd. You have to be a bigger liar than the next person.
They are learning that cheating is rewarded.
As soon as this 6-year-old girl won that contest it was planted firmly in her consciousness that this is the way to get what she wants.
The contest, sponsored by Club Lilly Lu, gave to the winner, a makeover that included a blonde Hannah Montana wig, as well as airfare for four to Albany, New York, and four tickets to the sold-out Hannah Montana concert on January 9.
Hannah Montana is a very popular, Emmy award-nominated children’s television series on Disney Channel. The main character, played by Miley Cyrus, lives a double life as an average teenage girl at school during the day and a famous pop singer at night. She conceals her real identity from the public, so the very premise of the show is based on a lie, a cover-up. And, yes she is the daughter of Billy Ray Cyrus of country music fame.
I grew up watching all the Disney classics and every Sunday evening my whole family would gather around the television in anticipation of watching the Wonderful World of Disney as if we were expecting Christmas.
Disney used to have a way of telling a story complete with all the evil in the world being visited upon hapless innocent victims. Through virtuous honesty and purity that victim always came out on top and evil was exposed and shunned by everyone.
We have come to expect the virtues of what a Disney production should represent. They have been the hallmark of honesty, of wholesomeness and of purity for several generations. It used to be safe to expose children to what Disney teaches (preaches). Families used to expect higher standards from a family oriented production from Disney.
As I grew older and wiser to the ways of the world and became privy to widespread behind the scenes business dealings, I realized that Disney, just like every other business we humans becomes involved in, resorts to under-handed methods to get ahead in the day-to-day dog-eat-dog business world.
As we age we all have to accept that adults lie and cheat and steal and commit every crime and sin imaginable against each other.
This 6-year-old girl should not have been subjected to the treachery of adult life at such a tender age. And for this lesson to have been laid upon her by her own mother is unforgivable.
The girls mother, Priscilla Ceballos, told company officials that the girl's father died April 17 in a roadside bombing in Iraq. She had identified the soldier as Sgt. Jonathon Menjivar, but the Department of Defense has no record of anyone with that name dying in Iraq. Only then did the mother admit to the deception.
In an interview with Dallas TV station KDFW she said, “We did whatever we could do to win." This doesn’t sound like a contrite person. This doesn’t sound like a moral person. This sounds like the average, everyday parent bragging that she knows what has to be done to get what she wants. This is how we are raising our kids. It is scary as hell. This is true terror. This is what America has become.
This is what we are teaching our children.
They are learning that in order to get what you want you have to lie and embellish and dramatize to stand out from the crowd. You have to be a bigger liar than the next person.
They are learning that cheating is rewarded.
As soon as this 6-year-old girl won that contest it was planted firmly in her consciousness that this is the way to get what she wants.
The contest, sponsored by Club Lilly Lu, gave to the winner, a makeover that included a blonde Hannah Montana wig, as well as airfare for four to Albany, New York, and four tickets to the sold-out Hannah Montana concert on January 9.
Hannah Montana is a very popular, Emmy award-nominated children’s television series on Disney Channel. The main character, played by Miley Cyrus, lives a double life as an average teenage girl at school during the day and a famous pop singer at night. She conceals her real identity from the public, so the very premise of the show is based on a lie, a cover-up. And, yes she is the daughter of Billy Ray Cyrus of country music fame.
I grew up watching all the Disney classics and every Sunday evening my whole family would gather around the television in anticipation of watching the Wonderful World of Disney as if we were expecting Christmas.
Disney used to have a way of telling a story complete with all the evil in the world being visited upon hapless innocent victims. Through virtuous honesty and purity that victim always came out on top and evil was exposed and shunned by everyone.
We have come to expect the virtues of what a Disney production should represent. They have been the hallmark of honesty, of wholesomeness and of purity for several generations. It used to be safe to expose children to what Disney teaches (preaches). Families used to expect higher standards from a family oriented production from Disney.
As I grew older and wiser to the ways of the world and became privy to widespread behind the scenes business dealings, I realized that Disney, just like every other business we humans becomes involved in, resorts to under-handed methods to get ahead in the day-to-day dog-eat-dog business world.
As we age we all have to accept that adults lie and cheat and steal and commit every crime and sin imaginable against each other.
This 6-year-old girl should not have been subjected to the treachery of adult life at such a tender age. And for this lesson to have been laid upon her by her own mother is unforgivable.
The girls mother, Priscilla Ceballos, told company officials that the girl's father died April 17 in a roadside bombing in Iraq. She had identified the soldier as Sgt. Jonathon Menjivar, but the Department of Defense has no record of anyone with that name dying in Iraq. Only then did the mother admit to the deception.
In an interview with Dallas TV station KDFW she said, “We did whatever we could do to win." This doesn’t sound like a contrite person. This doesn’t sound like a moral person. This sounds like the average, everyday parent bragging that she knows what has to be done to get what she wants. This is how we are raising our kids. It is scary as hell. This is true terror. This is what America has become.
Friday, December 28, 2007
Is China buying America?
The Chinese government has been quietly buying its stake in the bastion of America’s financial center through multi-billion dollar investments in our most prestigious financial companies. Morgan Stanley, Bear Stearns, Blackstone Group, and Britain's Barclays are eagerly taking money from China to help bail them out of recent financial troubles.
It brings back visions of “It’s a Wonderful Life” where James Stewart runs down main street of his home town that has become unrecognizable due to it all being sold to an entity that has no stake in the true town spirit but was bought up purely for its profit potential.
China is leading a surge of strategic investments from Asia and the Middle East that so far have sunk about $25 billion into Wall Street banks.
In selling out to the Chinese, these financial institutions are selling America’s right to remain American.
The subprime mortgage mess provided an ideal opportunity for foreign investors to buy a piece of America. And, slowly, piece by piece, we are losing our heritage.
In this new world order of global economy that Bush has been pushing, we are losing our claim as the richest nation on earth.
This is the early stages of a dramatic reversal of financial power on Wall Street, the cornerstone of the U.S. economy.
"Both Chinese private and government interests are controlling more and more of the U.S. economy, and this is a result of the big trade and budget deficits we have," said Alan Donziger, professor of economics at Villanova School of Business. "These investments will make the U.S. somewhat less independent, but this is inevitable when we live in a global economy."
U.S. business practices created this situation by opening credit to financially unsound home buyers, along with giving credit to anyone who asks for it. To be sure, Wall Street's current predicament is "our own doing," he said. Turmoil in the credit markets have been fueled by defaults on subprime mortgages, and that's caused the Federal Reserve to attempt a bailout of the industry through interest rate cuts.
The value of the U.S. dollar has fallen which makes investments in these financial institutions cheap.
China agreed to pay $5 billion for a 9.9 percent stake in Morgan Stanley, and those securities pay 9 percent a year until they convert to shares in 2010. That translates to a gain of about $450 million of cash next year. But this infusion of new stock will lessen the value of shares to Morgan Stanley investors this same factor affects every investment firm that sells to foreign governments.
By keeping investments under 10 percent, it does not trip an automatic review by the government. Bush, and others, believe the injection of foreign capital helps keep the banks competitive and restores faith in an industry beaten down this year. Bush is part of the problem, the thinking is that any new money is good money, especially for his buddies in the financial arena. But he fails to consider how America in general is affected in the long run.
The selling out of America holds little meaning for high stakes dealers. As long as their company can stay afloat they don’t care that they sell America.
The phrase ‘sell your own grandmother for a dollar’ comes to mind.
Banks don’t want to admit how much say these government-sponsored funds might get. And this is only the beginning. Merrill Lynch & Co. is on the hunt for a foreign investment to help cushion what could be a huge fourth-quarter writedown in January.
Financial power is moving dramatically toward China and the Middle East which will have significant impact over time.
Wal-Mart, the world’s largest retailer, buys most of its goods from China creating a one-way flow of cash to China. China buys Americas financial cornerstone providing a financial highway into China’s bank accounts. It doesn’t take a financial genius to see that America will soon be another Chinese province.
Make no mistake, America is being sold out.
It brings back visions of “It’s a Wonderful Life” where James Stewart runs down main street of his home town that has become unrecognizable due to it all being sold to an entity that has no stake in the true town spirit but was bought up purely for its profit potential.
China is leading a surge of strategic investments from Asia and the Middle East that so far have sunk about $25 billion into Wall Street banks.
In selling out to the Chinese, these financial institutions are selling America’s right to remain American.
The subprime mortgage mess provided an ideal opportunity for foreign investors to buy a piece of America. And, slowly, piece by piece, we are losing our heritage.
In this new world order of global economy that Bush has been pushing, we are losing our claim as the richest nation on earth.
This is the early stages of a dramatic reversal of financial power on Wall Street, the cornerstone of the U.S. economy.
"Both Chinese private and government interests are controlling more and more of the U.S. economy, and this is a result of the big trade and budget deficits we have," said Alan Donziger, professor of economics at Villanova School of Business. "These investments will make the U.S. somewhat less independent, but this is inevitable when we live in a global economy."
U.S. business practices created this situation by opening credit to financially unsound home buyers, along with giving credit to anyone who asks for it. To be sure, Wall Street's current predicament is "our own doing," he said. Turmoil in the credit markets have been fueled by defaults on subprime mortgages, and that's caused the Federal Reserve to attempt a bailout of the industry through interest rate cuts.
The value of the U.S. dollar has fallen which makes investments in these financial institutions cheap.
China agreed to pay $5 billion for a 9.9 percent stake in Morgan Stanley, and those securities pay 9 percent a year until they convert to shares in 2010. That translates to a gain of about $450 million of cash next year. But this infusion of new stock will lessen the value of shares to Morgan Stanley investors this same factor affects every investment firm that sells to foreign governments.
By keeping investments under 10 percent, it does not trip an automatic review by the government. Bush, and others, believe the injection of foreign capital helps keep the banks competitive and restores faith in an industry beaten down this year. Bush is part of the problem, the thinking is that any new money is good money, especially for his buddies in the financial arena. But he fails to consider how America in general is affected in the long run.
The selling out of America holds little meaning for high stakes dealers. As long as their company can stay afloat they don’t care that they sell America.
The phrase ‘sell your own grandmother for a dollar’ comes to mind.
Banks don’t want to admit how much say these government-sponsored funds might get. And this is only the beginning. Merrill Lynch & Co. is on the hunt for a foreign investment to help cushion what could be a huge fourth-quarter writedown in January.
Financial power is moving dramatically toward China and the Middle East which will have significant impact over time.
Wal-Mart, the world’s largest retailer, buys most of its goods from China creating a one-way flow of cash to China. China buys Americas financial cornerstone providing a financial highway into China’s bank accounts. It doesn’t take a financial genius to see that America will soon be another Chinese province.
Make no mistake, America is being sold out.
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Dick Cheney gets his way or your fired
J. William Leonard, director of the Archives' Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO), is being forced out of his position by Dick Cheney after 34 years of service.
The unit monitors the handling of government secrets and is responsible to the President for policy and oversight of the Government-wide security classification system and the National Industrial Security Program. They receive their authority from Executive Orders 12958 "Classified National Security Information" and 12829 "National Industrial Security Program", as amended.
What did Mr. Leonard do to draw Cheney’s ire? The veteran National Archives official challenged claims by the Office of Vice President (OVP) to be exempt from federal rules governing classified information.
Once again, this administration thinks it is exempt from the rules that everyone else must follow. And Cheney’s petulance will force someone out of his livelihood because that person had the temerity to apply the rules to the Office of the Vice President.
Mr. Leonard’s efforts touched off a firestorm—and a counter-strike by Cheney's chief of staff, David Addington, who tried to wipe out Leonard's job.
Mr. Leonard has been described by National Archivist Allen Weinstein as "the gold standard of information specialists in the federal government". But this glowing accolade will fall on the deaf ears of Mr. Cheney.
Cheney’s little snit will cause this nation to lose the accumulated knowledge and experience of the type of person this country strives for to fill any and all of its governmental offices.
Here’s a bit of background on how this travesty came to pass.
After 2002, OVP stopped reporting to the National Archives and Records, the depository for government records that helps keep democracy alive by allowing U.S. citizens oversight to the course of business conducted by the U.S. Federal government, which became an independent federal agency in 1985. After several routine attempts to do a review of the OVP they said ‘they weren't really subject to our reviews’ said Mr. Leonard. The wall that the White House had built around itself remains impermeable unless they want you in.
The ISOO produces an annual report of government offices and the Chicago Tribune saw an asterisk next to the entry for the OVP which stated that it contained no information from OVP. The Chicago Tribune decided to investigate.
A spokesperson from the OVP made public the idea that because they have both legislative and executive functions, that requirement doesn't apply to them. Mr. Leonard then wrote a letter to the Attorney General [asking for a ruling that Cheney's office had to comply.] Then, shortly after that there were email recommendations from OVP to a National Security Council task force to change the executive order that would effectively abolish Mr. Leonard’s office. Who wrote the emails? David Addington, fall guy for the Vice President, because you know he did not do this on his own, not with such a controlling boss like Dick Cheney.
It turns out that the OVP stopped cooperating with the ISOO around the same time the Valerie Plame case became public.
Is this the kind of power and spitefulness we want from our politicians? Cheney is acting like a child here. “You are not the boss of me!”. What a brat!!
The unit monitors the handling of government secrets and is responsible to the President for policy and oversight of the Government-wide security classification system and the National Industrial Security Program. They receive their authority from Executive Orders 12958 "Classified National Security Information" and 12829 "National Industrial Security Program", as amended.
What did Mr. Leonard do to draw Cheney’s ire? The veteran National Archives official challenged claims by the Office of Vice President (OVP) to be exempt from federal rules governing classified information.
Once again, this administration thinks it is exempt from the rules that everyone else must follow. And Cheney’s petulance will force someone out of his livelihood because that person had the temerity to apply the rules to the Office of the Vice President.
Mr. Leonard’s efforts touched off a firestorm—and a counter-strike by Cheney's chief of staff, David Addington, who tried to wipe out Leonard's job.
Mr. Leonard has been described by National Archivist Allen Weinstein as "the gold standard of information specialists in the federal government". But this glowing accolade will fall on the deaf ears of Mr. Cheney.
Cheney’s little snit will cause this nation to lose the accumulated knowledge and experience of the type of person this country strives for to fill any and all of its governmental offices.
Here’s a bit of background on how this travesty came to pass.
After 2002, OVP stopped reporting to the National Archives and Records, the depository for government records that helps keep democracy alive by allowing U.S. citizens oversight to the course of business conducted by the U.S. Federal government, which became an independent federal agency in 1985. After several routine attempts to do a review of the OVP they said ‘they weren't really subject to our reviews’ said Mr. Leonard. The wall that the White House had built around itself remains impermeable unless they want you in.
The ISOO produces an annual report of government offices and the Chicago Tribune saw an asterisk next to the entry for the OVP which stated that it contained no information from OVP. The Chicago Tribune decided to investigate.
A spokesperson from the OVP made public the idea that because they have both legislative and executive functions, that requirement doesn't apply to them. Mr. Leonard then wrote a letter to the Attorney General [asking for a ruling that Cheney's office had to comply.] Then, shortly after that there were email recommendations from OVP to a National Security Council task force to change the executive order that would effectively abolish Mr. Leonard’s office. Who wrote the emails? David Addington, fall guy for the Vice President, because you know he did not do this on his own, not with such a controlling boss like Dick Cheney.
It turns out that the OVP stopped cooperating with the ISOO around the same time the Valerie Plame case became public.
Is this the kind of power and spitefulness we want from our politicians? Cheney is acting like a child here. “You are not the boss of me!”. What a brat!!
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Another case of ‘lost’ data
This is yet another case of personal sloppiness affecting hundreds of thousands of adults and children.
This time the National Health Service has admitted to losing data collected on patients from nine hospitals in England.
The usual line was given to the affected individuals that there is no evidence data has fallen into the wrong hands. But once again, no one knows for certain because the data is missing.
In one case a disk failed to arrive at an east London Hospital. My first question, how was the disk sent? By private courier or daily mail?
Another case involves data on patients treated 40 years ago. They are all deceased and you may think no big deal, nothing can happen to them. But you would be wrong. Professional criminals would love to get their valid social security numbers and use them.
One hospital reported two breaches which means there are actually 10 new cases.
Law officials are of course promising to take action against anyone who failed their responsibilities under data protection laws. But the underlying problem of a lackadaisical effort at data protection again goes unmentioned. The individuals involved became derelict in their duty. The data needs to be transmitted using more secure methods. Privacy needs to be taken more seriously.
The whole culture of data management needs to be addressed. Rules are in place as required by laws but the individuals who are governed by them take shortcuts to make their personal lives easier. Sometimes it becomes a nuisance to take that extra precautionary step. We have all been faced with this situation. Maybe we will miss some deadline if we follow the rules to the letter so we circumvent one step.
Individuals set themselves up for misfortune by not practicing effective secure routines. If any of these same individuals who are tasked with protecting other peoples data discovered their own data had been compromised by someone not taking the rules seriously I am certain they would be concerned.
When we care for other people we are actually caring for ourselves. It is a simple thought to keep in mind as we go about our daily business. We need to care for other peoples data as if it were our own. If people really cared we would need rules to tell us to do so.
This time the National Health Service has admitted to losing data collected on patients from nine hospitals in England.
The usual line was given to the affected individuals that there is no evidence data has fallen into the wrong hands. But once again, no one knows for certain because the data is missing.
In one case a disk failed to arrive at an east London Hospital. My first question, how was the disk sent? By private courier or daily mail?
Another case involves data on patients treated 40 years ago. They are all deceased and you may think no big deal, nothing can happen to them. But you would be wrong. Professional criminals would love to get their valid social security numbers and use them.
One hospital reported two breaches which means there are actually 10 new cases.
Law officials are of course promising to take action against anyone who failed their responsibilities under data protection laws. But the underlying problem of a lackadaisical effort at data protection again goes unmentioned. The individuals involved became derelict in their duty. The data needs to be transmitted using more secure methods. Privacy needs to be taken more seriously.
The whole culture of data management needs to be addressed. Rules are in place as required by laws but the individuals who are governed by them take shortcuts to make their personal lives easier. Sometimes it becomes a nuisance to take that extra precautionary step. We have all been faced with this situation. Maybe we will miss some deadline if we follow the rules to the letter so we circumvent one step.
Individuals set themselves up for misfortune by not practicing effective secure routines. If any of these same individuals who are tasked with protecting other peoples data discovered their own data had been compromised by someone not taking the rules seriously I am certain they would be concerned.
When we care for other people we are actually caring for ourselves. It is a simple thought to keep in mind as we go about our daily business. We need to care for other peoples data as if it were our own. If people really cared we would need rules to tell us to do so.
Who is the real enemy to peace in the Middle East?
This mornings headline reads “Israel rules out cease-fire with Hamas”. Okay, I get why Israel and Hamas do not like each other, but, it seems to me, that when your enemy sticks out his hand and offers to stop fighting, the right thing to do is to accept his hand and stop fighting.
In my admittedly unscholarly estimation, Israel is becoming (has become) a warring nation, period. Sure they have been kicked around like dogs for centuries and they have developed a monster-sized chip on their shoulders. But to turn down an opportunity for a cease fire is saying they like their role as a warring nation. Or they just want to be a nation of martyrs.
Which is it Israel? Do you enjoy killing? Do you enjoy being killed? The rest of world can see how hateful you have become. Step outside yourselves and look at what you have allowed yourselves to become. I don’t understand how a nation of people who believes in God can wantonly kill another human being.
If you myopically cite one passage that says an ‘eye for an eye’ as a reason to kill then you are missing the very reason Jesus died on the cross. God alone can pass judgment on his people.
Let’s set aside, for a moment, that this season, the celebration of the birth of the son of God, is enough reason to at least stop the aggression. Let’s forget for a moment that God has told us ‘Thou Shalt not Kill’. Israel, I beg of you to show the world that you do indeed want peace and that you will graciously accept the hand that is offering it.
All my life I have heard only one theme from Israelis and Palestinians, ‘we attack them because they attacked us’. As a child I remember my parents telling me that this reasoning is nothing more than justification for more killing.
Is this true Israel? Is this what you want out of life, more justification to kill? I have concluded that there can never be peace in the very homelands where Jesus was born because you, Israel, will not allow it. This fact alone fosters disdain for your people and leads down a road of hatred and mistrust. Am I wrong here? There is no good reason to continue this killing. Learn to live together by sharing what little you each have on both sides.
I know this sounds very simplistic and is really way too much to ask for, but peace can only start when you forget the past and look to the future.
Another thing that has been pounded into our conciseness at every turn is how our children are our future. What are you, Israel, telling your children, that is okay to kill Palestinians because they are Palestinians even when the Bible teaches us not to kill your neighbor. You are teaching hypocrisy.
There is always time to accept peace and the best time, the utmost best time, is when it is offered. Accept this cease-fire. It is an opportunity our future cannot ignore.
Now listen to the world collectively say “Israel, what the Hell are you thinking?”
In my admittedly unscholarly estimation, Israel is becoming (has become) a warring nation, period. Sure they have been kicked around like dogs for centuries and they have developed a monster-sized chip on their shoulders. But to turn down an opportunity for a cease fire is saying they like their role as a warring nation. Or they just want to be a nation of martyrs.
Which is it Israel? Do you enjoy killing? Do you enjoy being killed? The rest of world can see how hateful you have become. Step outside yourselves and look at what you have allowed yourselves to become. I don’t understand how a nation of people who believes in God can wantonly kill another human being.
If you myopically cite one passage that says an ‘eye for an eye’ as a reason to kill then you are missing the very reason Jesus died on the cross. God alone can pass judgment on his people.
Let’s set aside, for a moment, that this season, the celebration of the birth of the son of God, is enough reason to at least stop the aggression. Let’s forget for a moment that God has told us ‘Thou Shalt not Kill’. Israel, I beg of you to show the world that you do indeed want peace and that you will graciously accept the hand that is offering it.
All my life I have heard only one theme from Israelis and Palestinians, ‘we attack them because they attacked us’. As a child I remember my parents telling me that this reasoning is nothing more than justification for more killing.
Is this true Israel? Is this what you want out of life, more justification to kill? I have concluded that there can never be peace in the very homelands where Jesus was born because you, Israel, will not allow it. This fact alone fosters disdain for your people and leads down a road of hatred and mistrust. Am I wrong here? There is no good reason to continue this killing. Learn to live together by sharing what little you each have on both sides.
I know this sounds very simplistic and is really way too much to ask for, but peace can only start when you forget the past and look to the future.
Another thing that has been pounded into our conciseness at every turn is how our children are our future. What are you, Israel, telling your children, that is okay to kill Palestinians because they are Palestinians even when the Bible teaches us not to kill your neighbor. You are teaching hypocrisy.
There is always time to accept peace and the best time, the utmost best time, is when it is offered. Accept this cease-fire. It is an opportunity our future cannot ignore.
Now listen to the world collectively say “Israel, what the Hell are you thinking?”
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Erosion in local news coverage
The Federal Communications Commission has voted to allow ownership of both a TV channel and a newspaper. The rule that prevented this dual ownership has been in effect since 1975.
The chairman of the FCC, Kevin Martin, cast the deciding vote which broke the tie stating it "may help to forestall the erosion in local news coverage".
I have lived in several news markets around the U.S. and in each of those markets there has never been less than three local TV news stations and never less than two major newspapers as well as a handful of community and regional newspapers.
Does this indicate an ‘erosion in local news coverage’? I don’t think so. I am surprised that the FCC believes this.
Where I live, along the Rocky Mountains, there are four local news stations that currently broadcast so often in their morning (5 AM – 7 AM), afternoon (11 AM – 12 PM), evening (4 PM – 7 PM) and late night (10 PM – 11 PM) time slots that one would have to be actively trying to not learn what happens in this town.
This town has two major newspapers that do an outstanding job of presenting even more in depth coverage than the TV stations here.
Between TV and news print, so much of the local news is repeated that you must be blind to think there is an erosion of local news coverage taking place here.
It is shocking that the FCC would set the stage for any media empire to be in control of two of the largest purveyors of news, TV and newspaper. This does not support the diversity of opinion that the 1975 rule sought to enforce.
Allowing a handful of people to decide what news stories are presented and how those news stories are presented creates an atmosphere of mistrust and the potential for abuse. Opinions are going to either be stifled or slanted to match the owners political beliefs.
It is true that with the proliferation of cable TV and the internet we now have an even greater idea-base from which to color our world view, leaving these two media sources as the only real choice does not serve diversity.
The chairman of the FCC, Kevin Martin, cast the deciding vote which broke the tie stating it "may help to forestall the erosion in local news coverage".
I have lived in several news markets around the U.S. and in each of those markets there has never been less than three local TV news stations and never less than two major newspapers as well as a handful of community and regional newspapers.
Does this indicate an ‘erosion in local news coverage’? I don’t think so. I am surprised that the FCC believes this.
Where I live, along the Rocky Mountains, there are four local news stations that currently broadcast so often in their morning (5 AM – 7 AM), afternoon (11 AM – 12 PM), evening (4 PM – 7 PM) and late night (10 PM – 11 PM) time slots that one would have to be actively trying to not learn what happens in this town.
This town has two major newspapers that do an outstanding job of presenting even more in depth coverage than the TV stations here.
Between TV and news print, so much of the local news is repeated that you must be blind to think there is an erosion of local news coverage taking place here.
It is shocking that the FCC would set the stage for any media empire to be in control of two of the largest purveyors of news, TV and newspaper. This does not support the diversity of opinion that the 1975 rule sought to enforce.
Allowing a handful of people to decide what news stories are presented and how those news stories are presented creates an atmosphere of mistrust and the potential for abuse. Opinions are going to either be stifled or slanted to match the owners political beliefs.
It is true that with the proliferation of cable TV and the internet we now have an even greater idea-base from which to color our world view, leaving these two media sources as the only real choice does not serve diversity.
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Administration guard dog: Mukasey
It has already started. Recently appointed lapdog replaces old lapdog. U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey rejected a congressional request for information about a Justice Department probe into the CIA's destruction of videotapes of harsh interrogations of suspected terrorists.
This congress is supposed to work together to get at the truth of any suspicious activity. When someone holds back information it can only mean one thing, damning information for someone. Now who could the U.S. Attorney General possibly be protecting?
The Democratic-led Congress has begun its own investigations of last week's disclosure that the CIA destroyed some tapes in 2005, with critics charging a possible cover-up of illegal torture.
The word transparency has been knocked about lately. Evidently the term has not yet reached the Attorney Generals office. But then, transparency has never been one of this administrations strong points.
In refusing to release information that federal investigators have dug up so far, Mukasey wrote: "The department has a long-standing policy of declining to provide non-public information about pending matters." So, it seems, tradition dictates that the U.S. Attorney General's office not cooperate with any other investigations. This department is contributing to duplication of effort forcing Congress to take up time that can be used for other endeavors.
"This policy is based in part on our interest in avoiding any perception that our law enforcement decisions are subject to political influence," Mukasey added in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, and Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the panel's ranking Republican. Actually, sir, this policy only muddies the waters about who you are protecting, a very clear perception of political influence. It is a very common term, namely ‘Covering Your Ass’. It is also called obstruction of justice. This is another of those well-practiced double standards that you like to hang onto.
This congress is supposed to work together to get at the truth of any suspicious activity. When someone holds back information it can only mean one thing, damning information for someone. Now who could the U.S. Attorney General possibly be protecting?
The Democratic-led Congress has begun its own investigations of last week's disclosure that the CIA destroyed some tapes in 2005, with critics charging a possible cover-up of illegal torture.
The word transparency has been knocked about lately. Evidently the term has not yet reached the Attorney Generals office. But then, transparency has never been one of this administrations strong points.
In refusing to release information that federal investigators have dug up so far, Mukasey wrote: "The department has a long-standing policy of declining to provide non-public information about pending matters." So, it seems, tradition dictates that the U.S. Attorney General's office not cooperate with any other investigations. This department is contributing to duplication of effort forcing Congress to take up time that can be used for other endeavors.
"This policy is based in part on our interest in avoiding any perception that our law enforcement decisions are subject to political influence," Mukasey added in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, and Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the panel's ranking Republican. Actually, sir, this policy only muddies the waters about who you are protecting, a very clear perception of political influence. It is a very common term, namely ‘Covering Your Ass’. It is also called obstruction of justice. This is another of those well-practiced double standards that you like to hang onto.
Friday, December 14, 2007
A war is a war is a war
I don’t understand what has changed in America that we applaud soldiers returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan when those who returned from Vietnam were jeered and called criminals.
I support our troops 100%, no matter where they are told to go. This war is not of there choosing. Vietnam wasn’t either. They go where they are told just as they have throughout history.
This war in Iraq is an illegal war based on the lies the Bush administration forced upon us seemingly overnight. Vietnam, though not technically a war but a police action, was forced on us too but it took years of gradual buildup responding to an ever increasing threat. Politicians back then were more open as to the reason we were there. Not so in Iraq.
Communists were never going to come to our shores and turn our citizenry into state-sponsored zombies working only for the state. And today, terrorist are not coming to our shores to destroy every thing we believe in.
Sure the whole atmosphere of protest during Vietnam against anything authoritarian was turning this country inside out and we were all turning against each other and therefore honoring our troops was just too far out of the question. But is the lack of protest today over what this single most undemocratic of administrations has perpetrated upon us an admission that we don’t care? Have we just thrown our hands up in resignation to the realization that we are powerless to change anything?
Patriotism back then was a dirty word uttered under the threat of being ostracized by the very people these soldiers were fighting to protect. Patriotism today is merely a tool used by right wingers to declare themselves ‘better Americans’ than anyone who voices their opinion against this war even when they support the soldiers.
What has changed over the last forty years?
Soldiers then were drafted and forced to fight, some volunteered but this nation’s citizenry turned their backs on them just the same. There was no applause, no pat on the back for a ‘job well done’. There were no large cheering crowds welcoming them home to the nation they put their lives on the line for.
Soldiers today volunteer, although the latest reports show those numbers are dwindling. Is this the reason we as a nation view them so differently? If these soldiers today were drafted and forced to go to Iraq, would they be jeered and called criminals just as they were during Vietnam?
The U.S. became the aggressor in this war. We went in uninvited, supposedly to rid the world of an evil man who was in reality no threat to the U.S. In Vietnam we answered a call to protect a friendly nation. You can decide for yourself which war was more ‘just’.
Has America grown up since Vietnam? Do we now realize we should support our brothers and sons no matter where they are sent knowing the reason could be unjust?
Supporting the troops is not an admission that we support the war. Protesting the war does not mean we are unpatriotic. We can all be patriotic and still admonish an evil, lying, manipulating president. Right wingers need to understand that doing our patriotic duty out of a sense of honor can be separate from the disdain we feel for the fool that sent us into battle.
Our brothers who fought in Vietnam should have been treated better than they were. That shame is on us at our own hands and cannot be washed away.
We can however, pay attention to what our elected officials are up to and force them to be transparent in their dealings so that we are never blindsided again and forced into another illegal war.
If we have indeed learned anything from our mistakes with Vietnam, I can only hope we will also learn from our mistakes with George W Bush.
I support our troops 100%, no matter where they are told to go. This war is not of there choosing. Vietnam wasn’t either. They go where they are told just as they have throughout history.
This war in Iraq is an illegal war based on the lies the Bush administration forced upon us seemingly overnight. Vietnam, though not technically a war but a police action, was forced on us too but it took years of gradual buildup responding to an ever increasing threat. Politicians back then were more open as to the reason we were there. Not so in Iraq.
Communists were never going to come to our shores and turn our citizenry into state-sponsored zombies working only for the state. And today, terrorist are not coming to our shores to destroy every thing we believe in.
Sure the whole atmosphere of protest during Vietnam against anything authoritarian was turning this country inside out and we were all turning against each other and therefore honoring our troops was just too far out of the question. But is the lack of protest today over what this single most undemocratic of administrations has perpetrated upon us an admission that we don’t care? Have we just thrown our hands up in resignation to the realization that we are powerless to change anything?
Patriotism back then was a dirty word uttered under the threat of being ostracized by the very people these soldiers were fighting to protect. Patriotism today is merely a tool used by right wingers to declare themselves ‘better Americans’ than anyone who voices their opinion against this war even when they support the soldiers.
What has changed over the last forty years?
Soldiers then were drafted and forced to fight, some volunteered but this nation’s citizenry turned their backs on them just the same. There was no applause, no pat on the back for a ‘job well done’. There were no large cheering crowds welcoming them home to the nation they put their lives on the line for.
Soldiers today volunteer, although the latest reports show those numbers are dwindling. Is this the reason we as a nation view them so differently? If these soldiers today were drafted and forced to go to Iraq, would they be jeered and called criminals just as they were during Vietnam?
The U.S. became the aggressor in this war. We went in uninvited, supposedly to rid the world of an evil man who was in reality no threat to the U.S. In Vietnam we answered a call to protect a friendly nation. You can decide for yourself which war was more ‘just’.
Has America grown up since Vietnam? Do we now realize we should support our brothers and sons no matter where they are sent knowing the reason could be unjust?
Supporting the troops is not an admission that we support the war. Protesting the war does not mean we are unpatriotic. We can all be patriotic and still admonish an evil, lying, manipulating president. Right wingers need to understand that doing our patriotic duty out of a sense of honor can be separate from the disdain we feel for the fool that sent us into battle.
Our brothers who fought in Vietnam should have been treated better than they were. That shame is on us at our own hands and cannot be washed away.
We can however, pay attention to what our elected officials are up to and force them to be transparent in their dealings so that we are never blindsided again and forced into another illegal war.
If we have indeed learned anything from our mistakes with Vietnam, I can only hope we will also learn from our mistakes with George W Bush.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Will baseball withstand cheaters?
With the Mitchell Report on Baseball’s steroid problem due out today, I’m wondering if game of baseball will actually change.
I have been a fan of Americas game since I was a kid. It was the first sport I was exposed to, it was the first sport that I could actually participate in. It is open to both boys and girls. What could be more fair and equal than that?
It is not unusual to drive through any community in the U.S. and see groups of kids playing baseball. In fact the game reaches around the world.
Growing up at a time when morals and ethics were actually being taught in the home, kids were very much against cheaters. If you didn’t play fair, you didn’t play.
As players begin emerging from the crowd as possible super stars of the game, the crowds cheer them on. Some of those players go on to break records. We cheer even louder and push them to attain even greater heights. This is what fans love about sports, stellar performances and breaking records and making the impossible plays. Every fan dreams of watching another human tear down a long standing record and we cheer them on as if they were heroes.
But fans have one overriding rule that does not need to be vocalized because we all grew up with it as the cornerstone for everything we know is right and just, you can not cheat.
When that record-breaking human is found to have used performance enhancing drugs to perform that impossible feat, fans lose respect for the player. The cheers become jeers. And a little more of our faith in humanity is torn down.
As we grow up the stakes become higher, there is major money involved from the sport they love and sponsor endorsements. There is constant pressure from the front office to perform beyond their means so their investment pays off, and there is constant pressure from the fans to become a sports legend. This last pressure is, I think, more in the players head because true fans just love to watch the strategy of the game being played out.
Athletes turn to performance enhancing drugs to help alleviate these mounting pressures. Fairness becomes no more than a childish thing to hold onto. The drive to be number one is a powerful force and ethics can be easily trampled into the dust of the playing field. The virtuous players get left behind, uncelebrated.
Before steroids came along, records were made and broken by muscle and sheer effort, the true essence of sport.
What is it about these guys today who feel they cannot reach those records on their own strength and ability? What drives them to shun this very basic rule of sports and subject themselves to the stigma of being a cheater?
Is the stigma of being a cheater being lessened by what we are repeatedly exposed to in the daily news? CEO’s cheat and steal from their own employees. Politicians cheat and lie to their own constituents. Religious leaders have forsaken moral values for their personal weaknesses. The poor and rich alike will steal and cheat to get ahead. Is it no surprise that the world of sports is riddled with these same low moral and ethical people?
The answers to these questions is the subject of psychology and I certainly am not equipped to address them. Although, I suspect it has a lot to do with ego and self image.
Just the fact that steroid use could lead to severe body damage such as liver cancer, steroid rage, testicular atrophy, torn tendons, osteoarthritis, just to name a few of the more serious side effects, shows the extent to which a person will go for fame.
Whatever their justification for using drugs, these cheaters should be banned from baseball forever and their records taken down. And not just baseball, there is no place for cheaters in any sport.
This game of baseball is still Americas game. I hope it can withstand this ‘black tide of cheaters’ and not lose more fans.
I have been a fan of Americas game since I was a kid. It was the first sport I was exposed to, it was the first sport that I could actually participate in. It is open to both boys and girls. What could be more fair and equal than that?
It is not unusual to drive through any community in the U.S. and see groups of kids playing baseball. In fact the game reaches around the world.
Growing up at a time when morals and ethics were actually being taught in the home, kids were very much against cheaters. If you didn’t play fair, you didn’t play.
As players begin emerging from the crowd as possible super stars of the game, the crowds cheer them on. Some of those players go on to break records. We cheer even louder and push them to attain even greater heights. This is what fans love about sports, stellar performances and breaking records and making the impossible plays. Every fan dreams of watching another human tear down a long standing record and we cheer them on as if they were heroes.
But fans have one overriding rule that does not need to be vocalized because we all grew up with it as the cornerstone for everything we know is right and just, you can not cheat.
When that record-breaking human is found to have used performance enhancing drugs to perform that impossible feat, fans lose respect for the player. The cheers become jeers. And a little more of our faith in humanity is torn down.
As we grow up the stakes become higher, there is major money involved from the sport they love and sponsor endorsements. There is constant pressure from the front office to perform beyond their means so their investment pays off, and there is constant pressure from the fans to become a sports legend. This last pressure is, I think, more in the players head because true fans just love to watch the strategy of the game being played out.
Athletes turn to performance enhancing drugs to help alleviate these mounting pressures. Fairness becomes no more than a childish thing to hold onto. The drive to be number one is a powerful force and ethics can be easily trampled into the dust of the playing field. The virtuous players get left behind, uncelebrated.
Before steroids came along, records were made and broken by muscle and sheer effort, the true essence of sport.
What is it about these guys today who feel they cannot reach those records on their own strength and ability? What drives them to shun this very basic rule of sports and subject themselves to the stigma of being a cheater?
Is the stigma of being a cheater being lessened by what we are repeatedly exposed to in the daily news? CEO’s cheat and steal from their own employees. Politicians cheat and lie to their own constituents. Religious leaders have forsaken moral values for their personal weaknesses. The poor and rich alike will steal and cheat to get ahead. Is it no surprise that the world of sports is riddled with these same low moral and ethical people?
The answers to these questions is the subject of psychology and I certainly am not equipped to address them. Although, I suspect it has a lot to do with ego and self image.
Just the fact that steroid use could lead to severe body damage such as liver cancer, steroid rage, testicular atrophy, torn tendons, osteoarthritis, just to name a few of the more serious side effects, shows the extent to which a person will go for fame.
Whatever their justification for using drugs, these cheaters should be banned from baseball forever and their records taken down. And not just baseball, there is no place for cheaters in any sport.
This game of baseball is still Americas game. I hope it can withstand this ‘black tide of cheaters’ and not lose more fans.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Average has become the new genius
Every time I read about or hear about proof that the average American citizens’ intelligence level is lower than that of a common chimpanzee I cringe until my blood begins to boil.
There is no excuse, whatsoever, for adults to not live up to their intelligence potential. We are given the opportunity to get a free education until the 12th grade and most (the vast majority) squander the time spent in high school as an excuse to ‘hook up’ with their friends or plan parties. Parents are happy to get the kids out of the house for six to eight hours a day so they get time alone away from them. Opening books and studying for the barest information possible required to pass the next test is the only brain exercise these kids get. And they do not want to do anything more than what is minimally required to get into the next grade level with only one goal in mind, to graduate. By the time they do graduate they can’t even answer what are considered high school level questions.
Jay Leno occasionally does a segment on the Tonight Show, called “Jaywalking”, where he goes to a college campus and asks college students high school level questions about various subjects. The responses he gets make me want to cry. I want to cry because I am so embarrassed about being an American citizen and, by default, lumped into the same pin with these morons. The fact that these ignorant asses just laugh off their stupid responses just shows how little regard we Americans have for education.
You can find examples everywhere of how under-educated America has become. It has become commonly acceptable for Americans to not watch the evening news, or any news program. Current events is treated as a plague to be avoided at all costs. Proper English, the very tool of communication we have been born and raised to speak and write with has not been used in this country for years, possibly even decades.
There is a television program called “Are you smarter than a 5th grader” where adults subject themselves to be pitted against actual 5th grade students. The creator of this program must have the same cynicism that I feel towards American adults. I gave up watching television for entertainment years ago but my father-in-law was watching this particular program as I passed through the living room the other night an just for the hell of it I decided to watch part of it. A grown man was struggling to identify what a bear’s offspring is called. As I watched this moron actually take the time to vocalize the elimination of three of the four possible answers, I could not help but picture everyone backstage laughing at this product to our education system. The fifth graders had already written their answer on a piece of paper and were patiently waiting for him to come up with an answer. This show has to be scripted. There is no way an adult is going to stand in front of an audience and humiliate himself like this. At least I was praying this was not for real. Is this the level that television has been lowered to? What a colossal waste of airtime.
You quiz any group of adults about history, math, science, politics, etc, any high school level subject and the great majority of them will fail that test. You may ask, does it matter? Hell yes, it matters. Why? Because the dumbing down of America plays directly into the hands of the people who run this country. These people depend on an ignorant population to keep them in power. If we get too intelligent then we will figure out what is true and what is pure crap. Politicians live on crap. If the voters became more intelligent then the politicians would have to become more intelligent. We get what we vote for.
We are all born with the equal ability to be great thinkers. We all have the same capacity to think for ourselves. Yet we freely give up that potential in exchange for being cool. Do you remember someone in high school who was obviously eager to do well and always studied to get good grades? Do you remember how that person was treated? That person was labeled a geek and was ostracized from all of the ‘in crowd’ activities because that person did not ‘fit in’. The people who did ‘fit in’, those who thought they were cool because they shunned education to party and hang out with their friends now have low level jobs, dead end careers, and appear on television shoes like “Are you smarter than a 5th grader” and are happy about it. The ‘geek’ owns a business, drives new cars, has lots of money.
You see, high school isn’t all about education. It is a means of teaching you to plan ahead, do the research, be industrious, think for yourself in order to become a leader and not a follower. It teaches you self-reliance. Some kids pick up on this early on and are the most likely to succeed. Others decide they would rather party and ‘be cool’.
Things have gotten so bad that if you exhibit average intelligence then you are the person who is most likely to succeed. Although, you still will probably not get to the top unless you really apply yourself. But in most cases, all you have to do is show a little bit of intelligence and fortitude and most people around you will think you are a freaking genius. This is truly sad.
There is no excuse, whatsoever, for adults to not live up to their intelligence potential. We are given the opportunity to get a free education until the 12th grade and most (the vast majority) squander the time spent in high school as an excuse to ‘hook up’ with their friends or plan parties. Parents are happy to get the kids out of the house for six to eight hours a day so they get time alone away from them. Opening books and studying for the barest information possible required to pass the next test is the only brain exercise these kids get. And they do not want to do anything more than what is minimally required to get into the next grade level with only one goal in mind, to graduate. By the time they do graduate they can’t even answer what are considered high school level questions.
Jay Leno occasionally does a segment on the Tonight Show, called “Jaywalking”, where he goes to a college campus and asks college students high school level questions about various subjects. The responses he gets make me want to cry. I want to cry because I am so embarrassed about being an American citizen and, by default, lumped into the same pin with these morons. The fact that these ignorant asses just laugh off their stupid responses just shows how little regard we Americans have for education.
You can find examples everywhere of how under-educated America has become. It has become commonly acceptable for Americans to not watch the evening news, or any news program. Current events is treated as a plague to be avoided at all costs. Proper English, the very tool of communication we have been born and raised to speak and write with has not been used in this country for years, possibly even decades.
There is a television program called “Are you smarter than a 5th grader” where adults subject themselves to be pitted against actual 5th grade students. The creator of this program must have the same cynicism that I feel towards American adults. I gave up watching television for entertainment years ago but my father-in-law was watching this particular program as I passed through the living room the other night an just for the hell of it I decided to watch part of it. A grown man was struggling to identify what a bear’s offspring is called. As I watched this moron actually take the time to vocalize the elimination of three of the four possible answers, I could not help but picture everyone backstage laughing at this product to our education system. The fifth graders had already written their answer on a piece of paper and were patiently waiting for him to come up with an answer. This show has to be scripted. There is no way an adult is going to stand in front of an audience and humiliate himself like this. At least I was praying this was not for real. Is this the level that television has been lowered to? What a colossal waste of airtime.
You quiz any group of adults about history, math, science, politics, etc, any high school level subject and the great majority of them will fail that test. You may ask, does it matter? Hell yes, it matters. Why? Because the dumbing down of America plays directly into the hands of the people who run this country. These people depend on an ignorant population to keep them in power. If we get too intelligent then we will figure out what is true and what is pure crap. Politicians live on crap. If the voters became more intelligent then the politicians would have to become more intelligent. We get what we vote for.
We are all born with the equal ability to be great thinkers. We all have the same capacity to think for ourselves. Yet we freely give up that potential in exchange for being cool. Do you remember someone in high school who was obviously eager to do well and always studied to get good grades? Do you remember how that person was treated? That person was labeled a geek and was ostracized from all of the ‘in crowd’ activities because that person did not ‘fit in’. The people who did ‘fit in’, those who thought they were cool because they shunned education to party and hang out with their friends now have low level jobs, dead end careers, and appear on television shoes like “Are you smarter than a 5th grader” and are happy about it. The ‘geek’ owns a business, drives new cars, has lots of money.
You see, high school isn’t all about education. It is a means of teaching you to plan ahead, do the research, be industrious, think for yourself in order to become a leader and not a follower. It teaches you self-reliance. Some kids pick up on this early on and are the most likely to succeed. Others decide they would rather party and ‘be cool’.
Things have gotten so bad that if you exhibit average intelligence then you are the person who is most likely to succeed. Although, you still will probably not get to the top unless you really apply yourself. But in most cases, all you have to do is show a little bit of intelligence and fortitude and most people around you will think you are a freaking genius. This is truly sad.
Monday, December 3, 2007
President Bush’s abuse of Congress
This political system of ours is a strong one. It will withstand any onslaught from within and from the outside. But it will do so only if Americans know what specific powers each of its branches of government have and only if those branches diligently and relentlessly exercise their own powers that are designed to hold each others power in check.
President Bush is no stranger to controversy on how he has usurped the power of Congress to declare war. He has also abused his office in declaring his right to spy on his fellow Americans and has used corporations to help him pull off this illegal and heinous activity as well as a long list of other crimes against the Constitution.
The current White House has made a mockery of what our forefathers deemed was the perfect union of the three branches of government and continues to do so unchecked by the very safeguards that were built into our Constitution.
I found an article on AntiWar.com written by Thomas R. Eddlem back in February 2006. This essay addresses the presidential powers, and lack thereof, as succinctly as any I have read. I present the link here in hopes of further enlightening as many Americans as possible to how President Bush’s ego has sought to destroy the balance that our forefathers instilled in our constitution. Mr. Eddlem has more clearly outlined the presidents role in politics much better than I ever could. I thank-you Mr. Eddlem for your articulation in this much needed clarification.
President Bush is no stranger to controversy on how he has usurped the power of Congress to declare war. He has also abused his office in declaring his right to spy on his fellow Americans and has used corporations to help him pull off this illegal and heinous activity as well as a long list of other crimes against the Constitution.
The current White House has made a mockery of what our forefathers deemed was the perfect union of the three branches of government and continues to do so unchecked by the very safeguards that were built into our Constitution.
I found an article on AntiWar.com written by Thomas R. Eddlem back in February 2006. This essay addresses the presidential powers, and lack thereof, as succinctly as any I have read. I present the link here in hopes of further enlightening as many Americans as possible to how President Bush’s ego has sought to destroy the balance that our forefathers instilled in our constitution. Mr. Eddlem has more clearly outlined the presidents role in politics much better than I ever could. I thank-you Mr. Eddlem for your articulation in this much needed clarification.
Venezuela rejects socialism
Chavez lost his bid to make himself dictator. By a very narrow margin, 51% voted against his constitutional referendum that would have allowed President Hugo Chavez to remain in power indefinitely.
President of the National Electoral Council, Tibisay Lucena, said the process "shows the entire world that we are a democratic country."
I would not be one bit surprised to learn that Chavez will blame the United States for interfering in this election process causing him to lose his bid. He is a dictator at heart and will not step down peacefully.
At stake were 69 amendments proposed by Chavez, who has said he wants to steer Venezuela toward full socialism -- a state his detractors describe as full totalitarianism.
Chavez called Venezuela's electoral system "one of the most transparent in the world," and said its voting machines are among "the most modern of the world."
So, with that statement he cannot say the machines were tampered with, but the paranoid tyrant will undoubtedly find someway to blame the U.S. for his loss.
I want to personally gives my thanks to the people of Venezuela, we already have too many dictators and far too many dictator wannabes.
President of the National Electoral Council, Tibisay Lucena, said the process "shows the entire world that we are a democratic country."
I would not be one bit surprised to learn that Chavez will blame the United States for interfering in this election process causing him to lose his bid. He is a dictator at heart and will not step down peacefully.
At stake were 69 amendments proposed by Chavez, who has said he wants to steer Venezuela toward full socialism -- a state his detractors describe as full totalitarianism.
Chavez called Venezuela's electoral system "one of the most transparent in the world," and said its voting machines are among "the most modern of the world."
So, with that statement he cannot say the machines were tampered with, but the paranoid tyrant will undoubtedly find someway to blame the U.S. for his loss.
I want to personally gives my thanks to the people of Venezuela, we already have too many dictators and far too many dictator wannabes.
Definite bias in national media
On the subject of the latest snow storm to hit this country from the west through the east, this snow storm dumped 4+” of snow and ice on the western states of Utah, Idaho, Colorado, Nevada, etc Friday night through late Saturday afternoon and I did not see one national media outlet say anything about it. But when it merely threatened the east coast, before it even got there, every national media outlet was predicting how it was going adversely affect the Monday morning commute.
Why was so much more attention placed on the east coast while the western states were ignored? Because all of the major national media is headquarters along the east coast.
This is not the first time I have seen this clear bias. It is as though the west is some other entity that is not worthy of the almighty east coasts attention.
Just an observation.
Why was so much more attention placed on the east coast while the western states were ignored? Because all of the major national media is headquarters along the east coast.
This is not the first time I have seen this clear bias. It is as though the west is some other entity that is not worthy of the almighty east coasts attention.
Just an observation.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Church protest at funeral is vulgar
On Nov 1, 2007 I learned how low a church would stoop in order to force their beliefs on other people. Their practice of taunting dead soldiers at military funerals is one of the most despicable displays of human indecency ever visited upon another human.
After the family of the fallen soldier sued the church for invasion of privacy and intent to cause emotional distress a jury awarded the family a settlement and now constitutional lawyers have the audacity to proclaim that the church’s rights may have been violated.
This case is a matter of common decency over man-made laws involving ‘legal’ rights. The church has the ‘right’ to voice its opinions, as granted by the constitution, but civility and human decency dictates that families have the right to bury their members in peace and with dignity. Anyone, usurping this right should be deeply ashamed of themselves.
The funeral ceremony is one of the most sacred and solemn rites to be bestowed on a human and as such demands privacy and is therefore free from outside sources using it as a forum for their own agendas.
When that outside source is a church then they need to take a serious re-evaluation of what ‘service’ they are providing mankind.
Constitutional law ‘experts’ may determine this a violation of the church’s First Amendment rights of free speech, but when one right tramples on another then civility needs to win out. It is abhorrent that anyone would disrupt a funeral. Especially a church who is in the business of these matters. Any church that disrupts funeral proceedings is not a true representative of Gods will.
David Hudson of the First Amendment Center claims that "If people can be sued because people are offended by other people's speech, then we've really curtailed freedom of speech." You miss the point entirely Mr. Hudson. Civility dictates that a family has the right to bury family members without being accosted by anyone. This is the biggest problem with lawyers, they throw civility out the window when it comes to ‘protecting’ civil rights. To lawyers it is only a matter of the financial bottom-line as to what they ‘believe’ at the time.
They will struggle for victory no matter where the results take us, even at the cost of civility and human decency. There is a line that no one should be able to cross and that line is indelibly drawn around funerals.
You can quote all the lawmakers theories you want, Mr. Hudson, but anyone who intrudes on the sacred and solemn proceedings of a family burying their loved ones should rot in hell. When a so-called Christian group who masquerades under the banner of spreading Gods word is the driving force behind the intrusion, well, there should be a special place in hell for them.
After the family of the fallen soldier sued the church for invasion of privacy and intent to cause emotional distress a jury awarded the family a settlement and now constitutional lawyers have the audacity to proclaim that the church’s rights may have been violated.
This case is a matter of common decency over man-made laws involving ‘legal’ rights. The church has the ‘right’ to voice its opinions, as granted by the constitution, but civility and human decency dictates that families have the right to bury their members in peace and with dignity. Anyone, usurping this right should be deeply ashamed of themselves.
The funeral ceremony is one of the most sacred and solemn rites to be bestowed on a human and as such demands privacy and is therefore free from outside sources using it as a forum for their own agendas.
When that outside source is a church then they need to take a serious re-evaluation of what ‘service’ they are providing mankind.
Constitutional law ‘experts’ may determine this a violation of the church’s First Amendment rights of free speech, but when one right tramples on another then civility needs to win out. It is abhorrent that anyone would disrupt a funeral. Especially a church who is in the business of these matters. Any church that disrupts funeral proceedings is not a true representative of Gods will.
David Hudson of the First Amendment Center claims that "If people can be sued because people are offended by other people's speech, then we've really curtailed freedom of speech." You miss the point entirely Mr. Hudson. Civility dictates that a family has the right to bury family members without being accosted by anyone. This is the biggest problem with lawyers, they throw civility out the window when it comes to ‘protecting’ civil rights. To lawyers it is only a matter of the financial bottom-line as to what they ‘believe’ at the time.
They will struggle for victory no matter where the results take us, even at the cost of civility and human decency. There is a line that no one should be able to cross and that line is indelibly drawn around funerals.
You can quote all the lawmakers theories you want, Mr. Hudson, but anyone who intrudes on the sacred and solemn proceedings of a family burying their loved ones should rot in hell. When a so-called Christian group who masquerades under the banner of spreading Gods word is the driving force behind the intrusion, well, there should be a special place in hell for them.
Friday, November 23, 2007
School of the Americas
Bill Quigley of TruthOut.org recently ran an article in AlterNet reporting how an annual gathering for peace and human rights was staged at Fort Benning, Georgia in an attempt to shutdown the School of the AmericasT.
The annual event drew more than 20,000 activists gathered at Fort Benning while simultaneous protests occurred in Santiago Chile, Tucson Arizona, Toronto Canada, and Berkeley California.
I direct the readers attention to this article for the purpose of illuminating how our government callously disregards human rights whenever someone protests what the government is doing.
The article, entitled ‘Twenty thousand protest at Fort Benning: Eleven face federal criminal trials” can be found here.
The annual event drew more than 20,000 activists gathered at Fort Benning while simultaneous protests occurred in Santiago Chile, Tucson Arizona, Toronto Canada, and Berkeley California.
I direct the readers attention to this article for the purpose of illuminating how our government callously disregards human rights whenever someone protests what the government is doing.
The article, entitled ‘Twenty thousand protest at Fort Benning: Eleven face federal criminal trials” can be found here.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Cost of Cheap Labor
I received this email and there is no author (it had been forwarded three times before it got to me) but it sounds very much in tune with reality.
Subject: Beware of Cheap Tomatoes
Tomatoes and Cheap Labor
Cheap Tomatoes; This should make everyone think, be you Democrat, Republican or Independent
From a California school teacher - - - "As you listen to the news about the student protests over illegal immigration, there are some things that you should be aware of:
I am in charge of the English-as-a-second-language department at a large southern California high school which is designated a Title 1 school, meaning that its students average lower socioeconomic and income levels.
Most of the schools you are hearing about, South Gate High, Bell Gardens, Huntington Park, etc., where these students are protesting, are also Title1 schools.
Title 1 schools are on the free breakfast and free lunch program. When I say free breakfast, I'm not talking a glass of milk and roll -- but a full breakfast and cereal bar with fruits and juices that would make a Marriott proud.
The waste of this food is monumental, with trays and trays of it being dumped in the trash uneaten. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I estimate that well over 50% of these students are obese or at least moderately overweight. About 75% or more DO have cell phones.
The school also provides day care centers for the unwed teenage pregnant girls (some as young as 13) so they can attend class without the inconvenience of having to arrange for babysitters or having family watch their kids. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I was ordered to spend $700,000 on my department or risk losing funding for the upcoming year even though there was little need for anything; my budget was already substantial. I ended up buying new computers for the computer learning center, half of which, one month later, have been carved with graffiti by the appreciative students who obviously feel humbled and grateful to have a free education in America. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I have had to intervene several times for young and substitute teachers whose classes consist of many illegal immigrant students here in the country less than 3 months who raised so much hell with the female teachers, calling them "Putas" (whores) and throwing things that the teachers were in tears.
Free medical, free education, free food, day care etc., etc., etc. Is it any wonder they feel entitled to not only be in this country but to demand rights, privileges and entitlements?
To those who want to point out how much these illegal immigrants contribute to our society because they LIKE their gardener and housekeeper and they like to pay less for tomatoes: spend some time in the real world of illegal immigration and see the TRUE costs.
Higher insurance, medical facilities closing, higher medical costs, more crime, lower standards of education in our schools, overcrowding, new diseases etc., etc, etc. For me, I'll pay more for tomatoes.
We need to wake up. The guest worker program will be a disaster because we won't have the guts to enforce it. Does anyone in their right mind really think they will voluntarily leave and return?
There are many hardworking Hispanic/American citizens that contribute to our country and many that I consider my true friends. We should encourage and accept those Hispanics who have done it the right and legal way.
It does, however, have everything to do with culture: A third-world culture that does not value education, that accepts children getting pregnant and dropping out of school by 15 and that refuses to assimilate, and an American culture that has become so weak and worried about "politically correct" that we don't have the will to do anything about it. If this makes your blood boil, as it did mine, forward this to everyone you know.
CHEAP LABOR? Isn't that what the whole immigration issue is about?
Business doesn't want to pay a decent wage.
Consumers don't want expensive produce.
Government will tell you Americans don't want the jobs.
But the bottom line is cheap labor. The phrase "cheap labor" is a myth, a farce, and a lie. There is no such thing as "cheap labor."
Take, for example, an illegal alien with a wife and five children. He takes a job for $5.00 or $6.00/ hour. At that wage, with six dependents, he pays no income tax, yet at the end of the year, if he files an Income Tax Return,he gets an "earned income credit" of up to $3,200 free.
He qualifies for Section 8 housing and subsidized rent.
He qualifies for food stamps.
He qualifies for free (no deductible, no co-pay) health care.
His children get free breakfasts and lunches at school.
He requires bilingual teachers and books.
He qualifies for relief from high energy bills.
If they are or become, aged, blind or disabled, they qualify for SSI. Once qualified for SSI they can qualify for Medicare. All of this is at (our) taxpayer's expense.
He doesn't worry about car insurance, life insurance, or homeowners insurance.
Taxpayers provide Spanish language signs, bulletins and printed material.
He and his family receive the equivalent of $20.00 to $30.00/hour in benefits.
Working Americans are lucky to have $5.00 or $6.00/ hour left after paying their bills and his.
The American taxpayers also pay for increased crime, graffiti and trash clean-up.
Cheap labor? YEAH RIGHT! Wake up people. THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS WE SHOULD BE ADDRESSING TO THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES FOR EITHER PARTY. AND WHEN THEY LIE TO US AND DON'T DO AS THEY SAY, WE SHOULD REPLACE THEM AT ONCE!'
THIS HAS GOT TO BE PASSED ALONG TO AS MANY AS POSSIBLE.
Subject: Beware of Cheap Tomatoes
Tomatoes and Cheap Labor
Cheap Tomatoes; This should make everyone think, be you Democrat, Republican or Independent
From a California school teacher - - - "As you listen to the news about the student protests over illegal immigration, there are some things that you should be aware of:
I am in charge of the English-as-a-second-language department at a large southern California high school which is designated a Title 1 school, meaning that its students average lower socioeconomic and income levels.
Most of the schools you are hearing about, South Gate High, Bell Gardens, Huntington Park, etc., where these students are protesting, are also Title1 schools.
Title 1 schools are on the free breakfast and free lunch program. When I say free breakfast, I'm not talking a glass of milk and roll -- but a full breakfast and cereal bar with fruits and juices that would make a Marriott proud.
The waste of this food is monumental, with trays and trays of it being dumped in the trash uneaten. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I estimate that well over 50% of these students are obese or at least moderately overweight. About 75% or more DO have cell phones.
The school also provides day care centers for the unwed teenage pregnant girls (some as young as 13) so they can attend class without the inconvenience of having to arrange for babysitters or having family watch their kids. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I was ordered to spend $700,000 on my department or risk losing funding for the upcoming year even though there was little need for anything; my budget was already substantial. I ended up buying new computers for the computer learning center, half of which, one month later, have been carved with graffiti by the appreciative students who obviously feel humbled and grateful to have a free education in America. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I have had to intervene several times for young and substitute teachers whose classes consist of many illegal immigrant students here in the country less than 3 months who raised so much hell with the female teachers, calling them "Putas" (whores) and throwing things that the teachers were in tears.
Free medical, free education, free food, day care etc., etc., etc. Is it any wonder they feel entitled to not only be in this country but to demand rights, privileges and entitlements?
To those who want to point out how much these illegal immigrants contribute to our society because they LIKE their gardener and housekeeper and they like to pay less for tomatoes: spend some time in the real world of illegal immigration and see the TRUE costs.
Higher insurance, medical facilities closing, higher medical costs, more crime, lower standards of education in our schools, overcrowding, new diseases etc., etc, etc. For me, I'll pay more for tomatoes.
We need to wake up. The guest worker program will be a disaster because we won't have the guts to enforce it. Does anyone in their right mind really think they will voluntarily leave and return?
There are many hardworking Hispanic/American citizens that contribute to our country and many that I consider my true friends. We should encourage and accept those Hispanics who have done it the right and legal way.
It does, however, have everything to do with culture: A third-world culture that does not value education, that accepts children getting pregnant and dropping out of school by 15 and that refuses to assimilate, and an American culture that has become so weak and worried about "politically correct" that we don't have the will to do anything about it. If this makes your blood boil, as it did mine, forward this to everyone you know.
CHEAP LABOR? Isn't that what the whole immigration issue is about?
Business doesn't want to pay a decent wage.
Consumers don't want expensive produce.
Government will tell you Americans don't want the jobs.
But the bottom line is cheap labor. The phrase "cheap labor" is a myth, a farce, and a lie. There is no such thing as "cheap labor."
Take, for example, an illegal alien with a wife and five children. He takes a job for $5.00 or $6.00/ hour. At that wage, with six dependents, he pays no income tax, yet at the end of the year, if he files an Income Tax Return,he gets an "earned income credit" of up to $3,200 free.
He qualifies for Section 8 housing and subsidized rent.
He qualifies for food stamps.
He qualifies for free (no deductible, no co-pay) health care.
His children get free breakfasts and lunches at school.
He requires bilingual teachers and books.
He qualifies for relief from high energy bills.
If they are or become, aged, blind or disabled, they qualify for SSI. Once qualified for SSI they can qualify for Medicare. All of this is at (our) taxpayer's expense.
He doesn't worry about car insurance, life insurance, or homeowners insurance.
Taxpayers provide Spanish language signs, bulletins and printed material.
He and his family receive the equivalent of $20.00 to $30.00/hour in benefits.
Working Americans are lucky to have $5.00 or $6.00/ hour left after paying their bills and his.
The American taxpayers also pay for increased crime, graffiti and trash clean-up.
Cheap labor? YEAH RIGHT! Wake up people. THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS WE SHOULD BE ADDRESSING TO THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES FOR EITHER PARTY. AND WHEN THEY LIE TO US AND DON'T DO AS THEY SAY, WE SHOULD REPLACE THEM AT ONCE!'
THIS HAS GOT TO BE PASSED ALONG TO AS MANY AS POSSIBLE.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Musharraf and Bush: puppets and war profiteers
Musharraf would go for the U.S. brand of democracy if he would only understand what it means for all politicians. Politicians could tax the hell out of the working force to pay for their rich lifestyle, their parties, their opportunities for ‘money under the table’ in backrooms where deals are made to pass bills and laws that help make themselves and their buddies richer. To pay for their own retirement benefits and their own health insurance while not having to share anything with the very people who put them in power. But Musharraf doesn't want to share with all politicians. He wants to ensure that only he and his buddies get to ride the gravy train and since he is in a position to prevent all opposition to his rule and is acting on that position to his benefit, this has made him George W. Bush’s hero.
This is why King George refuses to stop supporting the little dictator, they are brothers. Bush is simply spreading the wealth garnered from his illegal, propaganda-inflamed ‘war-against-terrorism’ scheme. If Bush allows Musharraf to be put out of office then all of Bush’s oil company buddies and his war machine cronies would take a direct hit in their fiscal bottom line. In Bush’s world of ‘steal from the poor and give to the rich’ such a mistake would be devastating. His ego would not be able to withstand such a let down to his club brothers.
Musharraf is dispensable if democracy is what Bush truly wants in Pakistan. In fact, it is necessary that Musharraf be relieved of power as soon as possible if democracy stands a chance of taking hold in Pakistan. Bush’s actions clearly show that democracy is not what Bush is after here. Bhutto wants democracy. Musharraf has clearly shown he only wants democracy if democracy wants him. Bush and Musharraf are too much alike to allow Musharraf to remain in power. He will destroy Pakistan just as Bush is destroying the U.S.
Wake up America, Musharraf still has ties with the Taliban. The Taliban propped him up as leader of Pakistan and he faked allegiance with America in order to slow America’s war against the Taliban. When Musharraf signed a peace deal with Islamic militants while claiming to fight alongside America to ferret out all militants proves he is just a scared puppy dog trying to hang on to power by promising to follow everybody’s direction. Now that he is faced with not being in power he arrests all lawmakers in an attempt to keep himself in power. This makes Musharraf a very untrustworthy and therefore very dangerous man.
Musharraf and Bush have both made it clear that democracy can take a back seat so they can stay in power and continue to profit from this illegal, immoral war at the expense of innocent lives.
This is why King George refuses to stop supporting the little dictator, they are brothers. Bush is simply spreading the wealth garnered from his illegal, propaganda-inflamed ‘war-against-terrorism’ scheme. If Bush allows Musharraf to be put out of office then all of Bush’s oil company buddies and his war machine cronies would take a direct hit in their fiscal bottom line. In Bush’s world of ‘steal from the poor and give to the rich’ such a mistake would be devastating. His ego would not be able to withstand such a let down to his club brothers.
Musharraf is dispensable if democracy is what Bush truly wants in Pakistan. In fact, it is necessary that Musharraf be relieved of power as soon as possible if democracy stands a chance of taking hold in Pakistan. Bush’s actions clearly show that democracy is not what Bush is after here. Bhutto wants democracy. Musharraf has clearly shown he only wants democracy if democracy wants him. Bush and Musharraf are too much alike to allow Musharraf to remain in power. He will destroy Pakistan just as Bush is destroying the U.S.
Wake up America, Musharraf still has ties with the Taliban. The Taliban propped him up as leader of Pakistan and he faked allegiance with America in order to slow America’s war against the Taliban. When Musharraf signed a peace deal with Islamic militants while claiming to fight alongside America to ferret out all militants proves he is just a scared puppy dog trying to hang on to power by promising to follow everybody’s direction. Now that he is faced with not being in power he arrests all lawmakers in an attempt to keep himself in power. This makes Musharraf a very untrustworthy and therefore very dangerous man.
Musharraf and Bush have both made it clear that democracy can take a back seat so they can stay in power and continue to profit from this illegal, immoral war at the expense of innocent lives.
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Drivers failed test
Driving on our roadways is a responsibility that involves every driver and pedestrian in your vicinity. You have their safety in your hands while behind the wheel of that automobile. Driving laws are in place so that everyone around you has a chance of arriving at their destination safely. This ‘privilege’ is being taken for granted and far too many people don’t take it seriously enough.
GMAC insurance conducted an informal driving test and found that nearly 36 million of us failed the simple driving test. The two areas with the biggest deficiency are tailgating and traffic lights.
When approaching a yellow traffic signal slow down and stop, don’t speed up to get through it. How much time do you think you are saving getting through that light? Truly, you do not save more than a few seconds. And where are you going that a few seconds makes a difference? Take a relaxed attitude when driving, don’t be aggressive.
Tailgating. This action is just plain foolish. Traveling too close to the vehicle in front of you creates a situation in which you are likely to cause an accident. You are taking the drivers attention off of the road in front of them and forcing them to look back at you for the fool you are. If the car in front of them has to stop quickly making them stop quickly which in turn makes you stop quickly then you are about to be involved in their accident. Why put yourself in that situation? I have never understood the mentality of tailgating another vehicle. Do you really think you're going to make them go faster? Do you think it is wise to piss someone off who could slam on their brakes to get you to back off? If someone wants to drive the speed limit you have no place trying to get them to do otherwise. Again, don’t be aggressive on the road.
A third problem, that I personally see a lot of, is improper use of turn signals. How much effort does it take to inform other people of your intentions? Why do you insist on keeping it a secret?
Using your turn signal, be it to turn or to change lanes, is to inform others of your intention. Use of a turn signal actually helps you the driver making the turn by telling others to back off because you are going to slow down. Signaling does not, by any means, tell everyone around you to stop what they are doing just so you can do what you want. Turn signals should be used before you apply your brakes and before you actually change lanes. Putting on a turn signal after you are already in the turn lane or have already changed lanes is a bit late to do any good. Give people around you plenty of warning. Also, using turn signals tells others that they should go around you so they can continue on their way without having to slow down and then speed up again which wastes fuel.
The biggest dangers in driving, both of which is under our control, is that people become mindless behind the wheel or they get impatient and become aggressive. They either follow along too closely convinced nothing is will ever happen to them, or they think they have to pass everything on the road as if they are out to win some prize for getting somewhere first.
I blame the socially accepted norm of driving fast on car commercials, along with several other factors. If you watch car commercials with a critical eye to how they present their automobiles you will notice they are selling them to go faster than anyone around them. Car advertisers want potential buyers to think they are the flashiest thing on the road and car advertisers think they have to show the car going fast in order to pull this off. Why is this?
There is also this idea that the number one lane on the freeway, the far left lane, is considered the fast lane. People, there is no fast lane, all lanes are governed by the same speed limit. I see people riding in this number one lane at the speed limit when some joker will come up on them driving over the limit and expect everyone to get out of their way. The joker begins terrorizing the law-abiding driver by riding on their bumper because the joker thinks he/she has the right to force the law-abiding driver over out of ‘their’ lane. At freeway speeds this is just nuts. At any speed it is aggressive driving. This is noting more than a power trip and we need to fight that urge because some innocent is going to get hurt.
We need to realize that everyone around us wants to get to where they are going without feeling pressured by some joker harassing us by tailgating (which amounts to terrorizing).
It is easy to get lazy and forget about defensive driving and driver courtesy as safety mechanisms for everyone around us and this informal test proves it. Please, take the time to take the test for yourself and make a conscious effort to become a safer driver for everyone’s benefit. Think about how insurance rates would go down if there were no traffic accidents. It is the responsibility of each of us to make that happen.
GMAC insurance conducted an informal driving test and found that nearly 36 million of us failed the simple driving test. The two areas with the biggest deficiency are tailgating and traffic lights.
When approaching a yellow traffic signal slow down and stop, don’t speed up to get through it. How much time do you think you are saving getting through that light? Truly, you do not save more than a few seconds. And where are you going that a few seconds makes a difference? Take a relaxed attitude when driving, don’t be aggressive.
Tailgating. This action is just plain foolish. Traveling too close to the vehicle in front of you creates a situation in which you are likely to cause an accident. You are taking the drivers attention off of the road in front of them and forcing them to look back at you for the fool you are. If the car in front of them has to stop quickly making them stop quickly which in turn makes you stop quickly then you are about to be involved in their accident. Why put yourself in that situation? I have never understood the mentality of tailgating another vehicle. Do you really think you're going to make them go faster? Do you think it is wise to piss someone off who could slam on their brakes to get you to back off? If someone wants to drive the speed limit you have no place trying to get them to do otherwise. Again, don’t be aggressive on the road.
A third problem, that I personally see a lot of, is improper use of turn signals. How much effort does it take to inform other people of your intentions? Why do you insist on keeping it a secret?
Using your turn signal, be it to turn or to change lanes, is to inform others of your intention. Use of a turn signal actually helps you the driver making the turn by telling others to back off because you are going to slow down. Signaling does not, by any means, tell everyone around you to stop what they are doing just so you can do what you want. Turn signals should be used before you apply your brakes and before you actually change lanes. Putting on a turn signal after you are already in the turn lane or have already changed lanes is a bit late to do any good. Give people around you plenty of warning. Also, using turn signals tells others that they should go around you so they can continue on their way without having to slow down and then speed up again which wastes fuel.
The biggest dangers in driving, both of which is under our control, is that people become mindless behind the wheel or they get impatient and become aggressive. They either follow along too closely convinced nothing is will ever happen to them, or they think they have to pass everything on the road as if they are out to win some prize for getting somewhere first.
I blame the socially accepted norm of driving fast on car commercials, along with several other factors. If you watch car commercials with a critical eye to how they present their automobiles you will notice they are selling them to go faster than anyone around them. Car advertisers want potential buyers to think they are the flashiest thing on the road and car advertisers think they have to show the car going fast in order to pull this off. Why is this?
There is also this idea that the number one lane on the freeway, the far left lane, is considered the fast lane. People, there is no fast lane, all lanes are governed by the same speed limit. I see people riding in this number one lane at the speed limit when some joker will come up on them driving over the limit and expect everyone to get out of their way. The joker begins terrorizing the law-abiding driver by riding on their bumper because the joker thinks he/she has the right to force the law-abiding driver over out of ‘their’ lane. At freeway speeds this is just nuts. At any speed it is aggressive driving. This is noting more than a power trip and we need to fight that urge because some innocent is going to get hurt.
We need to realize that everyone around us wants to get to where they are going without feeling pressured by some joker harassing us by tailgating (which amounts to terrorizing).
It is easy to get lazy and forget about defensive driving and driver courtesy as safety mechanisms for everyone around us and this informal test proves it. Please, take the time to take the test for yourself and make a conscious effort to become a safer driver for everyone’s benefit. Think about how insurance rates would go down if there were no traffic accidents. It is the responsibility of each of us to make that happen.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
No more HO HO HO?
This is going too damn far! Can this really be what we have come to? Santas in Sydney Australia who showed up at a recruitment office are told not to use Father Christmas’s traditional “ho ho ho” greeting because it may be offensive to women! The only minds that would mistake this traditional greeting as offensive are sick immature twists who refuse to outgrow their juvenile ways.
This is Santa’s domain. If we begin changing our traditions because a few adults can’t grow up enough to prevent street slang from invading this joyous tradition then we have lost our joy. Have we become so fearful of offending that traditions are to be cast off?
We cannot give in to the sick minds of adults who refuse to grow up!
You are allowing these juvenile imbeciles to dictate how we view the world and in the process you are making yourself look foolish. Changing the way Santa greets children is offensive to this time honored tradition. You should be ashamed of yourselves for allowing your mind to compare this greeting with street slang.
Leave Santa alone!
This is Santa’s domain. If we begin changing our traditions because a few adults can’t grow up enough to prevent street slang from invading this joyous tradition then we have lost our joy. Have we become so fearful of offending that traditions are to be cast off?
We cannot give in to the sick minds of adults who refuse to grow up!
You are allowing these juvenile imbeciles to dictate how we view the world and in the process you are making yourself look foolish. Changing the way Santa greets children is offensive to this time honored tradition. You should be ashamed of yourselves for allowing your mind to compare this greeting with street slang.
Leave Santa alone!
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Indiana fights DUI
The court system in Indiana is trying something different in handling drunk drivers. DUI offenders are required to attend a court-mandated panel presentation at the Indiana State Fairgrounds.
At this particular presentation the offenders heard a panel member tell of how her brother was killed by a DUI driver. Her story is all too familiar, lamenting the loss of her loved one and how he will never do this or do that and how the offender spent a token amount of time in jail and is now free to go wherever he/she wants.
I applaud them for their effort to find the elusive method of preventing future tragedy. This is definitely a step in the right direction but it still is not enough. We cannot settle for reaching a small percentage of offenders who still have enough common decency to not repeat their offense against the unsuspecting innocents on our roads.
This reporter did not mention whether this was a one time panel or something that every DUI offender will have to go through. Maybe there are additional aspects of this program that goes further towards preventing future tragedy than what was reported in this article, I don’t know because the reporter did not go into any specifics. If this is all there is to this program then it is falls short.
Six people who were ordered to attend this panel showed up intoxicated. The reporter did not mention how these people arrived at the meeting. Did they drive themselves? Did someone bring them? Did any of these offenders loose their privilege to drive as a result of their arrest? Did anyone ignore this opportunity and just not show up?
The six people who showed up intoxicated clearly don’t get it. Something more needs to be done to keep them off of our streets. And reporters need to paint a much clearer picture about what is being done.
At this particular presentation the offenders heard a panel member tell of how her brother was killed by a DUI driver. Her story is all too familiar, lamenting the loss of her loved one and how he will never do this or do that and how the offender spent a token amount of time in jail and is now free to go wherever he/she wants.
I applaud them for their effort to find the elusive method of preventing future tragedy. This is definitely a step in the right direction but it still is not enough. We cannot settle for reaching a small percentage of offenders who still have enough common decency to not repeat their offense against the unsuspecting innocents on our roads.
This reporter did not mention whether this was a one time panel or something that every DUI offender will have to go through. Maybe there are additional aspects of this program that goes further towards preventing future tragedy than what was reported in this article, I don’t know because the reporter did not go into any specifics. If this is all there is to this program then it is falls short.
Six people who were ordered to attend this panel showed up intoxicated. The reporter did not mention how these people arrived at the meeting. Did they drive themselves? Did someone bring them? Did any of these offenders loose their privilege to drive as a result of their arrest? Did anyone ignore this opportunity and just not show up?
The six people who showed up intoxicated clearly don’t get it. Something more needs to be done to keep them off of our streets. And reporters need to paint a much clearer picture about what is being done.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Robert A. Singer-child pornographer
Here is another depraved adult who needs to learn how to live amongst civil society.
Mr. Singer, 49, was the chief operating officer at the National Children’s Museum in Washington D.C.
This scum bag was caught distributing child pornography over the internet from his employers computer.
He had the audacity to bring his vile tools of his depraved sick mind to his place of employment and sully the reputation of an institution that brings education and culture to children.
Does this indicate that there might be others at the National Children’s Museum that sympathize with his sick proclivity to children?
The Washington museum posted a message on its Web site saying officials there are "horrified" by news of Singer's arrest. They reported that he has been suspended from his post, effective immediately, and is barred from the property.
Singer, 49, was arrested at his home in Falls Church, Virginia, by federal agents, according to the prosecutors' statement. Authorities allege he engaged in several instant messaging "chats" and e-mail communications with the undercover detective, posing as the woman and her daughter, from August to September.
If I had a picture I would surely post it here so the world knows what depravity looks like.
Mr. Singer, 49, was the chief operating officer at the National Children’s Museum in Washington D.C.
This scum bag was caught distributing child pornography over the internet from his employers computer.
He had the audacity to bring his vile tools of his depraved sick mind to his place of employment and sully the reputation of an institution that brings education and culture to children.
Does this indicate that there might be others at the National Children’s Museum that sympathize with his sick proclivity to children?
The Washington museum posted a message on its Web site saying officials there are "horrified" by news of Singer's arrest. They reported that he has been suspended from his post, effective immediately, and is barred from the property.
Singer, 49, was arrested at his home in Falls Church, Virginia, by federal agents, according to the prosecutors' statement. Authorities allege he engaged in several instant messaging "chats" and e-mail communications with the undercover detective, posing as the woman and her daughter, from August to September.
If I had a picture I would surely post it here so the world knows what depravity looks like.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Border Patrol found lacking
In my on-going series of highlighting any instance where people are not doing their jobs this one is extremely problematic. Border Patrol officials have been found to be complacent and inattentive in their duties by undercover investigators. Weak management controls have also been found. Border Patrol is our first line of defense for the security of every U.S. citizen both physically and financially.
As with most jobs in law enforcement, Border Patrol is one of the toughest, and it is, like every law enforcement branch, under-manned. This is nothing new. Everyone claims they want law and order but there just are not enough people willing to put their lives on the line to enforce it.
Government watchdogs have found that thousands of people who shouldn't have been admitted to the United States were allowed in last year because of security lapses at legal border crossings. Granted, not everyone who comes in is a danger to our physical well-being and they certainly are not all terrorists. But some of these individuals are connected with criminal enterprises which is where our financial well-being is threatened most and why the lack of job performance on the part of the Border Patrol is most egregious to the safety of their fellow Americans.
GAO investigators arriving at one point of entry found no border agents in the inspection booth, while at other locations, agents didn't ask for travel documents, according to the report. I, myself, have driven through Otay point of entry and found no border agents in the booth while re-entering the U.S.
The number of inadmissible aliens who managed to enter through official ports of entry in 2006 has not been disclosed by the Government Accountability Office. However, a source who has seen a full version of the report, in which those statistics were included, put the total at 21,000.
The government, for obvious reasons, does not want to release the numbers of how many escaped the attention of Customs and Border Protection. One reason is there is no way to know the actual number so any number they come up with would have to be prefaced as being an estimate. Another reason they don’t release the numbers is they don’t want the taxpayer, who is paying their salaries, to know they are not performing their duty. They don’t want the very people they are supposed to protect to know they are not performing their duty.
Men and women of law enforcement are a special breed of people. They want to see the bad guy put away, as all of us law abiding citizens do, but they alone are willing to strap on a gun and a badge and put their own lives at stake to put those bad guys away. Those of us who sit back in our easy chairs from the comfort of our homes should be shamed for ever casting a bad light on those who are doing their best. I applaud those individuals and give to them my utmost deepest felt respect. It’s the individuals who have sworn to protect the laws and citizens of this great country and turn their backs on us by slacking in their job performance that should be reprimanded to the fullest extent of the law. To allow possible criminals to get into the U.S. because they did not do their jobs is criminal itself.
Those who are conscientiously doing their sworn duty can get very frustrated when they see criminals they have caught and then released by liberal judges or asshole lawyers who defends the criminal and convinces the judge to let the criminal go.
I can understand the frustration that Border Patrol agents feel after two of their own were arrested and put in jail for shooting a known drug smuggler. But that is no excuse for jeopardizing the safety of U.S. citizens.
The Customs and Border Protection's stance is that at busy border crossings, it has to balance security with commerce. This is blatantly putting commerce ahead of safety.
The National Treasury Employees Union, which represents 17,600 Customs and Border Protection officers manning ports of entry, said the agency is understaffed and poorly managed and officers are overworked and not adequately trained. Why can’t we put National Guard to help them? Since Bush can send them to Iraq in the name of keeping terrorists from coming to America then he can certainly send them to our borders in America.
Whether we think the threat is real or not, we cannot afford to assume the threat is not real and slack off on our duties. The U.S. taxpayer deserves to get our monies worth when agents are hired to protect us.
As with most jobs in law enforcement, Border Patrol is one of the toughest, and it is, like every law enforcement branch, under-manned. This is nothing new. Everyone claims they want law and order but there just are not enough people willing to put their lives on the line to enforce it.
Government watchdogs have found that thousands of people who shouldn't have been admitted to the United States were allowed in last year because of security lapses at legal border crossings. Granted, not everyone who comes in is a danger to our physical well-being and they certainly are not all terrorists. But some of these individuals are connected with criminal enterprises which is where our financial well-being is threatened most and why the lack of job performance on the part of the Border Patrol is most egregious to the safety of their fellow Americans.
GAO investigators arriving at one point of entry found no border agents in the inspection booth, while at other locations, agents didn't ask for travel documents, according to the report. I, myself, have driven through Otay point of entry and found no border agents in the booth while re-entering the U.S.
The number of inadmissible aliens who managed to enter through official ports of entry in 2006 has not been disclosed by the Government Accountability Office. However, a source who has seen a full version of the report, in which those statistics were included, put the total at 21,000.
The government, for obvious reasons, does not want to release the numbers of how many escaped the attention of Customs and Border Protection. One reason is there is no way to know the actual number so any number they come up with would have to be prefaced as being an estimate. Another reason they don’t release the numbers is they don’t want the taxpayer, who is paying their salaries, to know they are not performing their duty. They don’t want the very people they are supposed to protect to know they are not performing their duty.
Men and women of law enforcement are a special breed of people. They want to see the bad guy put away, as all of us law abiding citizens do, but they alone are willing to strap on a gun and a badge and put their own lives at stake to put those bad guys away. Those of us who sit back in our easy chairs from the comfort of our homes should be shamed for ever casting a bad light on those who are doing their best. I applaud those individuals and give to them my utmost deepest felt respect. It’s the individuals who have sworn to protect the laws and citizens of this great country and turn their backs on us by slacking in their job performance that should be reprimanded to the fullest extent of the law. To allow possible criminals to get into the U.S. because they did not do their jobs is criminal itself.
Those who are conscientiously doing their sworn duty can get very frustrated when they see criminals they have caught and then released by liberal judges or asshole lawyers who defends the criminal and convinces the judge to let the criminal go.
I can understand the frustration that Border Patrol agents feel after two of their own were arrested and put in jail for shooting a known drug smuggler. But that is no excuse for jeopardizing the safety of U.S. citizens.
The Customs and Border Protection's stance is that at busy border crossings, it has to balance security with commerce. This is blatantly putting commerce ahead of safety.
The National Treasury Employees Union, which represents 17,600 Customs and Border Protection officers manning ports of entry, said the agency is understaffed and poorly managed and officers are overworked and not adequately trained. Why can’t we put National Guard to help them? Since Bush can send them to Iraq in the name of keeping terrorists from coming to America then he can certainly send them to our borders in America.
Whether we think the threat is real or not, we cannot afford to assume the threat is not real and slack off on our duties. The U.S. taxpayer deserves to get our monies worth when agents are hired to protect us.
Monday, November 5, 2007
The president who cried wolf!
Here we go again. Stop the world presses! George W. Bush claims that the very security of the U.S. depends on another one of his ‘yes men’ being nominated to high office. Enough of this crap George! Judge Mukasey is no more ‘crucial’ to the security of this country than I am. I at least know that waterboarding is torture and am not afraid to say so. And the fact that you call him a good man raises nothing but serious doubt on whether we can trust him.
Bush continually over-uses national security to bully his way into getting what he wants. I can’t wait for this petulant old man to be booted out of office at the next presidential election. It is my intense desire to see this little man and his embarrassing cohorts put out of office before that if Congress would only scrape together enough guts and integrity to do so.
Please spare us from having to listen to this delusional chicken little spouting off his paranoid crap about how the world will fall apart if we don’t accept his nominee or if his intelligence legislation isn’t passed or if we don’t throw more wasted billions of dollars at his dirty little illegal war.
Bush has the audacity to say that “Congress should not go home for the holidays while our men and women in uniform are waiting the funds they need.” This coming from a man who has taken more time off from his duties than any other president in U.S. history.
I pray to God that the next president knows how to righteously use diplomacy with the rest of world so that we don’t have to suffer the indignities of being viewed as thinking we are better than everyone else. This man knows nothing of how to get along with the world except through use of threat. I am embarrassed, as an American citizen, every day he and Cheney remains in the White House.
Bush continually over-uses national security to bully his way into getting what he wants. I can’t wait for this petulant old man to be booted out of office at the next presidential election. It is my intense desire to see this little man and his embarrassing cohorts put out of office before that if Congress would only scrape together enough guts and integrity to do so.
Please spare us from having to listen to this delusional chicken little spouting off his paranoid crap about how the world will fall apart if we don’t accept his nominee or if his intelligence legislation isn’t passed or if we don’t throw more wasted billions of dollars at his dirty little illegal war.
Bush has the audacity to say that “Congress should not go home for the holidays while our men and women in uniform are waiting the funds they need.” This coming from a man who has taken more time off from his duties than any other president in U.S. history.
I pray to God that the next president knows how to righteously use diplomacy with the rest of world so that we don’t have to suffer the indignities of being viewed as thinking we are better than everyone else. This man knows nothing of how to get along with the world except through use of threat. I am embarrassed, as an American citizen, every day he and Cheney remains in the White House.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Who is looking after us?
Government agencies still taking thinly veiled bribes from the industries they are tasked to regulate.
Are these people naïve or unethical? The Consumer Product Safety Commission chief and her predecessor, under the Bush administration, have taken dozens of trips at the expense of the toy, appliance and children’s furniture industries and others they regulate. Is there payoff involved? Absolutely. Want proof? The U.S. has become inundated with recalls of children’s products because of high levels of lead paint, under the Bush administration.
Our children are being put at risk by unethical industries that ignore safety requirements in their pursuit to make profit. They use substandard materials and our children are getting sick because of it. Parents are getting sick of it too.
These individuals are government employees and fall under the same ethical guidelines as every other government official concerning gifts. The industries who are regulated by the CPSC is guilty of bribery and the agency is guilty of accepting bribes. There is no other way to say it.
This practice of paying for travel is commonly called “gift travel”. This practice has become embedded as part of the benefits package of heads of regulatory agencies. When we can no longer count on regulatory agencies to protect us where does that leave us?
Once again our government has proven that it does not care about the safety of our children or of us as a whole. As long as they get pampered at the expense of someone else they will always be faced with returning the ‘favor’. And they do return the favor. Want proof of that too? The CPSC flew to China and Hong Kong in 2004 at the expense of the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory based in Bethesda, Maryland. Their laboratories are in Asia. The CPSC claims there were no regulatory requests pending at the time, hinting that there was no payoff involved, but rest assured the AFSL got a tax write-off for the travel and they expect the CSPC to reciprocate by looking favorably on safety standards that will favor the AFSL.
More egregious instances involve going soft on industries who have, this past summer, flooded the market with Chinese-made toys with hazardous levels of lead. The CPSC has gone soft on industries by opting for “voluntary” standards and repeatedly not taking legal action against businesses that refuse to recall dangerous products. Are we, the consumers being protected by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? NO! Are businesses being favored by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? YES!
Are we being shown that “voluntary” adherence to safety regulations is not working? YES! What is the Consumer Product Safety Commission going to do about it? NOTHING! Because they have been bought and paid for.
This government is more concerned with making revenue from taxes generated by these industries doing business in the U.S. than they are about our safety. That much has been made abundantly clear. Does this agency need to take these trips to the factories to see the process of product manufacture? No, they don’t. These products are tested here in the U.S. by the CPSC or its affiliates. The FDA tests products before they are released to the market. Why is the process different for the CPSC?
If the government is truly concerned with our safety, these products should be tested before they ever reach the American consumer.
CPSC officials defend the industry-paid trips as a way for the agency to be in contact with manufacturing officials and hear their concerns despite a limited travel budget. These manufacturing officials need to fly to the CPSC offices to voice their concerns, not give the impression of impropriety through “gift travel”.
Commission spokeswoman Julie Vallese said the agency's counsel and its ethics officers conducted "a full conflict-of-interest analysis" of the trips and stand behind their decisions. This is in the best interest of the agency to employ counsel and its ethics officers who will “stand up” for the agency. Their voracity and honesty are in question.
"The mission of the agency and the benefits to consumer safety are two factors that are taken into consideration in approving gift travel," she said. Reports of the trips are submitted to the Office of Government Ethics, she added. It is plain to see that the ‘benefits to consumer safety’ have taken a back seat in light of all of the recent recalls this country has seen.
This “gift travel” bribery scheme is in clear violation of ethics codes. Why does an ethics code even have to be in writing? Why can’t we find someone ethical enough to sit at the heads of government offices? Why does the consumer, the taxpayer, the very people who pay through the nose to support these governmental agencies have to continuously be on the loosing end of everything?
Ann Brown, who served as chairman, under the Clinton administration, from 1994 to 2001, traveled only at the expense of the agency or of media organizations that sponsored appearances where she announced product recalls. "We hated to have an industry pay for our staff for anything," said Pam Gilbert, a lawyer who was executive director of the agency under Brown. What does this say about the Republican party vs. the Democratic party? I think it is very telling. Ethics have gone to hell since Bush took office. Ethics scandals have reached unprecedented levels under the republican controlled congress. I know there is no shortage of ethics violations for democrats, after all they are all politicians.
If the agency got by under the Clinton administration without taking bribes it can do it under the Bush and future administrations. The atmosphere under Bush made it easy for the agency to throw ethics out the window and take these unnecessary trips.
Accepting gifts opens the door to more suspicion. Chances are this is just the tip of the iceberg. Chances are there are more shady dealings going on behind closed doors. Since the agency has shown it is willing to accept this sort of bribery, we, the taxpayer, can’t help but become suspicious of any action this agency takes.
Are these people naïve or unethical? The Consumer Product Safety Commission chief and her predecessor, under the Bush administration, have taken dozens of trips at the expense of the toy, appliance and children’s furniture industries and others they regulate. Is there payoff involved? Absolutely. Want proof? The U.S. has become inundated with recalls of children’s products because of high levels of lead paint, under the Bush administration.
Our children are being put at risk by unethical industries that ignore safety requirements in their pursuit to make profit. They use substandard materials and our children are getting sick because of it. Parents are getting sick of it too.
These individuals are government employees and fall under the same ethical guidelines as every other government official concerning gifts. The industries who are regulated by the CPSC is guilty of bribery and the agency is guilty of accepting bribes. There is no other way to say it.
This practice of paying for travel is commonly called “gift travel”. This practice has become embedded as part of the benefits package of heads of regulatory agencies. When we can no longer count on regulatory agencies to protect us where does that leave us?
Once again our government has proven that it does not care about the safety of our children or of us as a whole. As long as they get pampered at the expense of someone else they will always be faced with returning the ‘favor’. And they do return the favor. Want proof of that too? The CPSC flew to China and Hong Kong in 2004 at the expense of the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory based in Bethesda, Maryland. Their laboratories are in Asia. The CPSC claims there were no regulatory requests pending at the time, hinting that there was no payoff involved, but rest assured the AFSL got a tax write-off for the travel and they expect the CSPC to reciprocate by looking favorably on safety standards that will favor the AFSL.
More egregious instances involve going soft on industries who have, this past summer, flooded the market with Chinese-made toys with hazardous levels of lead. The CPSC has gone soft on industries by opting for “voluntary” standards and repeatedly not taking legal action against businesses that refuse to recall dangerous products. Are we, the consumers being protected by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? NO! Are businesses being favored by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? YES!
Are we being shown that “voluntary” adherence to safety regulations is not working? YES! What is the Consumer Product Safety Commission going to do about it? NOTHING! Because they have been bought and paid for.
This government is more concerned with making revenue from taxes generated by these industries doing business in the U.S. than they are about our safety. That much has been made abundantly clear. Does this agency need to take these trips to the factories to see the process of product manufacture? No, they don’t. These products are tested here in the U.S. by the CPSC or its affiliates. The FDA tests products before they are released to the market. Why is the process different for the CPSC?
If the government is truly concerned with our safety, these products should be tested before they ever reach the American consumer.
CPSC officials defend the industry-paid trips as a way for the agency to be in contact with manufacturing officials and hear their concerns despite a limited travel budget. These manufacturing officials need to fly to the CPSC offices to voice their concerns, not give the impression of impropriety through “gift travel”.
Commission spokeswoman Julie Vallese said the agency's counsel and its ethics officers conducted "a full conflict-of-interest analysis" of the trips and stand behind their decisions. This is in the best interest of the agency to employ counsel and its ethics officers who will “stand up” for the agency. Their voracity and honesty are in question.
"The mission of the agency and the benefits to consumer safety are two factors that are taken into consideration in approving gift travel," she said. Reports of the trips are submitted to the Office of Government Ethics, she added. It is plain to see that the ‘benefits to consumer safety’ have taken a back seat in light of all of the recent recalls this country has seen.
This “gift travel” bribery scheme is in clear violation of ethics codes. Why does an ethics code even have to be in writing? Why can’t we find someone ethical enough to sit at the heads of government offices? Why does the consumer, the taxpayer, the very people who pay through the nose to support these governmental agencies have to continuously be on the loosing end of everything?
Ann Brown, who served as chairman, under the Clinton administration, from 1994 to 2001, traveled only at the expense of the agency or of media organizations that sponsored appearances where she announced product recalls. "We hated to have an industry pay for our staff for anything," said Pam Gilbert, a lawyer who was executive director of the agency under Brown. What does this say about the Republican party vs. the Democratic party? I think it is very telling. Ethics have gone to hell since Bush took office. Ethics scandals have reached unprecedented levels under the republican controlled congress. I know there is no shortage of ethics violations for democrats, after all they are all politicians.
If the agency got by under the Clinton administration without taking bribes it can do it under the Bush and future administrations. The atmosphere under Bush made it easy for the agency to throw ethics out the window and take these unnecessary trips.
Accepting gifts opens the door to more suspicion. Chances are this is just the tip of the iceberg. Chances are there are more shady dealings going on behind closed doors. Since the agency has shown it is willing to accept this sort of bribery, we, the taxpayer, can’t help but become suspicious of any action this agency takes.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
U.S. court rules against religious freedom
The Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas, and its leaders, were ordered to pay $10.9 million for funeral protest.
There are really two issues here. One is the right for a church to preach what it believes and the second is the right of a family to solemnly grieve for its lost family member. This group did not respect that family’s grief and that is abominable. Especially from a group of people who claim to be Christian.
A federal jury in Baltimore, Maryland, Wednesday awarded $10.9 million to the father of a Marine whose funeral was picketed by members of a fundamentalist church carrying signs blaming soldiers' deaths on America's tolerance of homosexuals. (Can you believe the convoluted thinking that went into this charge).
Church members showed up at Snyder's funeral chanting derogatory slogans and holding picket signs with messages including "God Hates Fags."
They've picketed the funerals of dozens of troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming that God is punishing the United States because of its tolerance for homosexuality.
Some of the other signs at the funeral included "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "Thank God for IEDs."
They are preaching hatred and intolerance. It is unforgivable for any group who claims to believe in God, to preach hatred against the very humans that God created. Their hearts have been blackened by hatred and prejudiced by what they believe is ‘wrong thinking’ behavior.
I can’t believe these people would put their bigoted hate on public display. They have no shame.
These are Christians who supposedly believe in a forgiving and just God. To paraphrase Rush Limbaugh these are ‘fake Christians’.
Church founder, Fred Phelps, says the case is about "putting a preacher on trial for what he preaches." He is patting himself on the back for being important.
He obviously wants to make himself a martyr in this cause and he would be a dangerous man if it weren’t so laughable that he thinks God could hate one of his own children.
The courts action to sue a religious group for what it preaches is a desperate and dangerous attempt to silence a sector of this society for voicing what this country does not want to hear.
The method these people use to spread their message of hate is immoral. To thank God for killing someone is against everything that God represents and is unforgivably immoral and subhuman. The bible does say in Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." This country’s Bill of Rights says its citizens have the freedom to say and do as they see fit.
It is immoral for this or any other group to disrupt the solemn practice of sending our loved ones back to the very God that these fools believe hates him for being American.
I was born into a Baptist family. I was raised Baptist and I can tell you that this group is an embarrassment to all Christians and does not represent the mainstream religious community.
God will take care of these bigots and He will take care of homosexuals as He sees fit, our court system should stay out of it.
There are really two issues here. One is the right for a church to preach what it believes and the second is the right of a family to solemnly grieve for its lost family member. This group did not respect that family’s grief and that is abominable. Especially from a group of people who claim to be Christian.
A federal jury in Baltimore, Maryland, Wednesday awarded $10.9 million to the father of a Marine whose funeral was picketed by members of a fundamentalist church carrying signs blaming soldiers' deaths on America's tolerance of homosexuals. (Can you believe the convoluted thinking that went into this charge).
Church members showed up at Snyder's funeral chanting derogatory slogans and holding picket signs with messages including "God Hates Fags."
They've picketed the funerals of dozens of troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming that God is punishing the United States because of its tolerance for homosexuality.
Some of the other signs at the funeral included "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "Thank God for IEDs."
They are preaching hatred and intolerance. It is unforgivable for any group who claims to believe in God, to preach hatred against the very humans that God created. Their hearts have been blackened by hatred and prejudiced by what they believe is ‘wrong thinking’ behavior.
I can’t believe these people would put their bigoted hate on public display. They have no shame.
These are Christians who supposedly believe in a forgiving and just God. To paraphrase Rush Limbaugh these are ‘fake Christians’.
Church founder, Fred Phelps, says the case is about "putting a preacher on trial for what he preaches." He is patting himself on the back for being important.
He obviously wants to make himself a martyr in this cause and he would be a dangerous man if it weren’t so laughable that he thinks God could hate one of his own children.
The courts action to sue a religious group for what it preaches is a desperate and dangerous attempt to silence a sector of this society for voicing what this country does not want to hear.
The method these people use to spread their message of hate is immoral. To thank God for killing someone is against everything that God represents and is unforgivably immoral and subhuman. The bible does say in Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." This country’s Bill of Rights says its citizens have the freedom to say and do as they see fit.
It is immoral for this or any other group to disrupt the solemn practice of sending our loved ones back to the very God that these fools believe hates him for being American.
I was born into a Baptist family. I was raised Baptist and I can tell you that this group is an embarrassment to all Christians and does not represent the mainstream religious community.
God will take care of these bigots and He will take care of homosexuals as He sees fit, our court system should stay out of it.
Diplomats don’t want to go to Iraq
U.S. foreign diplomats are being forced to serve in Iraq under penalty of dismissal for refusing. It seems their new plush, multi-million dollar Baghdad facility is not incentive enough for them to do their jobs. It also seems they are very worried about being killed.
Perhaps they have no faith in the White House private army, i.e., Blackwater, to protect them. And they have no faith in the U.S. military to keep them from harms way.
Perhaps they lack faith in what Bush and his generals are trying to force us all to believe. That the war has turned around and the streets of Iraq are now safe.
These diplomats reflect what the rest of America sees, that Iraq isn’t worth the fight. These individuals don't have any faith that the centuries of hatred between the two main groups of people that make up Iraq will ever tolerate each other.
The State Department will allow potential assignees to prove a valid medical condition as basis for not going. I can just see it now, all of the 200 people informed this week as prime candidates for assignment will be rushing to their doctors attempting to find a way out of “DOING THEIR JOB”.
Forced assignments have not been used since the Vietnam War era. But they all have agreed to worldwide availability and now their time has come to fulfill that obligation.
The Foreign Service corp owes the American soldier, who has sacrificed most over there, and the American public, who has suffered world ridicule at the havoc that this president has brought to Iraq, to do their part to bring this immoral occupation to an end.
The U.S. should have used diplomats long before considering using our military to force our point of view onto Iraq.
To those diplomats who will go to Iraq I wish them best of luck and I pray they are able to overcome the damage that the mentally imbalanced and morally petulant Bush/Cheney team has brought to the Iraqi people.
Perhaps they have no faith in the White House private army, i.e., Blackwater, to protect them. And they have no faith in the U.S. military to keep them from harms way.
Perhaps they lack faith in what Bush and his generals are trying to force us all to believe. That the war has turned around and the streets of Iraq are now safe.
These diplomats reflect what the rest of America sees, that Iraq isn’t worth the fight. These individuals don't have any faith that the centuries of hatred between the two main groups of people that make up Iraq will ever tolerate each other.
The State Department will allow potential assignees to prove a valid medical condition as basis for not going. I can just see it now, all of the 200 people informed this week as prime candidates for assignment will be rushing to their doctors attempting to find a way out of “DOING THEIR JOB”.
Forced assignments have not been used since the Vietnam War era. But they all have agreed to worldwide availability and now their time has come to fulfill that obligation.
The Foreign Service corp owes the American soldier, who has sacrificed most over there, and the American public, who has suffered world ridicule at the havoc that this president has brought to Iraq, to do their part to bring this immoral occupation to an end.
The U.S. should have used diplomats long before considering using our military to force our point of view onto Iraq.
To those diplomats who will go to Iraq I wish them best of luck and I pray they are able to overcome the damage that the mentally imbalanced and morally petulant Bush/Cheney team has brought to the Iraqi people.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Too many ‘terrorists’?
A new government report says there are now more than three quarters of a million names on the U.S. government's terrorist "watch list," raising concerns the list may be becoming too large.
This is what is wrong with keeping lists. They get too cumbersome to be any good.
And how did this list get so long anyway? Is someone sitting at a desk just picking random names and throwing them on this list to justify Homeland Security personnel?
Can there really be this many terrorists? What criteria is needed to get on this list? Or, rather, these lists?
One group, the Government Accountability Office said the list is 755,000 people. Another group, the Terrorist Screening Center said the list is 300,000 people. Senate Homeland Security Committee says the number is 860,000. That is quite a discrepancy in numbers.
Boy, the 300,000 people who are on all three lists must be really worried.
Doesn’t it seem there needs to be a better screening method in place before everyone decides to make up their own lists? I can’t help but think that with such a large number the government must be racial profiling. Once again, the different government offices don’t talk to each other, they overlap their duties, they all come to differing conclusions. What the hell is our tax dollars paying for? We already knew we wasn’t getting our monies worth but this is ridiculous.
Aren’t Republicans the guys that keeps spouting off about a centralized government and cutting back on waste? Well this is a clear indication that this is not the case.
This government is out of control with all of its security departments each with their own list.
It seems the terrorists who stuck the Twin Towers achieved one goal, they got the U.S. so paranoid of another attack that we put everyone on a list and spend untold millions of dollars to watch them and create more bureaucratic departments to do so.
This is what is wrong with keeping lists. They get too cumbersome to be any good.
And how did this list get so long anyway? Is someone sitting at a desk just picking random names and throwing them on this list to justify Homeland Security personnel?
Can there really be this many terrorists? What criteria is needed to get on this list? Or, rather, these lists?
One group, the Government Accountability Office said the list is 755,000 people. Another group, the Terrorist Screening Center said the list is 300,000 people. Senate Homeland Security Committee says the number is 860,000. That is quite a discrepancy in numbers.
Boy, the 300,000 people who are on all three lists must be really worried.
Doesn’t it seem there needs to be a better screening method in place before everyone decides to make up their own lists? I can’t help but think that with such a large number the government must be racial profiling. Once again, the different government offices don’t talk to each other, they overlap their duties, they all come to differing conclusions. What the hell is our tax dollars paying for? We already knew we wasn’t getting our monies worth but this is ridiculous.
Aren’t Republicans the guys that keeps spouting off about a centralized government and cutting back on waste? Well this is a clear indication that this is not the case.
This government is out of control with all of its security departments each with their own list.
It seems the terrorists who stuck the Twin Towers achieved one goal, they got the U.S. so paranoid of another attack that we put everyone on a list and spend untold millions of dollars to watch them and create more bureaucratic departments to do so.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
White House paints rosy picture to protect us?
On October 23, 2007 Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Atlanta-based CDC told a Senate hearing that climate change "is anticipated to have a broad range of impacts on the health of Americans."
Her intention was to give the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee details of the effects that climate change could have on the spread of disease. But, the White House Office of Management and Budget severely edited her testimony removing specific scientific references to these potential health risks. The editing was so severe that her testimony was cut from 14 pages to just 4.
Why would the White House suppress findings from its own premier disease monitoring agency? What is the White House covering up? The very fact that the White House did remove finding from the report tells us that they are covering up something.
What was struck from the report was the broad range of health problems that could result from climate change which includes fatalities from heat stress and heart failure, increased injuries and deaths from severe weather such as hurricanes; more respiratory problems from drought-driven air pollution; an increase in waterborne diseases including cholera, and increases in vector-borne diseases including malaria and hantavirus; and mental health problems such as depression and post-traumatic stress.
She tried to paint a very depressing picture of the negative effects of global warming. She is trying to give us the worst case scenario without exaggerating. Finding out what we are facing is a very necessary factor in tackling a very serious problem. But George doesn’t want to face this problem. He would rather stick his head in the sand and pretend the problem is not real. He wants the problem to wait for the next president.
George has been denying the severity of climate change and he doesn’t want anyone to contradict him.
Doesn’t this sound like business as usual? If you are not going to tell him what he wants to hear then he doesn’t want anyone to hear it. He did the same thing with our military leadership, going through top generals until he found one who will mimic his rosy view of how the Iraq War is progressing. He reminds me of Nero fiddling away while Rome burns.
He is living in a fantasy world trying his best to ignore any and all negativity and surrounding himself with yes men who will tell him only what he wants to hear.
This choice of lifestyle is not healthy. In his position, this lifestyle choice is extremely unhealthy for the country.
I’ve written before about how Dubya doesn’t follow scientific studies because he doesn’t understand science speculating about how he was a failed science student in school. I now think the problem goes deeper and is much more sinister than this. In his mind he is an Emperor, a little Napoleon, if you will, who wants to decide what his public will hear and believe. He wants us to see only a rosy view of our world as long as it suits him. He will even go so far as to edit out scientific facts from a report that is attempting to prepare us for what our future holds so he doesn’t have to face the fact that it is taking place under his leadership.
Her intention was to give the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee details of the effects that climate change could have on the spread of disease. But, the White House Office of Management and Budget severely edited her testimony removing specific scientific references to these potential health risks. The editing was so severe that her testimony was cut from 14 pages to just 4.
Why would the White House suppress findings from its own premier disease monitoring agency? What is the White House covering up? The very fact that the White House did remove finding from the report tells us that they are covering up something.
What was struck from the report was the broad range of health problems that could result from climate change which includes fatalities from heat stress and heart failure, increased injuries and deaths from severe weather such as hurricanes; more respiratory problems from drought-driven air pollution; an increase in waterborne diseases including cholera, and increases in vector-borne diseases including malaria and hantavirus; and mental health problems such as depression and post-traumatic stress.
She tried to paint a very depressing picture of the negative effects of global warming. She is trying to give us the worst case scenario without exaggerating. Finding out what we are facing is a very necessary factor in tackling a very serious problem. But George doesn’t want to face this problem. He would rather stick his head in the sand and pretend the problem is not real. He wants the problem to wait for the next president.
George has been denying the severity of climate change and he doesn’t want anyone to contradict him.
Doesn’t this sound like business as usual? If you are not going to tell him what he wants to hear then he doesn’t want anyone to hear it. He did the same thing with our military leadership, going through top generals until he found one who will mimic his rosy view of how the Iraq War is progressing. He reminds me of Nero fiddling away while Rome burns.
He is living in a fantasy world trying his best to ignore any and all negativity and surrounding himself with yes men who will tell him only what he wants to hear.
This choice of lifestyle is not healthy. In his position, this lifestyle choice is extremely unhealthy for the country.
I’ve written before about how Dubya doesn’t follow scientific studies because he doesn’t understand science speculating about how he was a failed science student in school. I now think the problem goes deeper and is much more sinister than this. In his mind he is an Emperor, a little Napoleon, if you will, who wants to decide what his public will hear and believe. He wants us to see only a rosy view of our world as long as it suits him. He will even go so far as to edit out scientific facts from a report that is attempting to prepare us for what our future holds so he doesn’t have to face the fact that it is taking place under his leadership.
Please, take your job seriously
Nuclear submarine crew faked inspection records!?!?
Great! People in charge of a nuclear reactor inspection deem it too bothersome to actually inspect the reactor. Once again, the safety and welfare of fellow humans is not enough for someone to actually do their job. Click here for details of another, recent, example of job carelessness, this time involving nuclear weapons. How many more times will one of these ‘lackadaisical’ acts (a ‘whimsical’ term that a military officer used to describe the criminal act of dereliction of duty) be tolerated before one of the most devastating accidents imaginable happens and countless Americans lose their lives?
The worst case scenario is easy to imagine if you think about it long enough. Clue: it is a nuclear reactor!! But, these guys did not trouble themselves to think any further than beyond their own possible punishment for not doing their job. Perhaps they do realize what could happen if a nuclear accident occurred. Maybe they realize they could very likely be dead as the result of a missed inspection. But they were too deeply concerned with covering their own asses.
Does anyone know when a leak might happen? Does anyone know when something could wrong resulting in a nuclear meltdown? The answer to these questions of course is no!
But these guys were convinced enough that it could not, indeed, would not happen on their shift. Then they had the low moral and ethical character to forge the inspection record instead of informing someone that the reactor was not inspected just in the ‘off chance’ that something was wrong.
Once again it is more important to cover your own ass and to hell with everyone else. Why is this becoming business as usual?
What would happen if everyone just decided that since a nuclear accident has never happened we don’t ever have to perform another inspection? How would that be? Then we could all go about our own personal business of pleasuring ourselves and not have to be bothered with the time-consuming, unnecessary, busy-work of a job.
These individuals who did not perform their integral function as a part of this crew and then forged these records have basically said they don’t give a damn about the safety of this equipment or its crew.
They were responsible for the safety of 166 enlisted personnel and 13 officers on board that $900 million submarine. They were responsible for the environment that a nuclear meltdown would have damaged, possibly irreversibly, for countless years, plus any other ancillary damage that only a nuclear accident would have effected.
But, hey, nothing happened, right? Why take it so hard and demand punishment? Because, no one does know when something will go wrong.
No one should say “well, nothing did happen, so lighten up.” This attitude completely negates the importance of people doing their #*$&%^* job!
How many times is this self-centered, lazy lack of attention to detail going to continue before a serious accident does happen? Rhetorical question, because, by the way, no on can predict that either. But these guys decided their own personal time was too important to do their job.
The Navy will probably just give them a slap on the wrist, thereby telling the next crew that these inspections are not really that serious and that dereliction of duty falls within acceptable ‘guidelines’. After all, we are just human, right? We all make mistakes.
Now, let’s take the nuclear reactor out of the equation and look at everyday life. Police officers recently did not look for two possible victims of an automobile crash and the father of one of the victims found his dead son’s body hours later, at the scene. This is a case of someone not doing his job.
There are instances like these everyday, surely not as life threatening or as dramatic as a nuclear meltdown, but when you are put out or inconvenienced because someone does not do their job does it matter to you? Of course it does.
Shirking your responsibility causes businesses to lose money which eventually costs the consumers money. Putting your job off onto someone else can lead to death and/or serious injury. This stuff is real.
What if firefighters decided they didn’t want to fight the raging fire at your neighbors house, or your house? Maybe they were too busy playing a video game or watching sports on TV.
How would you feel if those very same firefighters did not receive any punishment? Or those police officers who did not do their job were given a slap on the wrist and allowed to continue on the job? Would you feel safe knowing they were still out there when you called on them for help?
People who shun their responsibility put themselves ahead of everyone else, it’s the “me first” attitude that detrimentally affects everyone.
There are far too many instances where people turn from their responsibility in favor of something that is more fun to do. The more this happens the greater the chance that a disaster is going to result.
Great! People in charge of a nuclear reactor inspection deem it too bothersome to actually inspect the reactor. Once again, the safety and welfare of fellow humans is not enough for someone to actually do their job. Click here for details of another, recent, example of job carelessness, this time involving nuclear weapons. How many more times will one of these ‘lackadaisical’ acts (a ‘whimsical’ term that a military officer used to describe the criminal act of dereliction of duty) be tolerated before one of the most devastating accidents imaginable happens and countless Americans lose their lives?
The worst case scenario is easy to imagine if you think about it long enough. Clue: it is a nuclear reactor!! But, these guys did not trouble themselves to think any further than beyond their own possible punishment for not doing their job. Perhaps they do realize what could happen if a nuclear accident occurred. Maybe they realize they could very likely be dead as the result of a missed inspection. But they were too deeply concerned with covering their own asses.
Does anyone know when a leak might happen? Does anyone know when something could wrong resulting in a nuclear meltdown? The answer to these questions of course is no!
But these guys were convinced enough that it could not, indeed, would not happen on their shift. Then they had the low moral and ethical character to forge the inspection record instead of informing someone that the reactor was not inspected just in the ‘off chance’ that something was wrong.
Once again it is more important to cover your own ass and to hell with everyone else. Why is this becoming business as usual?
What would happen if everyone just decided that since a nuclear accident has never happened we don’t ever have to perform another inspection? How would that be? Then we could all go about our own personal business of pleasuring ourselves and not have to be bothered with the time-consuming, unnecessary, busy-work of a job.
These individuals who did not perform their integral function as a part of this crew and then forged these records have basically said they don’t give a damn about the safety of this equipment or its crew.
They were responsible for the safety of 166 enlisted personnel and 13 officers on board that $900 million submarine. They were responsible for the environment that a nuclear meltdown would have damaged, possibly irreversibly, for countless years, plus any other ancillary damage that only a nuclear accident would have effected.
But, hey, nothing happened, right? Why take it so hard and demand punishment? Because, no one does know when something will go wrong.
No one should say “well, nothing did happen, so lighten up.” This attitude completely negates the importance of people doing their #*$&%^* job!
How many times is this self-centered, lazy lack of attention to detail going to continue before a serious accident does happen? Rhetorical question, because, by the way, no on can predict that either. But these guys decided their own personal time was too important to do their job.
The Navy will probably just give them a slap on the wrist, thereby telling the next crew that these inspections are not really that serious and that dereliction of duty falls within acceptable ‘guidelines’. After all, we are just human, right? We all make mistakes.
Now, let’s take the nuclear reactor out of the equation and look at everyday life. Police officers recently did not look for two possible victims of an automobile crash and the father of one of the victims found his dead son’s body hours later, at the scene. This is a case of someone not doing his job.
There are instances like these everyday, surely not as life threatening or as dramatic as a nuclear meltdown, but when you are put out or inconvenienced because someone does not do their job does it matter to you? Of course it does.
Shirking your responsibility causes businesses to lose money which eventually costs the consumers money. Putting your job off onto someone else can lead to death and/or serious injury. This stuff is real.
What if firefighters decided they didn’t want to fight the raging fire at your neighbors house, or your house? Maybe they were too busy playing a video game or watching sports on TV.
How would you feel if those very same firefighters did not receive any punishment? Or those police officers who did not do their job were given a slap on the wrist and allowed to continue on the job? Would you feel safe knowing they were still out there when you called on them for help?
People who shun their responsibility put themselves ahead of everyone else, it’s the “me first” attitude that detrimentally affects everyone.
There are far too many instances where people turn from their responsibility in favor of something that is more fun to do. The more this happens the greater the chance that a disaster is going to result.
Monday, October 22, 2007
We are losing our common decency
Dad kills children’s mother in front of them.
Kid Rock arrested after Waffle House brawl
Teen shoots four, kills self at Cleveland high school
A sheriff's deputy kills six young people at a house party in Crandon, Wisconsin, because his ex-girlfriend wouldn't take him back.
Man kills self in front of City Council after vote.
Parents beat 5-year-old.
Police blast into building, kill 63-year-old man who shot 5 at law office because he felt unfairly treated during divorce settlement.
Ex husband sets wife afire in front of witnesses. They don’t even care that their brazen acts of violence are witnessed anymore.
Stories like these are repeated every day. People are either putting off responsibility onto others or they are taking the law into their own hands and using violence to 'solve' their problems.
Why is it that people are resorting to violence and giving up on more civilized methods?
Are we becoming a society that believes if you walk away from a confrontation instead of getting physical then you are a wimp? Is this how an adult is judged these days? Is this what is passing for being manly, grown-up, or mature? Have we really reverted to animalism as the only means to settle our differences?
People are willing to become criminals, facing jail time, over words! How ridiculous is that?
People are lowering themselves to animal behavior because someone says they don’t ‘love’ us anymore and then killing the person they vowed to ‘love, cherish and respect’. What the hell, people?
This is ludicrous. The threat of punishment does not stop these people any more.
Is it becoming more of a mental health problem or simply animal instinct coming out?
Where is this society headed when we think it is better to kill or beat someone than to just turn the other cheek? This used to be preached to us as children that what ever someone says to you is only words and you should never escalate it into violence. I went to church as a child and I was taught to treat others as you want to be treated. This important lesson is not being taught anymore. There simply are not enough people going to church anymore learning to respect other people.
This is the perfect time to bring up the proliferation of the number of handguns in our society. Without them there would not be as many dead. That point cannot be argued. Handguns are used to kill people. That stupid slogan about how guns don’t kill people, people kill people, well without guns it would not be so easy to kill someone. And there would not be as many dead.
Why are we so on edge all the time ready to flip out at the drop of an assumed slight?
This affinity to resort to rage is especially prevalent while driving a car. Road rage cases are up. People become infuriated at the slightest assumption of rudeness. Stress, anxiety, antagonism all fuel the fire of frustration with life’s every day pressures to result in taking out that frustration on unsuspecting people. Then those people who now feel wrongly attacked fight back. Then it devolves into violence. We need to learn anger management.
Even without anger management, the one thing that should help us all get along with each other is respect. Everyone deserves it until they show they don’t want it. Common decency should tell us that a human life is worth far more than the ego of any one person who feels he should exact retribution just because someone calls him something he doesn’t like or cuts him off in traffic, or refuses to be with him anymore.
Kid Rock arrested after Waffle House brawl
Teen shoots four, kills self at Cleveland high school
A sheriff's deputy kills six young people at a house party in Crandon, Wisconsin, because his ex-girlfriend wouldn't take him back.
Man kills self in front of City Council after vote.
Parents beat 5-year-old.
Police blast into building, kill 63-year-old man who shot 5 at law office because he felt unfairly treated during divorce settlement.
Ex husband sets wife afire in front of witnesses. They don’t even care that their brazen acts of violence are witnessed anymore.
Stories like these are repeated every day. People are either putting off responsibility onto others or they are taking the law into their own hands and using violence to 'solve' their problems.
Why is it that people are resorting to violence and giving up on more civilized methods?
Are we becoming a society that believes if you walk away from a confrontation instead of getting physical then you are a wimp? Is this how an adult is judged these days? Is this what is passing for being manly, grown-up, or mature? Have we really reverted to animalism as the only means to settle our differences?
People are willing to become criminals, facing jail time, over words! How ridiculous is that?
People are lowering themselves to animal behavior because someone says they don’t ‘love’ us anymore and then killing the person they vowed to ‘love, cherish and respect’. What the hell, people?
This is ludicrous. The threat of punishment does not stop these people any more.
Is it becoming more of a mental health problem or simply animal instinct coming out?
Where is this society headed when we think it is better to kill or beat someone than to just turn the other cheek? This used to be preached to us as children that what ever someone says to you is only words and you should never escalate it into violence. I went to church as a child and I was taught to treat others as you want to be treated. This important lesson is not being taught anymore. There simply are not enough people going to church anymore learning to respect other people.
This is the perfect time to bring up the proliferation of the number of handguns in our society. Without them there would not be as many dead. That point cannot be argued. Handguns are used to kill people. That stupid slogan about how guns don’t kill people, people kill people, well without guns it would not be so easy to kill someone. And there would not be as many dead.
Why are we so on edge all the time ready to flip out at the drop of an assumed slight?
This affinity to resort to rage is especially prevalent while driving a car. Road rage cases are up. People become infuriated at the slightest assumption of rudeness. Stress, anxiety, antagonism all fuel the fire of frustration with life’s every day pressures to result in taking out that frustration on unsuspecting people. Then those people who now feel wrongly attacked fight back. Then it devolves into violence. We need to learn anger management.
Even without anger management, the one thing that should help us all get along with each other is respect. Everyone deserves it until they show they don’t want it. Common decency should tell us that a human life is worth far more than the ego of any one person who feels he should exact retribution just because someone calls him something he doesn’t like or cuts him off in traffic, or refuses to be with him anymore.
Cheney is ‘getting it up’ over war with Iran
This rhetoric and war speak is scaring the hell out of me. It should be scaring every peace loving human on this planet. I have called time and time again for this Bush/Cheney team to be censured and kicked out of office for the danger they present to this country and the world.
Dick Cheney continues his advocacy for “teaching Iran a lesson” for standing up against the United States attempts to put Iran firmly under its thumb.
His paranoia is barely containable as he seeks to spread his hate towards Iran with his remarks in a speech to the Washington Institute for Near East Studies. "Our country, and the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions."
He attempts to get the entire international community on his side to further bolster his belief that he is right.
Iran has stated repeatedly they do not want a nuclear weapon. How much plainer can they say it?
He said Iran's efforts to pursue technology that would allow them to build a nuclear weapon are obvious and that "the regime continues to practice delay and deceit in an obvious effort to buy time."
Dick, it is only ‘obvious’ to you, you paranoid freak. The only thing that is obvious to the rest of the world is that Iran is building nuclear power plants to provide clean nuclear power as they have said all along.
Cheney’s paranoia is a page out of McCarthyism. He refuses to allow him to believe Iran. His ‘attack first’ mind-set will allow him to kill innocent men, women and children in an attempt to find some little bit of evidence to prove his ill conceived justification for going to war. And his ego will take the whole world with him.
This is the same cowboy mentality that decimated the American Indian when the white man criminally declared this land as theirs.
Cheney is escalating U.S. rhetoric against Iran to support President Bush's warning, at a news conference Wednesday, that a nuclear Iran could lead to World War III. This is rhetoric that I am sure Cheney fed Bush in the first place.
Bush/Cheney paranoia is what is leading us towards World War III and to use a most foul and odious tactic as the threat of a world war is an obvious attempt to gain support for his blind ambition of world democratic dominance. They should both be severely chastised for implanting, in the world conscience, this most abhorrent possibility of a nuclear world war.
"I've told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them (Iran) from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon," Bush said.
No! If you're interested in avoiding World War III, you keep communication lines open and talk out your fears and differences instead of threatening to kill innocent people unless you get your way. This diplomacy you uncouth red-neck.
Bush's spokeswoman later said the president was not making any war plans but rather "a rhetorical point." One part of this statement is true, Bush doesn’t make plans, Cheney does.
It is disgusting to Americas sense of dignity to have to employ a spokesperson to come along behind the president of the U.S. to ‘cleanup’ his words in order to make his thoughts more palpable. The image is already there, the seed for world war has been planted. These two, Bush/Cheney, are getting more dangerous every time someone listens to their poisoned thoughts. And we are only fooling ourselves if we believe their hype that it is Iran that is forcing a showdown because they won’t bow down to U.S. led international pressure. The world community needs to ‘slap these guys down’ and educate them on how to be more diplomatic and less confrontational.
Cheney states the ultimate goal of the Iranian leadership is to establish itself as the hegemonic force in the Middle East and undermine a free Shiite-majority Iraq as a rival for influence in the Muslim world.
No! It is the ultimate goal of the U.S. leadership to establish itself as the hegemonic force in the Middle East and undermine the ability of free nations to practice their own sovereignty, free of U.S. meddling.
Cheney believes Iran's government seeks "to keep Iraq in a state of weakness to ensure Baghdad does not pose a threat to Tehran."
No! U.S. government, Bush/Cheney, seeks to keep Iraq in a state of weakness to ensure Baghdad and Tehran do not pose a threat to U.S. oil interests.
Cheney accused Iran of having a direct role in the deaths of U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and said the government has "solidified its grip on the country" since coming to power in 1979.
Iran has never had a grip on Iraq’s government. Mr. Cheney you are rewriting history. Another Cheney lie designed to get the American people and the entire international community to back him.
Iran is frightened of the prospect of U.S. military buildup in Iraq as a stepping stone to ‘democratize’ Iran. It is in their interest to keep the U.S. threat away from themselves. Get the hell out of Iraq and all of these problems go away!
Only after Iran has actually started the process of making nuclear weapons can anyone truthfully say they are making weapons. Until then it is only speculation and to attack them based solely on speculation will make the U.S. the true criminal.
Congress has debated Bush/Cheney’s intentions toward Iran but debate is all they will ever do, because Congress is nothing more than a ‘pit of spineless dogs’ that will ‘beg and rollover’ on White House command.
Last month the Senate approved a resolution urging the State Department to label Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization. Guess who planted this brilliant idea into Congress’s weak little minds.
On what grounds did they based this action on? On the word of a military whose top brass has been hand picked to allow only political ‘yes’ men who will eagerly bend over to do the White House bidding.
Democratic Senator Jim Webb of Virginia said he feared the measure could be interpreted as authorizing a military strike in Iran, calling it Cheney's "fondest pipe dream."
Could not have said it any better myself.
Dick Cheney continues his advocacy for “teaching Iran a lesson” for standing up against the United States attempts to put Iran firmly under its thumb.
His paranoia is barely containable as he seeks to spread his hate towards Iran with his remarks in a speech to the Washington Institute for Near East Studies. "Our country, and the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions."
He attempts to get the entire international community on his side to further bolster his belief that he is right.
Iran has stated repeatedly they do not want a nuclear weapon. How much plainer can they say it?
He said Iran's efforts to pursue technology that would allow them to build a nuclear weapon are obvious and that "the regime continues to practice delay and deceit in an obvious effort to buy time."
Dick, it is only ‘obvious’ to you, you paranoid freak. The only thing that is obvious to the rest of the world is that Iran is building nuclear power plants to provide clean nuclear power as they have said all along.
Cheney’s paranoia is a page out of McCarthyism. He refuses to allow him to believe Iran. His ‘attack first’ mind-set will allow him to kill innocent men, women and children in an attempt to find some little bit of evidence to prove his ill conceived justification for going to war. And his ego will take the whole world with him.
This is the same cowboy mentality that decimated the American Indian when the white man criminally declared this land as theirs.
Cheney is escalating U.S. rhetoric against Iran to support President Bush's warning, at a news conference Wednesday, that a nuclear Iran could lead to World War III. This is rhetoric that I am sure Cheney fed Bush in the first place.
Bush/Cheney paranoia is what is leading us towards World War III and to use a most foul and odious tactic as the threat of a world war is an obvious attempt to gain support for his blind ambition of world democratic dominance. They should both be severely chastised for implanting, in the world conscience, this most abhorrent possibility of a nuclear world war.
"I've told people that if you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them (Iran) from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon," Bush said.
No! If you're interested in avoiding World War III, you keep communication lines open and talk out your fears and differences instead of threatening to kill innocent people unless you get your way. This diplomacy you uncouth red-neck.
Bush's spokeswoman later said the president was not making any war plans but rather "a rhetorical point." One part of this statement is true, Bush doesn’t make plans, Cheney does.
It is disgusting to Americas sense of dignity to have to employ a spokesperson to come along behind the president of the U.S. to ‘cleanup’ his words in order to make his thoughts more palpable. The image is already there, the seed for world war has been planted. These two, Bush/Cheney, are getting more dangerous every time someone listens to their poisoned thoughts. And we are only fooling ourselves if we believe their hype that it is Iran that is forcing a showdown because they won’t bow down to U.S. led international pressure. The world community needs to ‘slap these guys down’ and educate them on how to be more diplomatic and less confrontational.
Cheney states the ultimate goal of the Iranian leadership is to establish itself as the hegemonic force in the Middle East and undermine a free Shiite-majority Iraq as a rival for influence in the Muslim world.
No! It is the ultimate goal of the U.S. leadership to establish itself as the hegemonic force in the Middle East and undermine the ability of free nations to practice their own sovereignty, free of U.S. meddling.
Cheney believes Iran's government seeks "to keep Iraq in a state of weakness to ensure Baghdad does not pose a threat to Tehran."
No! U.S. government, Bush/Cheney, seeks to keep Iraq in a state of weakness to ensure Baghdad and Tehran do not pose a threat to U.S. oil interests.
Cheney accused Iran of having a direct role in the deaths of U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and said the government has "solidified its grip on the country" since coming to power in 1979.
Iran has never had a grip on Iraq’s government. Mr. Cheney you are rewriting history. Another Cheney lie designed to get the American people and the entire international community to back him.
Iran is frightened of the prospect of U.S. military buildup in Iraq as a stepping stone to ‘democratize’ Iran. It is in their interest to keep the U.S. threat away from themselves. Get the hell out of Iraq and all of these problems go away!
Only after Iran has actually started the process of making nuclear weapons can anyone truthfully say they are making weapons. Until then it is only speculation and to attack them based solely on speculation will make the U.S. the true criminal.
Congress has debated Bush/Cheney’s intentions toward Iran but debate is all they will ever do, because Congress is nothing more than a ‘pit of spineless dogs’ that will ‘beg and rollover’ on White House command.
Last month the Senate approved a resolution urging the State Department to label Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization. Guess who planted this brilliant idea into Congress’s weak little minds.
On what grounds did they based this action on? On the word of a military whose top brass has been hand picked to allow only political ‘yes’ men who will eagerly bend over to do the White House bidding.
Democratic Senator Jim Webb of Virginia said he feared the measure could be interpreted as authorizing a military strike in Iran, calling it Cheney's "fondest pipe dream."
Could not have said it any better myself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)