Just when you thought the Cold War was over and Vlad and George were bosom buddies, reality again rears its ugly head. Islamo-fascists once again are the beneficiaries of Russia's greed and desire to reignite the Cold War. According to the Associated Press, Russia is selling a state of the art air defense system to the Iranian government. Obviously, the Iranians have forgotten the Russian oppression of their Afghan brothers in the 80's.
This new air defense system will undoubtedly be used to protect Iranian nuclear reactors from any potential threat from the air. The S-300 air defense missile system is capable of engaging any airborne threat at a range of 95 miles and 90,000 feet, including other missiles.
Russia has already agreed to supply Iran with nuclear fuel for the Bushehr nuclear plant. Regardless of what is reported about Iran's lack of a nuclear weapons program, one can be sure that they can and will have nuclear capability in a very short time. Building a nuclear bomb is fairly easy. The hard part is obtaining fissile material. But if you have a nuclear reactor you no longer have that problem. The technology and expertise can easily be obtained via the Internet. Take a read through Tom Clancy's Sum of All Fears. He was able to obtain all of the requisite information for building a nuclear bomb without the benefit of the Internet. Even though the bad guys already have the knowledge, Big Brother might take note if I were to include links. So you are on your own. But, it is pretty simple stuff even without a PhD. in Physics.
Maybe I am paranoid and Mr. Putin is not the same guy who ran the KGB and is now stepping down as president to return to private life. Oops, I forgot. He is not returning to private life. He is taking a new job as Prime Minister and in all likelihood will retain control of the Russian Mafia - err government.
The Doomsday Clock is ticking forward and everyone wants to play pin the tail on George. The real donkies are Vladamir Putin, the Iranian theocracy and the rest of the Islamo-fascists. Our European friends just supply the tacks and a few nuclear reactors.
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Monday, December 24, 2007
Tolerance
It is a good thing that Christians are bit more forgiving than others. Naming a teddy bear is one thing. Action figures are another...
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_7789121
Illegal Immigration - The law works?
The Associated Press has a story today about illegal immigrants leaving Arizona in response to the state's employer sanctions law that goes into effect January 1. One pastor talks about illegals being fed up with "living in terror". Terror? I guess being caught by law enforcement when you are a criminal is now "terror". Of course the next question is, if that is terror, what is crashing airliners into buildings?
These "terrorized" illegals must now choose where to go now that Arizona is becoming less hospitable. Some plan on moving back to their native lands. Others are checking out the immigration laws of neighboring states. Perhaps, some will even move to LakotaLand where they can roam and live tax-free.
These "terrorized" illegals must now choose where to go now that Arizona is becoming less hospitable. Some plan on moving back to their native lands. Others are checking out the immigration laws of neighboring states. Perhaps, some will even move to LakotaLand where they can roam and live tax-free.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Treaties - Meaningless Words on Meaningless Paper
According to some foreign news sources, a group of Lakota Indians have declared independence from the United States and are unilaterally withdrawing from treaties with the US. Their justification is based on UN treaties and the US Constitution. Yet, they refer to treaties with the US as "meaningless words on meaningless paper" on their website. I guess you can have it both ways.
I imagine that this is a fringe group that does not represent all Lakota and is probably nothing more than a publicity stunt. However, if this is truly a step toward succession, any treaties that were withdrawn would no longer apply. If that is the case then they need only open up a history book to see what happened when a few states thought it was a good idea to no longer be a part of the United States.
Of course I don't think that the US would actually go to war or try to occupy the area. Although war would be a possibility if anyone had the backbone of Abraham Lincoln. However, it would be easy enough to deny passage through US territory to access the "new sovereign country" until the proper treaties could be ratified. Oops, treaties are worthless pieces of paper. But without them there would be no entry or exit to LakotaLand.
If the Lakota were able to take a part of the Midwest and start a new country could the People's Republic of California be next?
Update: USA Today confirms the story 12/21/07 and the bloggers there think it is a fantastic idea. I guess I am just a wacko who does not believe in freedom. Waco, TX should be a wakeup call. Koresh was not even trying to form a new country and look where he and his followers ended up.
I imagine that this is a fringe group that does not represent all Lakota and is probably nothing more than a publicity stunt. However, if this is truly a step toward succession, any treaties that were withdrawn would no longer apply. If that is the case then they need only open up a history book to see what happened when a few states thought it was a good idea to no longer be a part of the United States.
Of course I don't think that the US would actually go to war or try to occupy the area. Although war would be a possibility if anyone had the backbone of Abraham Lincoln. However, it would be easy enough to deny passage through US territory to access the "new sovereign country" until the proper treaties could be ratified. Oops, treaties are worthless pieces of paper. But without them there would be no entry or exit to LakotaLand.
If the Lakota were able to take a part of the Midwest and start a new country could the People's Republic of California be next?
Update: USA Today confirms the story 12/21/07 and the bloggers there think it is a fantastic idea. I guess I am just a wacko who does not believe in freedom. Waco, TX should be a wakeup call. Koresh was not even trying to form a new country and look where he and his followers ended up.
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Genetic Engineering - the Home Game
Just as a common hardware/software platform helped the computer world achieve critical mass and heralded the PC revolution, technological advances and the creation of a standard platform could begin the next boom market... Synthetic biology.
Scientists in Maryland have already built the world's first entirely handcrafted chromosome -- a large looping strand of DNA made from scratch in a laboratory, containing all the instructions a microbe needs to live and reproduce. They plan to transplant it into a cell next year where it will take over the cell and begin to reproduce itself. Of course, the idea is that novel microorganisms can be created the produce things like fuel from waste products or vaccines. This is a wonderful idea. However, it would not be much of a stretch to imagine that DNA could be written that has more "less desirable" attributes.
It could be entirely possible within a few years for someone to create whatever they wish just by writing some genetic code. This code is then transformed into DNA via a DNA synthesizer (yes Virginia, this device does exist) much the same way a job is sent to a laser printer. The synthesized DNA would then be transferred to a host cell and voila! Freshly minted artificially sequenced life form.
There is already some commercialization of this type of technology. LS9 Inc., a company California has used synthetic DNA in E. coli bacteria to produce a fuel alternative by feeding the E. coli a mixture of corn syrup and sugar cane. The bacteria are efficient enough that LS9 estimates that they should be able to sell the fuel for $1.25 per gallon.
DuPont also uses a genetically modified E. coli to produce the chemical 1,3 propanediol (PDO). PDO is used to create high-tech fabrics (The CEO wears a pinstripe suit made from the fabric). This process is set to become the first $1 billion non-pharmaceutical bio tech product .
Once standardized techniques are developed for DNA transfer, it will become just about as easy to hack an organism as it is to hack a computer. Even with all of the laws etc that regulate computer technology, it is still easy enough for any miscreant with a little tech savvy to wreak havoc in cyberspace. Synthetic biology ups the ante significantly. It will become fairly easy to write genetic code, synthesize the DNA and then implant it into an organism for replication and watch with glee as the newly created organism does whatever it has been programmed to do. Which could be anything from bio-fuel to bio-weapons and everything in between. The possibility for bio-error is even greater than that of bio-terror.
Even if one does not posses a DNA synthesizer, it is possible to order genetic sequences through the mail and then paste them together. The genetic codes of some viruses are fairly simple; ranging from around 3,000 DNA letters long to more than a million. The polio virus genome has 7,741 letters, influenza virus has 13,500 letters, Ebola has 19,000 and smallpox has 185,000.
In 2002, Eckard Wimmer at the State University of New York demonstrated that is was possible to make polio virus from scratch by building its genome from short lengths of DNA. The DNA sequence for polio was available on the web and was used as a template for hundreds of strands of DNA with about 70 letters each. His team assembled the DNA strands to recreate the full sequence and then used it as a template for a mirror image sequence in RNA, the genetic material used by the virus. These RNA strands were then added to human cells which accepted the new sequence and began to produce copies of the virus. Remember that the polio virus has been officially "eradicated". The 1918 influenza strain is among the group of viruses that have subsequently been built from scratch. A used DNA synthesizer can be purchased over the Internet for under $10000. The possibilities will be endless.
DNA Synthesizer (New)
Here is a link to an interesting report from someone on the forefront of this emerging technology: http://www.jcvi.org/cms/research/projects/syngen-options
Scientists in Maryland have already built the world's first entirely handcrafted chromosome -- a large looping strand of DNA made from scratch in a laboratory, containing all the instructions a microbe needs to live and reproduce. They plan to transplant it into a cell next year where it will take over the cell and begin to reproduce itself. Of course, the idea is that novel microorganisms can be created the produce things like fuel from waste products or vaccines. This is a wonderful idea. However, it would not be much of a stretch to imagine that DNA could be written that has more "less desirable" attributes.
It could be entirely possible within a few years for someone to create whatever they wish just by writing some genetic code. This code is then transformed into DNA via a DNA synthesizer (yes Virginia, this device does exist) much the same way a job is sent to a laser printer. The synthesized DNA would then be transferred to a host cell and voila! Freshly minted artificially sequenced life form.
There is already some commercialization of this type of technology. LS9 Inc., a company California has used synthetic DNA in E. coli bacteria to produce a fuel alternative by feeding the E. coli a mixture of corn syrup and sugar cane. The bacteria are efficient enough that LS9 estimates that they should be able to sell the fuel for $1.25 per gallon.
DuPont also uses a genetically modified E. coli to produce the chemical 1,3 propanediol (PDO). PDO is used to create high-tech fabrics (The CEO wears a pinstripe suit made from the fabric). This process is set to become the first $1 billion non-pharmaceutical bio tech product .
Once standardized techniques are developed for DNA transfer, it will become just about as easy to hack an organism as it is to hack a computer. Even with all of the laws etc that regulate computer technology, it is still easy enough for any miscreant with a little tech savvy to wreak havoc in cyberspace. Synthetic biology ups the ante significantly. It will become fairly easy to write genetic code, synthesize the DNA and then implant it into an organism for replication and watch with glee as the newly created organism does whatever it has been programmed to do. Which could be anything from bio-fuel to bio-weapons and everything in between. The possibility for bio-error is even greater than that of bio-terror.
Even if one does not posses a DNA synthesizer, it is possible to order genetic sequences through the mail and then paste them together. The genetic codes of some viruses are fairly simple; ranging from around 3,000 DNA letters long to more than a million. The polio virus genome has 7,741 letters, influenza virus has 13,500 letters, Ebola has 19,000 and smallpox has 185,000.
In 2002, Eckard Wimmer at the State University of New York demonstrated that is was possible to make polio virus from scratch by building its genome from short lengths of DNA. The DNA sequence for polio was available on the web and was used as a template for hundreds of strands of DNA with about 70 letters each. His team assembled the DNA strands to recreate the full sequence and then used it as a template for a mirror image sequence in RNA, the genetic material used by the virus. These RNA strands were then added to human cells which accepted the new sequence and began to produce copies of the virus. Remember that the polio virus has been officially "eradicated". The 1918 influenza strain is among the group of viruses that have subsequently been built from scratch. A used DNA synthesizer can be purchased over the Internet for under $10000. The possibilities will be endless.
DNA Synthesizer (New)
Here is a link to an interesting report from someone on the forefront of this emerging technology: http://www.jcvi.org/cms/research/projects/syngen-options
Friday, December 14, 2007
Genetic Engineering
It is a brave new world and we are alive to witness it. Japanese researchers have created a genetically modified mouse that does not fear cats. It seems that the fear of cats was hardwired into the genetic code of the rodents. Now the gene can be switched off. So Fluffy can now have a willing playmate. At least until Fluffy breaks her new toy.
As novel and humorous as the seems, it certainly raises a few questions. Does this mean that eventually we will not be able to use the excuse of genetic predisposition? Mickey might not have been able to help himself over his fear of Fluffy. But scientists can.
Not only can your pet cat get a receptive pet mouse. But, you can clone Fluffy and have the clone fluoresce. It seems that the folks in South Korea that have been leading the way in animal cloning have figured out a way to modify the clones before implantation.
I can't help but think of my post from a while back... Cloning Jeri Ryan... imagine the possibilities.
http://news.wired.com/dynamic/stories/J/JAPAN_FEARLESS_MOUSE?SITE=WIRE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-12-13-04-57-43
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2007/12/123_15447.html
As novel and humorous as the seems, it certainly raises a few questions. Does this mean that eventually we will not be able to use the excuse of genetic predisposition? Mickey might not have been able to help himself over his fear of Fluffy. But scientists can.
Not only can your pet cat get a receptive pet mouse. But, you can clone Fluffy and have the clone fluoresce. It seems that the folks in South Korea that have been leading the way in animal cloning have figured out a way to modify the clones before implantation.
I can't help but think of my post from a while back... Cloning Jeri Ryan... imagine the possibilities.
http://news.wired.com/dynamic/stories/J/JAPAN_FEARLESS_MOUSE?SITE=WIRE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-12-13-04-57-43
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2007/12/123_15447.html
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Prison Reform - Saudi Style
Once again we can look eastward toward our most excellent friends from the kingdom of Saudi Arabia to discover the true path to enlightenment. The same system of justice that brought us 200 lashes and six months in jail for a woman who was gang-raped, now releases 1,500 members of Al Qaeda from prison, requiring them only to promise to refrain from jihad within the boundaries of the Arabian Peninsula. Of course, they are free to go anywhere else in the world and continue the jihad. But, they did promise that they won't trouble the Saudis. Another 1500 or so remain in prison because they could not find it in their hearts to take the pledge. Imagine the reduction in prison population if we would adopt this type of parole system.
I think that at the very least, they could have given each one of them 100 lashes before sending them on their way as a gentle reminder of what they would be returning to if they were to go back on their word. Okay, I will admit that 100 lashes is a bit harsh for killing infidels. Maybe just a slap on the wrist would be sufficient. Fortunately, the Saudi royal family understands the importance of keeping their women in line and their jihadists free to spread the love around the world.
Saudi generosity benefits the United States in more ways than just the exportation of peace-loving reformed jihadists. We also are blessed with magnificent architectural projects funded by the Saudi royal family where people can go and be instructed in the ways of Wahhabism.
Actually, Wahhabism is really an environmental movement. In Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive. Hence wherever Wahhabism catches on, the number of drivers can be reduced by about 50 percent as women are forbidden to drive cars. This in turn significantly reduces the carbon footprint which ultimately fights global warming. Jihad against global warming. It warms my heart to realize that the oil rich Saudis are actually using their wealth to save the planet. Come to think of it, Al Gore should probably share his Nobel Prize with King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz.
http://www.nysun.com/article/67016?page_no=1
I think that at the very least, they could have given each one of them 100 lashes before sending them on their way as a gentle reminder of what they would be returning to if they were to go back on their word. Okay, I will admit that 100 lashes is a bit harsh for killing infidels. Maybe just a slap on the wrist would be sufficient. Fortunately, the Saudi royal family understands the importance of keeping their women in line and their jihadists free to spread the love around the world.
Saudi generosity benefits the United States in more ways than just the exportation of peace-loving reformed jihadists. We also are blessed with magnificent architectural projects funded by the Saudi royal family where people can go and be instructed in the ways of Wahhabism.
Actually, Wahhabism is really an environmental movement. In Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive. Hence wherever Wahhabism catches on, the number of drivers can be reduced by about 50 percent as women are forbidden to drive cars. This in turn significantly reduces the carbon footprint which ultimately fights global warming. Jihad against global warming. It warms my heart to realize that the oil rich Saudis are actually using their wealth to save the planet. Come to think of it, Al Gore should probably share his Nobel Prize with King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz.
http://www.nysun.com/article/67016?page_no=1
Monday, November 26, 2007
What's in a Name?
Apparently 40 lashes, 6 months in jail, or a fine.
We learned last year that cartoons portraying a certain religious figure can trigger worldwide riots that can be blamed on western imperialism and insensitivity.
It seems that naming a teddy bear can be nearly as disastrous. A teacher in the Sudan made the mistake of allowing her students to pick their favorite name for the class teddy bear. The name chosen happened to be one shared with a certain religious leader who was the very popular with the children. Now, the teacher is at risk for allowing her Islamic students choose a popular Islamic name for their class bear.
My limited understanding is that you can't have a representation of said leader, like a picture, statue, etc. But, there are countless people who share the name. I guess I am just an ignorant infidel if I ask how the choice of the Islamic children can be an insult to Islam.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7112929.stm
We learned last year that cartoons portraying a certain religious figure can trigger worldwide riots that can be blamed on western imperialism and insensitivity.
It seems that naming a teddy bear can be nearly as disastrous. A teacher in the Sudan made the mistake of allowing her students to pick their favorite name for the class teddy bear. The name chosen happened to be one shared with a certain religious leader who was the very popular with the children. Now, the teacher is at risk for allowing her Islamic students choose a popular Islamic name for their class bear.
My limited understanding is that you can't have a representation of said leader, like a picture, statue, etc. But, there are countless people who share the name. I guess I am just an ignorant infidel if I ask how the choice of the Islamic children can be an insult to Islam.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7112929.stm
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Sir Paul Certainly Has A Reason
You have to love vegans. They come up with new ways to highlight their insanity each and every day. Personally, I do enjoy a hot naked vegan exposing herself to prove that I don't need leather. fur or Fillet Mignon.
If anyone wondered why Sir Paul and Heather split up, this latest story could be enlightening. She was one of the featured vapid pie holes pleading for Mother Earth at some Save the Planet rally in England. After arriving at there in her not so green Mercedes 4x4, she bleated that carbon emissions from livestock are killing the planet and we should be drinking milk from rats and dogs instead of cows . All the while, her petrol fueled Mercedes motor was running. Just like her mouth. I can only say to her, "you first". I can only imagine her milking a dog or a rat... (insert comments in poor taste here) I think she too should be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize as her hypocrisy is certainly worthy of Al Gore!
If only she would have shown up nude...
Read the story here:
If anyone wondered why Sir Paul and Heather split up, this latest story could be enlightening. She was one of the featured vapid pie holes pleading for Mother Earth at some Save the Planet rally in England. After arriving at there in her not so green Mercedes 4x4, she bleated that carbon emissions from livestock are killing the planet and we should be drinking milk from rats and dogs instead of cows . All the while, her petrol fueled Mercedes motor was running. Just like her mouth. I can only say to her, "you first". I can only imagine her milking a dog or a rat... (insert comments in poor taste here) I think she too should be considered for the Nobel Peace Prize as her hypocrisy is certainly worthy of Al Gore!
If only she would have shown up nude...
Read the story here:
To Clone or Not to Clone
There is hope that stem cell research can move forward without the need for human cloning. Researchers have demonstrated that human skin cells can be made to behave like embryonic stem cells. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312294,00.html .
But, even though this new technique shows significant promise, it is still very likely that a human clone will be produced in the near future even if the need for cloning to produce stem cells is eliminated. We humans have never demonstrated the ability to say no. Even if every ethical researcher decided to abandon human cloning, there will always be someone, somewhere to give it a try. Legislators can pass laws prohibiting research. But work can and will continue where our laws do not apply. Even now, work continues outside of the United States to produce human clones. It is therefore prudent to consider how to deal with the inevitable introduction of clones into our society.
But, even though this new technique shows significant promise, it is still very likely that a human clone will be produced in the near future even if the need for cloning to produce stem cells is eliminated. We humans have never demonstrated the ability to say no. Even if every ethical researcher decided to abandon human cloning, there will always be someone, somewhere to give it a try. Legislators can pass laws prohibiting research. But work can and will continue where our laws do not apply. Even now, work continues outside of the United States to produce human clones. It is therefore prudent to consider how to deal with the inevitable introduction of clones into our society.
Monday, November 12, 2007
Ethics and Technology - Part II
The future is now.
Researchers at the Oregon National Primate Research Center have developed a method for cloning primate embryos. The question with regard to human cloning is not if, but when. When this becomes a reality we will not be ready for the implications and consequences. It probably will not be tomorrow. However it could certainly be within our lifetime that we are given the option to have a clone produced that could supply us with transplantable organs and tissue that are perfect matches to our own.
A UN Panel from the U.N. University's Institute of Advanced Studies has said it will only be a matter of time before scientists manage to clone a human if governments do not impose a ban. The panel has suggested that a legally binding ban be established. This will most likely fail. Legally binding and United Nations don't fit in the same sentence. We have UN bans on the development of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons that have certainly been less than effective. Even if the UN were not impotent, a ban on cloning will not work for the simple reason that someone will exploit the inactivity of others to gain any advantage in this area.
The real question then becomes: what are the rights of human clones? Do they constitute a class of beings that can be exploited? In the US we supposedly place a premium on the worth of the individual and human rights. There are countries that do not see life the same way as we supposedly do here in the United States. They will certainly have few reservations when is comes to the exploitation of cloned humans.
While I think that would be great if the world could join together and define a unified response, I think that is very unlikely that any such accord will be developed and even less likely that it would or even could be enforced. Therefore, it is important that we decide how to respond when the inevitable occurs.
http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article3152325.ece
Researchers at the Oregon National Primate Research Center have developed a method for cloning primate embryos. The question with regard to human cloning is not if, but when. When this becomes a reality we will not be ready for the implications and consequences. It probably will not be tomorrow. However it could certainly be within our lifetime that we are given the option to have a clone produced that could supply us with transplantable organs and tissue that are perfect matches to our own.
A UN Panel from the U.N. University's Institute of Advanced Studies has said it will only be a matter of time before scientists manage to clone a human if governments do not impose a ban. The panel has suggested that a legally binding ban be established. This will most likely fail. Legally binding and United Nations don't fit in the same sentence. We have UN bans on the development of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons that have certainly been less than effective. Even if the UN were not impotent, a ban on cloning will not work for the simple reason that someone will exploit the inactivity of others to gain any advantage in this area.
The real question then becomes: what are the rights of human clones? Do they constitute a class of beings that can be exploited? In the US we supposedly place a premium on the worth of the individual and human rights. There are countries that do not see life the same way as we supposedly do here in the United States. They will certainly have few reservations when is comes to the exploitation of cloned humans.
While I think that would be great if the world could join together and define a unified response, I think that is very unlikely that any such accord will be developed and even less likely that it would or even could be enforced. Therefore, it is important that we decide how to respond when the inevitable occurs.
http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article3152325.ece
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Truly Random Ramblings
I have been hard at work writing papers for a graduate course. Hence my lack of new material for the blog. However, I was reading the news this evening and I was going to take a shot at the shoddy business practices of an ever increasing number of Chinese companies. The latest one involves toy beads that are coated with a chemical that turns into GHB (date rape drug) if ingested. Interstingly enough, this is a toy company not a pharmaceutical company. Although, maybe they share production facilities. I for one would not wish to trust my life or that of anyone that I cared for to that type of quality. I wonder what will they think of next. By the way, I also read that they intend to have a lunar mission by 2010.
The article that made me all warm and fuzzy right before I settle in to my nice warm bed was one detailing how my tax dollars are being used for good. The USS Lake Erie fired two interceptor missiles and score two kills on two short range ballistic missiles at the same time. Now that is a return on investment!The top picture of one of the targets launching. Below is the launch of the interceptor.
Everyone laughed at Ronald Reagan when he proposed the crazy idea of a bullet hitting a bullet. Thank you Ron!
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
The Emotional Abuse of Men
A Muslim cleric is trying to raise awareness of an issue that is silently destroying men through insomnia and lack of spiritual focus. Sexy women's clothing. Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, chief minister of northeastern Kelantan, the only one of Malaysia's 13 states that is not ruled by the moderate National Front governing coalition, has declared that sexy women's clothing is causing men to lose sleep and pray without focus. His solution to the problem is loose, baggy, flowing clothing for women.
While I have been intrigued by sexy women's clothing I never realized that I was really being abused each time that I paused to take in the scenery. Nor did I realize that the urge to gawk is actually out of my control. I think that I should feel liberated knowing that if only women would wear the right clothes, I could get more sleep and be more focused.
When I imagine a world where women do not heap abuse upon men through their brazen displays of natural curves I wonder how much better life could be. I believe that we can see glimpses of this "Paradise" if we look at places like Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan under the Taliban etc. This helps me to understand desire to get those 70 virgins. I wonder what they would be wearing?
While I have been intrigued by sexy women's clothing I never realized that I was really being abused each time that I paused to take in the scenery. Nor did I realize that the urge to gawk is actually out of my control. I think that I should feel liberated knowing that if only women would wear the right clothes, I could get more sleep and be more focused.
When I imagine a world where women do not heap abuse upon men through their brazen displays of natural curves I wonder how much better life could be. I believe that we can see glimpses of this "Paradise" if we look at places like Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan under the Taliban etc. This helps me to understand desire to get those 70 virgins. I wonder what they would be wearing?
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
The Myth of Civil Discourse
I have been reading a book entitled, "The World is Flat" by Thomas Friedman. In this book he talks about the "flattening of the word" and the forces that have caused this phenomenon and some of the consequences. The pervasiveness of the Internet is one of the forces that are shaping the world in which we live. The world is indeed a very flat place when you can be instantly connected to millions of people and share information at the speed of light. Indeed, this blog is a small example of how anyone with an Internet connection can instantly fire a shot heard around the world. It is now so easy to communicate with anyone, anywhere, anytime.
I was thinking about this new form of communication and assessing the pros and cons of being able to communicate and share information instantly. Certainly there is great benefit to be realized. Communication is much more than an exchange of data. True communication involves personal interaction. For many, the Internet is actually a major factor in the depersonalization of communication. Some even consider the Internet to be the cause of this change. However, just as violent video games are often blamed for an increase in violence, I believe that that too much of the shift away from personal communication is blamed on the Internet. Violent video games are more of a mirror of societal shifts than the cause of those shifts. The Internet facilitates depersonalization and merely reflects the overall changes in societal attitudes. In one sense, things are becoming less personal. Yet, at the same time things can get very personal very fast. One only need read a few of the political blogs to see this at its worst. George Bush (not my favorite president by a mile) is Hitler, Dahmer, Satan, and the village idiot all rolled into one. I am only using him as an obvious example.
Maybe I am just waxing nostalgic when I think about "civil discourse." Is it possible to disagree yet not be disagreeable? Given past history, it seems like the answer is a resounding "NO!" When was the last time that two people or two factions were able to sit down to discuss their differences without regressing to name calling? Ad hominem attacks are the weapon of the weak. Yet, that is where nearly every disagreement ends even before it starts. I remember Al Franken's book, "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot". Mr Franken may have made some valid arguments to support his political views and he probably sold plenty of books to his supporters. But, was he able to articulate his position clearly enough to win over support or even pique the interest of any but the most partisan of readers?
I am reminded of the old Saturday Night Live sketch of Point/Counterpoint. Most debates begin and end in much the same way as did that sketch. It does not seem to matter what the topic is. Inevitably, there is polarization, posturing and finally the poison is delivered. It is much easier to attack a person than a position. Is it any wonder that people are interacting from a distance? It is much easier to avoid confrontation and withdraw than to be derided and ridiculed.
It is truly refreshing to interact with someone who has different perspective and position if they can express themselves without resorting to personal attacks. Sadly, this type of free liberal discourse is becoming more of a rarity with each passing day. The Internet is just a tool that enables this to occur more smoothly and quickly.
I was thinking about this new form of communication and assessing the pros and cons of being able to communicate and share information instantly. Certainly there is great benefit to be realized. Communication is much more than an exchange of data. True communication involves personal interaction. For many, the Internet is actually a major factor in the depersonalization of communication. Some even consider the Internet to be the cause of this change. However, just as violent video games are often blamed for an increase in violence, I believe that that too much of the shift away from personal communication is blamed on the Internet. Violent video games are more of a mirror of societal shifts than the cause of those shifts. The Internet facilitates depersonalization and merely reflects the overall changes in societal attitudes. In one sense, things are becoming less personal. Yet, at the same time things can get very personal very fast. One only need read a few of the political blogs to see this at its worst. George Bush (not my favorite president by a mile) is Hitler, Dahmer, Satan, and the village idiot all rolled into one. I am only using him as an obvious example.
Maybe I am just waxing nostalgic when I think about "civil discourse." Is it possible to disagree yet not be disagreeable? Given past history, it seems like the answer is a resounding "NO!" When was the last time that two people or two factions were able to sit down to discuss their differences without regressing to name calling? Ad hominem attacks are the weapon of the weak. Yet, that is where nearly every disagreement ends even before it starts. I remember Al Franken's book, "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot". Mr Franken may have made some valid arguments to support his political views and he probably sold plenty of books to his supporters. But, was he able to articulate his position clearly enough to win over support or even pique the interest of any but the most partisan of readers?
I am reminded of the old Saturday Night Live sketch of Point/Counterpoint. Most debates begin and end in much the same way as did that sketch. It does not seem to matter what the topic is. Inevitably, there is polarization, posturing and finally the poison is delivered. It is much easier to attack a person than a position. Is it any wonder that people are interacting from a distance? It is much easier to avoid confrontation and withdraw than to be derided and ridiculed.
It is truly refreshing to interact with someone who has different perspective and position if they can express themselves without resorting to personal attacks. Sadly, this type of free liberal discourse is becoming more of a rarity with each passing day. The Internet is just a tool that enables this to occur more smoothly and quickly.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Reciprocity
Reciprocity is such a wonderfully simple word. Much like the Golden Rule, it should be the fundamental law of the land in the United States. If it were, things would be so much simpler and fair. Do unto others as they do unto you may not be the best way to handle one’s personal dealings. However, it is a sane and fair way to conduct affairs of governance and business. I like to think of it as a perfect mirror, reflecting actions back to shine upon those responsible for them. This mirror could bring a world of possible solutions to many of the problems and issues that we face every day. Dealing with others in the same fashion that they deal with you.
The fact that we do not has been used against us so many times. The terrorists who atttacked our country and continue to desire to harm us exploit this weakness every day. We would not want to carry this to the extreme of cutting off their heads with dull knives if they happen to be captured. Nor should we coddle them and treat them like American citizens. We certainly should not court martial an officer who applies the threat of force to uncover thwart the plans of said individuals to kill the officer's men and women.
Reciprocity would work wonders in the fight against illegal immigration. The Mexican government routinely publishes literature that details the best ways to enter the United States illegally and exploit our generousity and goodwill. If we applied Mexico’s immigration law upon its citizen’s who choose to violate our national sovereignty, the problem would begin to improve almost immediately.
China enjoys the freedom to engage in almost every opportunity imaginable with regard to trade and business, including purchasing major stakes in our financial institutions. Yet we do not have the same ability to acquire an equivalent level of interest in theirs. Reciprocity would get results.
Would the government of Saudi Arabia allow a foreign government to set up a “Christian” School in Mecca, Medina, or anywhere in their country? Yet, we have a Saudi sponsored school in northern Virginia that teaches Wahhabism. Female American military personnel can’t even drive cars in Saudi Arabia because it offends the sensibilities of the society. Yet, we permit, protect and even encourage the presence of institutions that are fundamentally at odds with our society. Once again, a little reciprocity would go a long way.
I believe in freedom and free markets if they are truly free. But if one side takes advantage of the other such that reciprocity does not exist, then it is up to the government to take whatever action is necessary to “level the playing field” whether it is in business or international relations. It would be a very compelling type of diplomacy that few diplomats would embrace.
The fact that we do not has been used against us so many times. The terrorists who atttacked our country and continue to desire to harm us exploit this weakness every day. We would not want to carry this to the extreme of cutting off their heads with dull knives if they happen to be captured. Nor should we coddle them and treat them like American citizens. We certainly should not court martial an officer who applies the threat of force to uncover thwart the plans of said individuals to kill the officer's men and women.
Reciprocity would work wonders in the fight against illegal immigration. The Mexican government routinely publishes literature that details the best ways to enter the United States illegally and exploit our generousity and goodwill. If we applied Mexico’s immigration law upon its citizen’s who choose to violate our national sovereignty, the problem would begin to improve almost immediately.
China enjoys the freedom to engage in almost every opportunity imaginable with regard to trade and business, including purchasing major stakes in our financial institutions. Yet we do not have the same ability to acquire an equivalent level of interest in theirs. Reciprocity would get results.
Would the government of Saudi Arabia allow a foreign government to set up a “Christian” School in Mecca, Medina, or anywhere in their country? Yet, we have a Saudi sponsored school in northern Virginia that teaches Wahhabism. Female American military personnel can’t even drive cars in Saudi Arabia because it offends the sensibilities of the society. Yet, we permit, protect and even encourage the presence of institutions that are fundamentally at odds with our society. Once again, a little reciprocity would go a long way.
I believe in freedom and free markets if they are truly free. But if one side takes advantage of the other such that reciprocity does not exist, then it is up to the government to take whatever action is necessary to “level the playing field” whether it is in business or international relations. It would be a very compelling type of diplomacy that few diplomats would embrace.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Bio Ethics and Cybernetics
The other day I wrote about the quest to create new life by combining human genetic material with that of other species. The question is not if this will happen but rather when will it happen and how will it affect humanity in the long run. It is interesting that much of the research is being done in the European Union where there is still tremendous opposition to genetically modified foods. In Europe, it is perfectly acceptable to create human/whatever chimeras but not to sell a disease resistant , genetically modified vegetable seed that could possibly end up in the food chain.
I was musing on the possibilities for potential additions to the human genetic configuration and some of the issues that could arise with the rights of these newly manufactured creatures. Especially if they were created to serve specific purposes such as providing organs and tissue for harvesting. I jokingly commented to a friend about some that might be created for recreational use. I was only slightly serious and we both got a good laugh about an otherwise very serious issue.
Soon after our exchange I read an article that suggests the possibility of marriage to robots becoming legal in a place like Massachusetts in the next fifty years. It also suggests a more limited physical interaction between humans and machines within the next five years. If these developments are considered together, there exists a real possibility for person to purchase their spouse, partner, or lover and have then take whatever form they wish. One could create a human-like exterior with cybernetic and non-human organic internals to meet whatever need was perceived. Some might see this as a great advancement. Suddenly, the movie Bladerunner does not seem as much science fiction as it once did. Seven of Nine could be the next household appliance. We could create armies of robots that could be used to marry, kill or exploit for whatever purpose.
Suppose for a moment that you decide to "marry" your robotic girlfriend. Does the marriage end if you flip the power switch? What if you decide that you want a different model for each day of the week? Would this logic then be applicable to human to human marriages? I guess it says a great deal about society's view of marriage if it could be applied to a machine. My antiquated view of marriage is that it is supposed to be a lifelong commitment between a man and a woman who are equal partners and are jointly devoted to the well-being of the other. Commitment is a choice and the flip side is that one party can void the agreement at any time Thus both are constantly making a choice to remain together. If you don't run that risk, there is no reward. This is what theologians call free will. Without free will there is no love, no commitment, no freedom. Free will is the answer to many of life's most difficult questions. If you create a machine to service your wants and needs and it is given a choice to meet your needs or its needs what would it choose?
http://www.livescience.com/technology/071012-robot-marriage.html
Friday, October 12, 2007
Godless Infidels
I am often fascinated by the hypocrisy of the left. In one breath they will tell you that they are for free speech and diversity of opinions and in the next they will deny the right to anyone who opposes their viewpoint to express their opinions. The events at Columbia University come to mind.
One area in particular where this is most pronounced is talk radio. Those on the left are constantly complaining about the stranglehold that the right supposedly has on the airwaves. Every so often they "Fairness Doctrine" comes back to the fore with talk of curtailing the rights of non-liberals to express their views on the airwaves. The truth of the matter is there is a market glut when it comes to liberal opinions. The major news networks, CNN, PBS all have a decidedly liberal bias and thus have saturated the market with liberal opinion. This is why conservative talk radio is so popular, it meets a market need. The continued failure of Air America also attests to the lack of demand for even more Liberal pablum.
This brings me to the latest example of Liberal hypocrisy. All we have been hearing is how Jesus could not possibly be a conservative and that Liberals can be just as religious as Conservatives. Yet, at every turn, Liberals in leadership go out of their way to mock and marginalize persons of faith and conviction. Often, they are labeled with such terms as , ignorant, bigoted, backward, Neanderthals, etc. I am fairly sure that Jesus is neither a Republican or a Democrat. However, I am pretty sure that he has strong feelings about some things. I am definitely sure that he is not pleased with the mockery of the Last Supper sponsored by Miller Brewing and the City of San Francisco.
I would like to now what he thinks about the new radio show on Air America that will be featuring Ron Reagan, the unfortunate namesake of the great former president. The show in entitled, "Godless Infidels". I am sure that it will be a huge hit among liberals who scoff at the notion of a Creator. Ron Jr. , the atheist will surely be a darling among the crowd that preaches tolerance excpet when it comes to faith. While this is nowhere near the blasphemy sponsored by Miller Brewing, it certainly makes me pause and wonder about a future shaped by the Democratic Party and the liberals who lead it.
I think everyone has a right to believe as they choose. I believe we will answer for it at the end. Atheists have a right to practice their religion as much as any other group. They are free to bow before the altar of knowledge, enlightenment or whatever they wish to call it. Personally, I think they are just worshipping humanity. I think that they have set thier sights a bit low if that is the best that they can aspire to. But, I am pleased that they have a new show and that they are willing to be seen as they really are. I hope Ron Jr. really articulates the liberal atheistic connection. Truth in advertising would be a refreshing change.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,300719,00.html
One area in particular where this is most pronounced is talk radio. Those on the left are constantly complaining about the stranglehold that the right supposedly has on the airwaves. Every so often they "Fairness Doctrine" comes back to the fore with talk of curtailing the rights of non-liberals to express their views on the airwaves. The truth of the matter is there is a market glut when it comes to liberal opinions. The major news networks, CNN, PBS all have a decidedly liberal bias and thus have saturated the market with liberal opinion. This is why conservative talk radio is so popular, it meets a market need. The continued failure of Air America also attests to the lack of demand for even more Liberal pablum.
This brings me to the latest example of Liberal hypocrisy. All we have been hearing is how Jesus could not possibly be a conservative and that Liberals can be just as religious as Conservatives. Yet, at every turn, Liberals in leadership go out of their way to mock and marginalize persons of faith and conviction. Often, they are labeled with such terms as , ignorant, bigoted, backward, Neanderthals, etc. I am fairly sure that Jesus is neither a Republican or a Democrat. However, I am pretty sure that he has strong feelings about some things. I am definitely sure that he is not pleased with the mockery of the Last Supper sponsored by Miller Brewing and the City of San Francisco.
I would like to now what he thinks about the new radio show on Air America that will be featuring Ron Reagan, the unfortunate namesake of the great former president. The show in entitled, "Godless Infidels". I am sure that it will be a huge hit among liberals who scoff at the notion of a Creator. Ron Jr. , the atheist will surely be a darling among the crowd that preaches tolerance excpet when it comes to faith. While this is nowhere near the blasphemy sponsored by Miller Brewing, it certainly makes me pause and wonder about a future shaped by the Democratic Party and the liberals who lead it.
I think everyone has a right to believe as they choose. I believe we will answer for it at the end. Atheists have a right to practice their religion as much as any other group. They are free to bow before the altar of knowledge, enlightenment or whatever they wish to call it. Personally, I think they are just worshipping humanity. I think that they have set thier sights a bit low if that is the best that they can aspire to. But, I am pleased that they have a new show and that they are willing to be seen as they really are. I hope Ron Jr. really articulates the liberal atheistic connection. Truth in advertising would be a refreshing change.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,300719,00.html
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Ethics and Technology
With so much going on in the world it is easy to miss events that in hindsight are pivotal points in our history. We are nearing one of those places and there is not much being said even though it creates the opportunity for significant debate.
We are increasingly faced with opportunities to push the frontiers of science farther out with each passing day. As a result, we have benefited greatly as new technologies and discoveries have improved our lives.
However, this is a double edged sword. For every positive reward that we reap, there is usually the potential for greater evil. When I speak of evil it is not necessarily in the context of morally evil. Rather I use it to describe the negative consequences that are possible and could perhaps be used for moral evil. But these evils can occur with or without moral intervention.
For instance, nuclear power presents wonderful opportunities to provide mankind with limitless electrical power. But, the issues of nuclear waste and nuclear proliferation are the price that is paid for this seemingly limitless source of energy.
In this article in The Guardian, we read about a bio tech researcher who intends to create a new form of life. This in not life from nothing. He is using an already living organism to host a custom designed genetic sequence that is not related to the host cell. Basically, he is infecting one type of cell with a newly designed genetic code. This is similar to the mechanism used by viruses when they infect cells. They cause the cells to produce more of the virus rather than more of the original host cell.
This process could be used to develop many novel treatments and offers promise to end a great deal of human suffering. But, this could easily be used to create very nasty organisms instead of helpful ones. Funny thing about microorganisms, they have no morals. They just do what they do without regard to the impact on the host. A virus that infects a cell and reprograms it to reproduce more of the itself instead of the original is not evil. It is just doing what it is programmed to do.
It would be a great thing to create a microbe that eats hazardous waste and turns it into something more benign or even useful. But, what happens if the food supply runs out or a mutation occurs? Another funny thing about microbes is that they tend to adapt to environmental changes. A microbe that eats excess CO2 would be great. But, we need some CO2 to support life on the planet. How do you tell a microbe to stop? I guess the real question is "just because we can do something, should we do it?" I am sure that the response is that somebody will do it so why not me?
I love technology and I am fascinated as the frontiers of human knowledge are pushed further and further out. My enthusiasm is slightly tempered when I consider the story about the Tower of Babel. Most people read that story and think that Divine intervention spoiled the party. I think that a lack of Divine intervention is a much more troubling outcome. We may get just what we are asking for.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/oct/06/genetics.climatechange
We are increasingly faced with opportunities to push the frontiers of science farther out with each passing day. As a result, we have benefited greatly as new technologies and discoveries have improved our lives.
However, this is a double edged sword. For every positive reward that we reap, there is usually the potential for greater evil. When I speak of evil it is not necessarily in the context of morally evil. Rather I use it to describe the negative consequences that are possible and could perhaps be used for moral evil. But these evils can occur with or without moral intervention.
For instance, nuclear power presents wonderful opportunities to provide mankind with limitless electrical power. But, the issues of nuclear waste and nuclear proliferation are the price that is paid for this seemingly limitless source of energy.
In this article in The Guardian, we read about a bio tech researcher who intends to create a new form of life. This in not life from nothing. He is using an already living organism to host a custom designed genetic sequence that is not related to the host cell. Basically, he is infecting one type of cell with a newly designed genetic code. This is similar to the mechanism used by viruses when they infect cells. They cause the cells to produce more of the virus rather than more of the original host cell.
This process could be used to develop many novel treatments and offers promise to end a great deal of human suffering. But, this could easily be used to create very nasty organisms instead of helpful ones. Funny thing about microorganisms, they have no morals. They just do what they do without regard to the impact on the host. A virus that infects a cell and reprograms it to reproduce more of the itself instead of the original is not evil. It is just doing what it is programmed to do.
It would be a great thing to create a microbe that eats hazardous waste and turns it into something more benign or even useful. But, what happens if the food supply runs out or a mutation occurs? Another funny thing about microbes is that they tend to adapt to environmental changes. A microbe that eats excess CO2 would be great. But, we need some CO2 to support life on the planet. How do you tell a microbe to stop? I guess the real question is "just because we can do something, should we do it?" I am sure that the response is that somebody will do it so why not me?
I love technology and I am fascinated as the frontiers of human knowledge are pushed further and further out. My enthusiasm is slightly tempered when I consider the story about the Tower of Babel. Most people read that story and think that Divine intervention spoiled the party. I think that a lack of Divine intervention is a much more troubling outcome. We may get just what we are asking for.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/oct/06/genetics.climatechange
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Nature Outing
It seems that folks in Johnson City, Tennessee are not as evolved as those in San Francisco. 40 men in the past two weeks have been arrested in a public park for various acts of self expression. Local residents complained to police that the park was being used for homosexual hookups. Police then launched a sting operation near what was known unofficially as "the Man Cave." If this had been San Francisco, local officials and the Miller Brewing Company would have sponsored the spelunking. Instead, the local paper even went so far as to print pictures of the alleged perpetrators.
Public parks are for everyone. People have a right to express themselves no matter what their sexual proclivities may be. Were these men unfairly singled out compared to others who may have gone "parking"? If it is OK to read second graders a fairy tale about two princes falling in love, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298307,00.html why can't they witness it firsthand at the Man Cave? They could see the same thing at the Folsom Street Fair with the blessing of the City of San Francisco. In fact, it might even constitute a field trip for school children from the Bay Area.
It will be interesting to see how this unfair targeting of men with needs is handled. I think there is an ACLU chapter somewhere in Tenessee.
See the Man Cave: http://www.johnsoncitypress.com/Detail.php?Cat=HOMEPAGE&ID=60342
Public parks are for everyone. People have a right to express themselves no matter what their sexual proclivities may be. Were these men unfairly singled out compared to others who may have gone "parking"? If it is OK to read second graders a fairy tale about two princes falling in love, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298307,00.html why can't they witness it firsthand at the Man Cave? They could see the same thing at the Folsom Street Fair with the blessing of the City of San Francisco. In fact, it might even constitute a field trip for school children from the Bay Area.
It will be interesting to see how this unfair targeting of men with needs is handled. I think there is an ACLU chapter somewhere in Tenessee.
See the Man Cave: http://www.johnsoncitypress.com/Detail.php?Cat=HOMEPAGE&ID=60342
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Football and Life
I am a huge fan of football players. But I don't believe they should play football. In fact, I abhor the game and everything for which it stands. It is after all, discriminatory (only really big strong athletes can play), dangerous ( look at all of the injuries), and a useless outlet for excess testosterone. Besides, I think that the coaches are idiots who love to scream and yell at their players for no reason. However, I really do support those who choose to play the game and devote their life and risk their health to participate in this pointless pursuit. I even support the coaches who are wasting their time trying to get people to become the best football players they can be.
I imagine that you may be scratching your head and trying to figure out what I mean. I am merely applying the same concepts used by the left who say that they support the troops but not the war. Of course, it is the right of every American to express their opinion. But, you can't have it both ways. Either you support the troops and their mission or you don't. It is really very simple.
Democrats have been trying to "cut funding for the war" at the same time they claim "we support the troops". You can't have it both ways. That is in essence saying to the troops, "we love you but we are not going to give you what you need to do the job." Additionally, the enemies of our troops are emboldened as they see support for the troops (pardon me "mission of our troops") wane. I am sure that the semantic nuance is lost on the guys who are building bombs to kill our soldiers. This only makes it even more difficult for the American men and women who are serving their country.
Democrats want a timetable for withdrawal. Yet everything they do actually makes the job of our troops more difficult and less likely that the mission will wind down. So the very thing that they ostensibly claim to want is less likely to occur as a result of their actions.
Mistakes were made and nothing in life is certain. It is a rare occasion when outcomes can be known in advance. War is certainly no exception. I fully support the right of those who are against the war to speak out. However, I do expect them to honestly state their opinion. I also believe that actions speak louder than words and I only hear the actions of Democrats who are undermining our troops each time they open their mouths and follow it with "but we support the troops."
You can not say in one breath I support you and in the next do everything in your power to undermine those you claim to support. That would be like a person proclaiming undying love and devotion to their committed life partner while stepping out with a member of the opposite sex who also happens to be their partner's sibling.
I imagine that you may be scratching your head and trying to figure out what I mean. I am merely applying the same concepts used by the left who say that they support the troops but not the war. Of course, it is the right of every American to express their opinion. But, you can't have it both ways. Either you support the troops and their mission or you don't. It is really very simple.
Democrats have been trying to "cut funding for the war" at the same time they claim "we support the troops". You can't have it both ways. That is in essence saying to the troops, "we love you but we are not going to give you what you need to do the job." Additionally, the enemies of our troops are emboldened as they see support for the troops (pardon me "mission of our troops") wane. I am sure that the semantic nuance is lost on the guys who are building bombs to kill our soldiers. This only makes it even more difficult for the American men and women who are serving their country.
Democrats want a timetable for withdrawal. Yet everything they do actually makes the job of our troops more difficult and less likely that the mission will wind down. So the very thing that they ostensibly claim to want is less likely to occur as a result of their actions.
Mistakes were made and nothing in life is certain. It is a rare occasion when outcomes can be known in advance. War is certainly no exception. I fully support the right of those who are against the war to speak out. However, I do expect them to honestly state their opinion. I also believe that actions speak louder than words and I only hear the actions of Democrats who are undermining our troops each time they open their mouths and follow it with "but we support the troops."
You can not say in one breath I support you and in the next do everything in your power to undermine those you claim to support. That would be like a person proclaiming undying love and devotion to their committed life partner while stepping out with a member of the opposite sex who also happens to be their partner's sibling.
Cancelling Christmas
The Grinch is alive and well and currently lives in Oak Lawn, Illinois. It seems that school officials have decided to dispose of Christmas and all of the associated school traditions at the behest of one Muslim parent. As it stands, most "Christmas" traditions are purely secular. The guy in the red suit is not Jesus and I don't believe that the jolly old elf was born in manger. Nor do I believe that any of the gifts in his bag can compare to the gift given by Jesus.
I believe in the separation of Church and State. But, I do not believe that freedom of religion is the same as freedom from religion. This nation was founded upon Judeo-Christian beliefs and that is a part of our history and the main reason why the United States is the country that it is today. Our Constitution explicitly states that our rights come from our Creator. This key historical fact is overlooked in many schools because to mention it would be a a violation of the so-called "separation of Church and State".
Look around the world. Has another country matched the generosity of the US? How much tolerance and religious freedom are available in secular communist states? How much tolerance and religious freedom are found in Muslim nations? I would venture to say that if a Christian suggested canceling a Muslim holiday in a Muslim country that they would not survive to ask again.
In Muslim countries there is little tolerance for non Muslim beliefs. Converts to Christianity are killed in some of the most brutal means imagininable. A female serving in the US military in Saudi Arabia can't even drive a vehicle while serving her country! Where is the outcry? Religion is forced down the throats of every US serviceman serving in a Muslim country. Can you drink a beer in Iraq if you are a US soldier? NO! Because this might offend the sensibilities of Muslims. Now in our own country, we don't want to offend Muslims with our so called "Christian Traditions". Most of these traditions are secular and contain only vestiges of Christianity. If someone is so offended, they are free to leave at any time or better yet, not show up in the first place.
To the cowards in Chicago I say, shame on you for acquiescing to the wishes of a tiny vocal minority. Unfortunately, the vocal minority trumps the silent majority 99% of the time. I hope that the silent majority turns out to vote.
To the rest of the Nation, Wake Up and Smell the Smoke!
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/local_story_271104049.html
I believe in the separation of Church and State. But, I do not believe that freedom of religion is the same as freedom from religion. This nation was founded upon Judeo-Christian beliefs and that is a part of our history and the main reason why the United States is the country that it is today. Our Constitution explicitly states that our rights come from our Creator. This key historical fact is overlooked in many schools because to mention it would be a a violation of the so-called "separation of Church and State".
Look around the world. Has another country matched the generosity of the US? How much tolerance and religious freedom are available in secular communist states? How much tolerance and religious freedom are found in Muslim nations? I would venture to say that if a Christian suggested canceling a Muslim holiday in a Muslim country that they would not survive to ask again.
In Muslim countries there is little tolerance for non Muslim beliefs. Converts to Christianity are killed in some of the most brutal means imagininable. A female serving in the US military in Saudi Arabia can't even drive a vehicle while serving her country! Where is the outcry? Religion is forced down the throats of every US serviceman serving in a Muslim country. Can you drink a beer in Iraq if you are a US soldier? NO! Because this might offend the sensibilities of Muslims. Now in our own country, we don't want to offend Muslims with our so called "Christian Traditions". Most of these traditions are secular and contain only vestiges of Christianity. If someone is so offended, they are free to leave at any time or better yet, not show up in the first place.
To the cowards in Chicago I say, shame on you for acquiescing to the wishes of a tiny vocal minority. Unfortunately, the vocal minority trumps the silent majority 99% of the time. I hope that the silent majority turns out to vote.
To the rest of the Nation, Wake Up and Smell the Smoke!
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/local_story_271104049.html
Monday, October 1, 2007
Rethinking Illegal Migration
I had been planning to put a few of my thoughts out for discussion regarding my favorite Democratic presidential hopeful, Ms. Hillary Clinton. However, a friend sent me an article the other day that really made me think and reconsider my stance on the relationship between the United States and Mexico.
According to Mexican president Felipe Calderon, immigration is a natural and inevitable phenomenon that the United States should embrace so that more Mexican workers can come here. He also stated that the Mexico is losing it's best people to the United States. I think that he may be correct. We probably are getting the best from Mexico. The people that come across the border illegally show no respect for the rule of law and are contemptuous of everything that it means to be an American, including learning the English language. If this is the best that Mexico has to offer, then it is easy to understand why Mexico is rife with poverty, corruption and lawlessness.
The "official" number of "undocumented immigrants" is around 12 million. We used to call them "illegal aliens" but I guess that is not politically correct. It is very likely that the true number is much higher. But, even 12 million is millions too many. Especially when there are tens of thousands who are trying to enter legally and who can contribute more than they take. Even if Mexico is sending us their best, their best are still a net drain on the economy. When the cost of education, health care, social services etc. are factored in; it is unlikely that they have a positive effect on our economy. Unless cheap produce and artificially low unskilled wages are seen as positive.
Seasonal work would be a valid excuse for temporary migration. But, it is seldom temporary and more often than not, becomes permanent. Over time, they create isolated communities that demand special recognition and accommodation. They have children who are American citizens by virtue of the fact that they were born on American soil. These children also require special accommodation since their parents can't speak English and contribute to their education. Enter bi-lingual education at a significant cost to the taxpayers. Even though their parents were in violation of American Law at the time of birth, they are American citizens. If we closed the borders today, this 12 million would still become 24 million then 48 million very quickly. I might support amnesty if it included a change to the Constitution that would prevent automatic citizenship for the children of these criminals. While it may be unfair to the children, there should not be a reward for lawlessness.
This bring me back to Hillary. I recently read that she wants the US government to provide every child born in the US a $5000 savings bond or similar instrument. Her proposal would make it even more tempting for more people to come here illegally to get the $5000 per child reward. For the sake of simplicity, let's assume that there are only 12 million illegals. If we also assume that the average birth rate from the US Census Bureau of 14.1 per 1000 applies (it is probably higher than this) we have 168000 new US citizens born every year to parents who are criminals. Hillary is thus proposing to spend $840,000,000 annually for the baby shower. Plus these children then have all of the rights and privileges of being an American. This horrible idea could not even be funded for legal residents of this country. The fact that illegal offspring would benefit is even more galling. Fortunately, most will probably never see the $5000 or the amount that is is supposed to become. The whole program will just be another "trust fund" like Social Security that greedy, disingenuous, self-serving politicians can use to buy more votes.
I believe that both Democrats and Republicans are spineless when it comes to this issue. The Democrats are hoping to convert all of the illegals into loyal Democrats beholding to the government that supports them. I was especially galled by the Democratic candidates who participated in the Spanish language debate. This is the ultimate expression of political pandering. Likewise, the Republicans like the lower priced labor that is available when they look the other way at this violation of US law and national sovereignty. The simple fact that the pandering politicians are overlooking is that a country without borders is no longer a country.
According to Mexican president Felipe Calderon, immigration is a natural and inevitable phenomenon that the United States should embrace so that more Mexican workers can come here. He also stated that the Mexico is losing it's best people to the United States. I think that he may be correct. We probably are getting the best from Mexico. The people that come across the border illegally show no respect for the rule of law and are contemptuous of everything that it means to be an American, including learning the English language. If this is the best that Mexico has to offer, then it is easy to understand why Mexico is rife with poverty, corruption and lawlessness.
The "official" number of "undocumented immigrants" is around 12 million. We used to call them "illegal aliens" but I guess that is not politically correct. It is very likely that the true number is much higher. But, even 12 million is millions too many. Especially when there are tens of thousands who are trying to enter legally and who can contribute more than they take. Even if Mexico is sending us their best, their best are still a net drain on the economy. When the cost of education, health care, social services etc. are factored in; it is unlikely that they have a positive effect on our economy. Unless cheap produce and artificially low unskilled wages are seen as positive.
Seasonal work would be a valid excuse for temporary migration. But, it is seldom temporary and more often than not, becomes permanent. Over time, they create isolated communities that demand special recognition and accommodation. They have children who are American citizens by virtue of the fact that they were born on American soil. These children also require special accommodation since their parents can't speak English and contribute to their education. Enter bi-lingual education at a significant cost to the taxpayers. Even though their parents were in violation of American Law at the time of birth, they are American citizens. If we closed the borders today, this 12 million would still become 24 million then 48 million very quickly. I might support amnesty if it included a change to the Constitution that would prevent automatic citizenship for the children of these criminals. While it may be unfair to the children, there should not be a reward for lawlessness.
This bring me back to Hillary. I recently read that she wants the US government to provide every child born in the US a $5000 savings bond or similar instrument. Her proposal would make it even more tempting for more people to come here illegally to get the $5000 per child reward. For the sake of simplicity, let's assume that there are only 12 million illegals. If we also assume that the average birth rate from the US Census Bureau of 14.1 per 1000 applies (it is probably higher than this) we have 168000 new US citizens born every year to parents who are criminals. Hillary is thus proposing to spend $840,000,000 annually for the baby shower. Plus these children then have all of the rights and privileges of being an American. This horrible idea could not even be funded for legal residents of this country. The fact that illegal offspring would benefit is even more galling. Fortunately, most will probably never see the $5000 or the amount that is is supposed to become. The whole program will just be another "trust fund" like Social Security that greedy, disingenuous, self-serving politicians can use to buy more votes.
I believe that both Democrats and Republicans are spineless when it comes to this issue. The Democrats are hoping to convert all of the illegals into loyal Democrats beholding to the government that supports them. I was especially galled by the Democratic candidates who participated in the Spanish language debate. This is the ultimate expression of political pandering. Likewise, the Republicans like the lower priced labor that is available when they look the other way at this violation of US law and national sovereignty. The simple fact that the pandering politicians are overlooking is that a country without borders is no longer a country.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Tolerance and Blasphemy
Miller Lite is no longer my beer of choice. I won't be pouring any down the drain in protest as that money has already been spent. However, it will no longer be what I order when I drop by my favorite watering hole for a "cold one". This is not because I think that there are better tasting beers on the market (I do). Nor or is it because I have reached my goal weight and now feel that I can drink regular beer. It is because I am disgusted with the Miller Brewing Company's sponsorship of a gay festival in San Francisco. It is not because they sponsored the event per se. I am sure that gays drink Miller Lite too and I believe in the freedom to choose and to express yourself. But, I also believe that enough is enough and I am tired of individuals and now corporations pandering to the extreme left while denigrating anything that has the faintest hint of Judeo-Christian ethics or morals.
The event of which I speak is the Folsom Street Fair, annual gay pride event that brings a halt to the streets of San Francisco. This city sanctioned event is a fantastic excuse for San Franciso's finest to join with other like-minded individuals to flaunt activities which should best be kept behind closed doors. Incidently, this is the same city that would not allow the United States Marine Corps to film a commercial on their streets becuase of the message it might convey. I guess the USMC is less desireable than men wearing women's clothes and engaging in public sex acts.
I am not a prude by any measure. I believe that if consenting adults wish to engage in certain activities they should be free to do so as long as they don't foist it on others. Personally, I would not consider gaining carnal knowledge in public. I believe thatt is a private matter between individuals, not a spectator sport. Is that not the mantra of the activists? I don't wish to "force my morality" on others. However, I would appreciate the same courtesy. I do believe that we all will answer for our actions in the end. If anyone thinks that I am foolish or wrong that's fine with me. Eat drink and be merry if that is your thing. But, please extend the same courtesy to me and refrain from forcing your morality on the rest of us.
Back to my reasoning for removing Miller Lite from my drink menu. The organizers of this event were not content to enjoy their decadence with the full blessing of the City of San Francisco. No, they needed to take a shot at Christians by promoting the event with a perverted homage to DaVinci's "Last Supper." I don't necessarily believe that their is anything special about the painting. But, it does provide imagery and a backdrop for the blasphemous statement that the event organizers wished to make. They certainly succeeded. There is absolutely no doubt of the contempt in which that segment of the gay community holds Christianity in general and Jesus in particular.
It is one thing to be tolerant. It is another to be affirming. It is completely another to embrace blasphemy. Fortunately for the organizers and participants, Christians believe in turning the other cheek and letting everyone answer for themselves in the final reckoning. Christians believe that God deals with blasphemers. I can only imagine the potential carnage in San Francisco and at Miller Breweries all over the country if the target for homosexual derision would have been something or someone venerated by Islam.
Where is the liberal outrage that arises any time that Muslims might be offended? I am sure that it will never appear. I am certainly not going to hold my breath. I will however be withholding my money from the Miller Brewing Company who is now trying to distance themselves a little from the offensive ad. The Miller High Life and Miller Lite logos were proudly displayed on the sponsorship page at the time of this writing. If they are taken down, I will post the screen shot.
See for yourself:
http://folsomstreetfair.org/fair-sponsors.php
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Legal Ethics -
Columbia University is not alone in its love of free perverse speech. Hofstra University Law School is sponsoring a "Legal Ethics" Conference entitled "Lawyering at the Edge: Unpopular Clients, Difficult Cases, Zealous Advocates" Among the luminaries pontificating on legal ethics will be Lynne Stewart, best known for her conviction for providing material support for terrorists. She was sentenced to 28 months for the ethical transmission of terrorism orders from her client, sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was sentenced to life in prison for plotting to blow up five New York landmarks and assassinate Egypt's president. She was automatically disbarred for this conviction and she considers herself a martyr. I am not a lawyer. However I think I know what it means to be an accessory to a crime. Frankly, I see nothing but a lack of ethics in her case.
Every defendant regardless of crime is entitled to adequate legal representation. But, an attorney is only representing and acting on behalf of their client before the courts of which they are sworn officers. They do not have a responsibility or right to commit or even sanction further criminal acts on behalf of their client.
This is example of behavior that causes me to hold lawyers in general with such contempt. Her behavior was as ethical as Hitler's was humanitarian. Yet, she is hailed as an expert on legal ethics. Perhaps she should go and spend some time with sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman's associates and see how well she fares. Better yet, maybe she could just strap on some plastic explosives for the cause if she feels so strongly.
http://www.hofstra.edu/Home/News/PressReleases/091807_ethicsconference.html
Every defendant regardless of crime is entitled to adequate legal representation. But, an attorney is only representing and acting on behalf of their client before the courts of which they are sworn officers. They do not have a responsibility or right to commit or even sanction further criminal acts on behalf of their client.
This is example of behavior that causes me to hold lawyers in general with such contempt. Her behavior was as ethical as Hitler's was humanitarian. Yet, she is hailed as an expert on legal ethics. Perhaps she should go and spend some time with sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman's associates and see how well she fares. Better yet, maybe she could just strap on some plastic explosives for the cause if she feels so strongly.
http://www.hofstra.edu/Home/News/PressReleases/091807_ethicsconference.html
Why Earthquakes and Coastal Loss May Not Be So Bad
San Francisco, the epicenter of all things that define the land of fruits and nuts has finally said "no" to group that wanted to film on the streets. San Francisco, sanctuary city for anyone who violates America's borders, and proud host to countless public displays of activities that belong behind closed doors has finally said enough is enough. After unsuccessfully attempting to ban an aerial demonstration by the US Navy's Blue Angels, San Franciso has once again shown contempt for the United States Military. The Silent Drill Platoon of the United States Marine Corps was barred from filming a segment of their new commercial on the streets of San Francisco. Ironically, filming was on September 11.
The USMC exemplifies the best of our country and is one of the few institutions that hold true to our nation's heritage. It would be easy to say that San Francisco should be ashamed of itself. But that is the problem, they have no shame. It would consume too much space here to go down the list of things that San Francisco has openly supported and welcomed. Unfortunately, the US Marines are not on the list. It seems that the only criteria that causes a group not to be welcomed to the city is that the group represents some form of decency, honor, or values.
The Marines can't film on the streets of San Francisco. But I bet that when the zoophiles want a parade, a convention or even to film a documentary/how-to video, San Francisco will be welcoming them with open arms.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298039,00.html
The USMC exemplifies the best of our country and is one of the few institutions that hold true to our nation's heritage. It would be easy to say that San Francisco should be ashamed of itself. But that is the problem, they have no shame. It would consume too much space here to go down the list of things that San Francisco has openly supported and welcomed. Unfortunately, the US Marines are not on the list. It seems that the only criteria that causes a group not to be welcomed to the city is that the group represents some form of decency, honor, or values.
The Marines can't film on the streets of San Francisco. But I bet that when the zoophiles want a parade, a convention or even to film a documentary/how-to video, San Francisco will be welcoming them with open arms.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298039,00.html
Friday, September 21, 2007
Dumb and Dumber
Today, an MIT sophomore was arrested for allegedly wearing a fake bomb inside the terminal at Logan Airport. It consisted of a circuit board, wires and Play-Doh. How stupid can this girl be? Miss Teen South Carolina seems like a genius next to this electrical and computer engineering major. The prankster is a young woman from Hawaii.
Her explanation for the device was to call it art. Art my arse! I had hoped when I first read the story that she was merely mentally ill with a death wish. While this may still be the case, I would venture to say that the cold hard reality is the that she is just beyond stupid. In this climate, how could anyone possibly think that such an act would have anything that resembles a good outcome? She could very easily and quite appropriately have been shot and killed. Although, I would guess that either she did not consider that possibility or she really is mentally ill. I am beginning to wonder if anyone takes the times that we are in seriously. At first glance, it seems that this young woman has no clue as to how serious the threat of terrorism is. I suppose that she could just be a victim of her own upbringing. Or maybe she is just another ignorant, idealistic college student whose brain has been filled with liberal pablum, spoon-fed to her by Bush and US hating professors. You can't even walk onto an airplane with knitting needles, nail files or a screwdriver. Yet, she thought it would be OK to walk into an airport with an artistic rendition of a bomb!
She should be held accountable for her stupid and reckless actions. She should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. She implied that she had a bomb by her actions and appearances. The fact that it was not a bomb is meaningless. If a person implies that they have a weapon in the commission of a crime, the fact that they did not actually have one has no bearing. It is the threat of deadly force that is considered. Certainly she caused panic and acted in a threatening manner while pretending to have a bomb. She should be treated the same way as anyone else who threatens to do harm with explosives.
I do have to wonder if the unbridled liberalism that pervades college campuses added to her stupidity. On many campuses it is quite likely that she will be hailed as a hero for her brilliant method-acting performance as a would be suicide bomber. I can envision a Hollywood movie already in the works. She was profiled and singled out for wearing a fake bomb. Her freedom of expression was violated as she was not able to proudly display her artwork extolling the virtues of hand-crafted explosive devices.
She might even get to speak at Columbia University eventually. Columbia would roll out the red carpet for sure. After all, they are welcoming Mahamoud Ahmadinejad as a guest speaker but cancelled a speech by one of the Minutemen. I imagine that Ann Coulter would not be welcomed as a dissenting voice either. Funny how liberals talk about the free exchange of ideas , as long as they come from the left.
Don't forget the kid who was expelled from grade school for a drawing that resembled a gun.
I guess that was a bit of a rambling tangent. But, this is my opinion.
Her explanation for the device was to call it art. Art my arse! I had hoped when I first read the story that she was merely mentally ill with a death wish. While this may still be the case, I would venture to say that the cold hard reality is the that she is just beyond stupid. In this climate, how could anyone possibly think that such an act would have anything that resembles a good outcome? She could very easily and quite appropriately have been shot and killed. Although, I would guess that either she did not consider that possibility or she really is mentally ill. I am beginning to wonder if anyone takes the times that we are in seriously. At first glance, it seems that this young woman has no clue as to how serious the threat of terrorism is. I suppose that she could just be a victim of her own upbringing. Or maybe she is just another ignorant, idealistic college student whose brain has been filled with liberal pablum, spoon-fed to her by Bush and US hating professors. You can't even walk onto an airplane with knitting needles, nail files or a screwdriver. Yet, she thought it would be OK to walk into an airport with an artistic rendition of a bomb!
She should be held accountable for her stupid and reckless actions. She should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. She implied that she had a bomb by her actions and appearances. The fact that it was not a bomb is meaningless. If a person implies that they have a weapon in the commission of a crime, the fact that they did not actually have one has no bearing. It is the threat of deadly force that is considered. Certainly she caused panic and acted in a threatening manner while pretending to have a bomb. She should be treated the same way as anyone else who threatens to do harm with explosives.
I do have to wonder if the unbridled liberalism that pervades college campuses added to her stupidity. On many campuses it is quite likely that she will be hailed as a hero for her brilliant method-acting performance as a would be suicide bomber. I can envision a Hollywood movie already in the works. She was profiled and singled out for wearing a fake bomb. Her freedom of expression was violated as she was not able to proudly display her artwork extolling the virtues of hand-crafted explosive devices.
She might even get to speak at Columbia University eventually. Columbia would roll out the red carpet for sure. After all, they are welcoming Mahamoud Ahmadinejad as a guest speaker but cancelled a speech by one of the Minutemen. I imagine that Ann Coulter would not be welcomed as a dissenting voice either. Funny how liberals talk about the free exchange of ideas , as long as they come from the left.
Don't forget the kid who was expelled from grade school for a drawing that resembled a gun.
I guess that was a bit of a rambling tangent. But, this is my opinion.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Why Can't We Be Friends?
The future Nobel Peace Prize winner, Mahmoud Ahmandinejad, is coming to America and he wants to visit Ground Zero to lay a wreath. I may be wrong in thinking that he would actually be commemorating the bravery of the hijackers who destroyed the towers. But it seems that even Hillary Clinton is opposed to such a visit, for the moment. I wonder if a future President Clinton would feel the same way. Liberals of her ilk use the most vitriolic references to Americans, including President Bush. Yet, most of the time, they embrace and only speak in the most glowing terms of people such as Ahmandinejad, Assad, and others who are bent upon the destruction of Western Civilization. She and other liberals have said that they do not support his visit to Ground Zero. However, they do not assign any labels to him other than "President". A term that they rarely even use to describe George Bush. In President Bush's case, it is more often used in disgust with a certain distaste. They show more respect for Mahmoud than George. Nice.
No one seems to remember that Ahmandinejad was involved in the taking of hostages during the Carter administration. That fact alone should bar him from entering the United States. His presence only underscores the moral bankruptcy and general hatred of the United States that permeates the United Nations. Granted, he is really only a figurehead, a puppet that dances at the whim of the Supreme Leader of Iran who happens to be a radical Islamic cleric. Liberals who decry anything that even smells like a religious conviction of anyone in the United States, seem to have no difficulty at all accepting a nuclear armed theocracy whose answer to religious dissent is death. This is the same mindset that inspired those noble martyrs to strike the heart of capitalism and western decadence on September 11, 2001. If a martyred hijacker gets greeted by 70 virgins, how many would Mahmoud get if he launched a nuke into Tel-Aviv or gave one to a martyr to hand deliver somewhere in the heart of the Great Satan?
Welcome to New York Mahmoud! I am sure you will feel a sense of pride when you step onto the streets of New York.
No one seems to remember that Ahmandinejad was involved in the taking of hostages during the Carter administration. That fact alone should bar him from entering the United States. His presence only underscores the moral bankruptcy and general hatred of the United States that permeates the United Nations. Granted, he is really only a figurehead, a puppet that dances at the whim of the Supreme Leader of Iran who happens to be a radical Islamic cleric. Liberals who decry anything that even smells like a religious conviction of anyone in the United States, seem to have no difficulty at all accepting a nuclear armed theocracy whose answer to religious dissent is death. This is the same mindset that inspired those noble martyrs to strike the heart of capitalism and western decadence on September 11, 2001. If a martyred hijacker gets greeted by 70 virgins, how many would Mahmoud get if he launched a nuke into Tel-Aviv or gave one to a martyr to hand deliver somewhere in the heart of the Great Satan?
Welcome to New York Mahmoud! I am sure you will feel a sense of pride when you step onto the streets of New York.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Saddam's Weapons
Everyone whines and cries that we have never found WMD in Iraq. One fact that has been overlooked is that Saddam had many months before the invasion to move them. During the time leading up to the invasion, there was a great deal of traffic between Syria and Iraq. Now we have a news story that reports an accident with a chemical warhead taking place in Syria. If Syria had a chemical weapons program, it would have been a great place to move the Iraqi inventory whle the fuss "blew over". With Saddam dead, they would not even have to give them back. What a deal! This is especially great for the peace promoting president of Iran who is buddies with the Syrian president. I can only imagine the Israeli response to a chemically tipped SCUD.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411428847&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411428847&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Frivolous Lawsuits
In an effort to protect the rights of people to file frivolous lawsuits, Nebraska State Senator Ernie Chambers has decided to file the most frivolous of lawsuits against God. In his claim, the Honorable Senator Chambers taunts, blasphemes and even goes so far as to say "Come out come out wherever you are." If his intention is to be frivolous, he certainly is accomplishing his goal. However, I wonder if he knows the third one about vain use of the Divine Name. I can only wonder about the response if the Defendant were to appear at the hearing.
It is a good thing that the Honorable Senator is in a country whose legal system is based upon Judeo-Christian tradition rather than an Islamic one where "agents" of the defendant would act upon behalf of the defendant and behead the plaintiff. It is also interesting to note the political affiliation of the Honorable Senator Ernie Chambers (D) from Nebraska.
Many people may get a chuckle or two at the expense of the Honorable Senator. Yet, I dare say I know who will be getting the last laugh. The only question in my mind is will it be sooner or later?
Read the legal filing:
http://www.kptm.com/Global/link.asp?L=267382&nav=menu606_1
It is a good thing that the Honorable Senator is in a country whose legal system is based upon Judeo-Christian tradition rather than an Islamic one where "agents" of the defendant would act upon behalf of the defendant and behead the plaintiff. It is also interesting to note the political affiliation of the Honorable Senator Ernie Chambers (D) from Nebraska.
Many people may get a chuckle or two at the expense of the Honorable Senator. Yet, I dare say I know who will be getting the last laugh. The only question in my mind is will it be sooner or later?
Read the legal filing:
http://www.kptm.com/Global/link.asp?L=267382&nav=menu606_1
***NEWS FLASH*** Russia and China are Spying on US
In an earth shattering revelation (Bush concocted lie) to Congress, the National Intelligence Director identified Russia and China as two countries that are aggressively spying on the United States! How can this possibly be true? The Soviet Union has been dismantled and Russia is our friend and China is one of our largest trading partners, supplying us with all of the cheap goods that we and our pets can consume.
It is obvious to anyone with half a brain, such as the majority of Congressional Democrats, that this is just another scare tactic of the Bush administration to line the pockets of Haliburton and other members of the military-industrial complex who stand to profit from more surveillance.
Russia and China are working toward world peace and international unity. They are leading the way in guiding Iran and North Korea into the League of Civilized Nations. There are also at the forefront of human rights, promising a jobs and health care for every comrade, err citizen. Free speech is another area where these countries excel. Why would they possibly want to spy on the United States? We are reviled by most of the world and have nothing to offer except our capitalistic decadence, blood lust, and insatiable thirst for oil money? The world would be a much better place without the United States heating up the globe with hydrocarbons, rendering numerous species extinct, and generally messing up the planet.
I am sure that the Democrats who know the truth about the evils of the United States of America will continue to fight the forces of evil and do their best to see that the United States of America becomes more like Russia, China, and the rest of the world. Perhaps one day we might even reach the status of the French.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297132,00.html
It is obvious to anyone with half a brain, such as the majority of Congressional Democrats, that this is just another scare tactic of the Bush administration to line the pockets of Haliburton and other members of the military-industrial complex who stand to profit from more surveillance.
Russia and China are working toward world peace and international unity. They are leading the way in guiding Iran and North Korea into the League of Civilized Nations. There are also at the forefront of human rights, promising a jobs and health care for every comrade, err citizen. Free speech is another area where these countries excel. Why would they possibly want to spy on the United States? We are reviled by most of the world and have nothing to offer except our capitalistic decadence, blood lust, and insatiable thirst for oil money? The world would be a much better place without the United States heating up the globe with hydrocarbons, rendering numerous species extinct, and generally messing up the planet.
I am sure that the Democrats who know the truth about the evils of the United States of America will continue to fight the forces of evil and do their best to see that the United States of America becomes more like Russia, China, and the rest of the world. Perhaps one day we might even reach the status of the French.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297132,00.html
Monday, September 17, 2007
Viva La France
France, the country that brought us Marcel Marceau, the Maginot Line, and nearly 400 varieties of cheese, continues to create new forms of ineffective diplomacy. First, the newly elected and ostensibly pro-American president lays out a hard line toward Iran and their continued pursuit of nuclear weapons. Now the French Prime Minister is saying that France needs to prepare for the possibility of war with Iran. Just what exactly does that mean? Stockpiling Camenbert? Stashing all of the good wine in underground bunkers?
History is the best teacher and France has taught Iran that there is absolutely no possibility that they would be prepared to engage in any type of war, other than a war of words with anyone. France and the UN have cried wolf and made idle threats for so long that no one takes either of them seriously. This coupled with Germany's outright refusal to consider the possibility of war with Iran should provide sufficient comfort to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and anyone else that wants to build a nuclear weapon.
Ahmadinejad rests easily comforted by the response to the invasion of Iraq. He must put his head down on his pillow each night and thank President Bush for removing Saddam Hussein from power (something that Iran did not accomplish during its war with Iraq), and for exposing the lack of intestinal fortitude of the EU and the American public which were merely reminders of the pre-WWII appeasement of Hitler.
Unfortunately, things are going to get worse before they get better. Worse for free western civilization and better for the Islamic fascists that seek its destruction.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL1791152720070917?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&pageNumber=1
History is the best teacher and France has taught Iran that there is absolutely no possibility that they would be prepared to engage in any type of war, other than a war of words with anyone. France and the UN have cried wolf and made idle threats for so long that no one takes either of them seriously. This coupled with Germany's outright refusal to consider the possibility of war with Iran should provide sufficient comfort to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and anyone else that wants to build a nuclear weapon.
Ahmadinejad rests easily comforted by the response to the invasion of Iraq. He must put his head down on his pillow each night and thank President Bush for removing Saddam Hussein from power (something that Iran did not accomplish during its war with Iraq), and for exposing the lack of intestinal fortitude of the EU and the American public which were merely reminders of the pre-WWII appeasement of Hitler.
Unfortunately, things are going to get worse before they get better. Worse for free western civilization and better for the Islamic fascists that seek its destruction.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL1791152720070917?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&pageNumber=1
Thursday, September 13, 2007
All the News that is Fit to Print
You have to love the New York Times, the bastion of Truth, Justice, the American Way and the First Amendment. In a fine example of journalistic integrity, they provided MoveOn.org a generous discount on a full page age that defamed the character of the US Commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus before he testified to Congress. This article was then used by hostile members of the Congress to call into question the integrity of the General during said hearing.
It seems obvious to me that this might indicate a slight bias to the left. Of course, I am certain that any self-respecting liberal would deny this and in fact pontificate on the fairness and in fact the courage shown by the paper in "printing the truth." Paid advertising by liberal special-interest groups are truth and paid advertising by anyone else is lies or at best and opinion. I wonder what would be said if one of Rupert Murdoch's outlets gave a similar discount to a conservative organization. I bet the outcry would be deafening. I also believe that the calls for a boycott and Senate investigation would follow immediately.
The fundamental truth is that liberals can't help but vilify the military. It is what they do best. While I think that mistakes have been made in the execution of the war in Iraq, I attribute most of this to the unpredictability of war and the law of unintended consequences, not some grand conspiracy of Bush, Cheney and Haliburton.
While it is perfectly acceptable to question the value of a war, it is entirely unacceptable to besmirch the integrity of the honorable men and women who are serving our country and are doing their best to accomplish their mission and survive. One of the first things that you learn in logic is the invalidity of ad hominem arguments. Ad hominem is the only tool to use when you have nothing better. It is obvious that this is the best that MoveOn. org and others can do when arguing against the war. MoveOn.org certainly has the right to run whatever ad they choose and the New York Times can charge whatever price for they wish for said ad. But, the hypocrisy should be noted. The NYT for the liberal discount they provided and to MoveOn.org for their true message. Liberals constantly say "We support the troops." The truth is that they do not. They pay lip-service to supporting the armed forces but in fact they despise them and everything for which they stand. Liberals learned a lesson from the Vietnam era, don't call the troops "babykillers" as that does not sit well with the majority of people. But, they are doing the same thing albeit with a better spin.
I do believe that it is possible to support the troops and perhaps not support the war. However, I have not yet seen an example that manages to accomplish that goal. What I do see is every effort to protest the war emboldens the people who are fighting against our troops and thus making their jobs more difficult. This in turn acts to demoralize the very same people that MoveOn.org and other profess to be supporting. With friends like that, who needs enemies?
http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09132007/news/nationalnews/times_gives_lefties_a_hefty_di.htm
It seems obvious to me that this might indicate a slight bias to the left. Of course, I am certain that any self-respecting liberal would deny this and in fact pontificate on the fairness and in fact the courage shown by the paper in "printing the truth." Paid advertising by liberal special-interest groups are truth and paid advertising by anyone else is lies or at best and opinion. I wonder what would be said if one of Rupert Murdoch's outlets gave a similar discount to a conservative organization. I bet the outcry would be deafening. I also believe that the calls for a boycott and Senate investigation would follow immediately.
The fundamental truth is that liberals can't help but vilify the military. It is what they do best. While I think that mistakes have been made in the execution of the war in Iraq, I attribute most of this to the unpredictability of war and the law of unintended consequences, not some grand conspiracy of Bush, Cheney and Haliburton.
While it is perfectly acceptable to question the value of a war, it is entirely unacceptable to besmirch the integrity of the honorable men and women who are serving our country and are doing their best to accomplish their mission and survive. One of the first things that you learn in logic is the invalidity of ad hominem arguments. Ad hominem is the only tool to use when you have nothing better. It is obvious that this is the best that MoveOn. org and others can do when arguing against the war. MoveOn.org certainly has the right to run whatever ad they choose and the New York Times can charge whatever price for they wish for said ad. But, the hypocrisy should be noted. The NYT for the liberal discount they provided and to MoveOn.org for their true message. Liberals constantly say "We support the troops." The truth is that they do not. They pay lip-service to supporting the armed forces but in fact they despise them and everything for which they stand. Liberals learned a lesson from the Vietnam era, don't call the troops "babykillers" as that does not sit well with the majority of people. But, they are doing the same thing albeit with a better spin.
I do believe that it is possible to support the troops and perhaps not support the war. However, I have not yet seen an example that manages to accomplish that goal. What I do see is every effort to protest the war emboldens the people who are fighting against our troops and thus making their jobs more difficult. This in turn acts to demoralize the very same people that MoveOn.org and other profess to be supporting. With friends like that, who needs enemies?
http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/print.php?url=http://www.nypost.com/seven/09132007/news/nationalnews/times_gives_lefties_a_hefty_di.htm
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Mystery of the Nuclear Warheads
It seems that the US Air Force "lost track" of a few W80-1 nuclear warheads for a few hours the other day. Apparently, five nuclear warheads were left on some cruise missiles that were being transported to Louisiana to be decommissioned.
While it concerns me that such an error could occur, I believe that the Air Force is doing what is necessary to determine the cause of the mistake and will develop an appropriate corrective action. What concerns me more is the fact that there are Air Force Officers that are willing to speak anonymously about this incident. If they were to be named, I imagine there would be a court martial or two. I am fully supportive of whistle blowers in certain circumstances. However, I do not believe that this situation justifies the officers going public with what is most likely classified material. The public has a right to know unless our enemies do not have a right to know.
Classified information has flowed much too freely in the past few years with little or no consequences other than people who should not know certain things learning those things. I can't help but think of satellite phones etc. This is just another example that should be made an example. It used to be that only politicians and other lower life forms leaked classified information to the press. Now it seems that it has spread to commissioned officers. How sad indeed.
http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070904/NEWS01/70904040
While it concerns me that such an error could occur, I believe that the Air Force is doing what is necessary to determine the cause of the mistake and will develop an appropriate corrective action. What concerns me more is the fact that there are Air Force Officers that are willing to speak anonymously about this incident. If they were to be named, I imagine there would be a court martial or two. I am fully supportive of whistle blowers in certain circumstances. However, I do not believe that this situation justifies the officers going public with what is most likely classified material. The public has a right to know unless our enemies do not have a right to know.
Classified information has flowed much too freely in the past few years with little or no consequences other than people who should not know certain things learning those things. I can't help but think of satellite phones etc. This is just another example that should be made an example. It used to be that only politicians and other lower life forms leaked classified information to the press. Now it seems that it has spread to commissioned officers. How sad indeed.
http://www.thetowntalk.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070904/NEWS01/70904040
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Chinese Friends
Surprise,surprise, surprise! Our Chinese friends have hacked into DoD computers. What a shocker! Everyone is up in arms about lead paint, and defective toys. But does anyone see the real danger in China, the PLA? The PLA (People's Liberation Army) is not quite a bunch of democracy loving guys seeking to liberate the people from communist oppression. It is in fact the military arm of the Communist Party. The same folks who brought us Tienanmen Square.
The US Government continues to downplay the threat that COMMUNIST China poses to the United States and the rest of the free world. We hear about sub-standard health and safety standards. But, the real threat is found in the PLA. This latest incident will be overlooked by most outlets, downplayed by the rest. Yet, this threat is very real. The United States security is based on the premise that we are technologically superior to our enemies. In 2006, China fired high powered lasers designed to knock out our satellites. This was near the time that our own Congress denied funding for a satellite and star tracking program that had the potential to be used for ASAT purposes. The funds were reinstated only after assurances that the system would not be used for ASAT.
Now we have the PLA actively attacking our DoD computer networks. But, they are our friends, or at least we want them to be so we won't do anything to upset them. I wonder if anybody in the US has read Sun Tzu. Everyone is so afraid of the stereotypical "hacker" sitting in his dorm room with stale pizza and soda that they real threat goes unnoticed. The PLA soldier sitting in front of a computer screen at a Chinese military base, with hundreds of his comrades.
Other questions that have China as the answer:
1) Who is the newest country to build nuclear submarines armed with nuclear missiles?
2) Who is building an aircraft carrier?
3) Who is engaged in massive espionage against US high-tech and military companies?
4) Who holds large quantities of American government debt?
WAKE UP America! China is not our friend. We once had a great president who made decisions based upon the ideas of "trust but verify" and "peace through strength". That worked pretty well. Before him it was "walk softly but carry a big stick." Reagan and Roosevelt are well represented by the ships that bear their names. Unfortunately, the country that they loved is squandering their legacy and becoming more like France before WWII.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9dba9ba2-5a3b-11dc-9bcd-0000779fd2ac.html
The US Government continues to downplay the threat that COMMUNIST China poses to the United States and the rest of the free world. We hear about sub-standard health and safety standards. But, the real threat is found in the PLA. This latest incident will be overlooked by most outlets, downplayed by the rest. Yet, this threat is very real. The United States security is based on the premise that we are technologically superior to our enemies. In 2006, China fired high powered lasers designed to knock out our satellites. This was near the time that our own Congress denied funding for a satellite and star tracking program that had the potential to be used for ASAT purposes. The funds were reinstated only after assurances that the system would not be used for ASAT.
Now we have the PLA actively attacking our DoD computer networks. But, they are our friends, or at least we want them to be so we won't do anything to upset them. I wonder if anybody in the US has read Sun Tzu. Everyone is so afraid of the stereotypical "hacker" sitting in his dorm room with stale pizza and soda that they real threat goes unnoticed. The PLA soldier sitting in front of a computer screen at a Chinese military base, with hundreds of his comrades.
Other questions that have China as the answer:
1) Who is the newest country to build nuclear submarines armed with nuclear missiles?
2) Who is building an aircraft carrier?
3) Who is engaged in massive espionage against US high-tech and military companies?
4) Who holds large quantities of American government debt?
WAKE UP America! China is not our friend. We once had a great president who made decisions based upon the ideas of "trust but verify" and "peace through strength". That worked pretty well. Before him it was "walk softly but carry a big stick." Reagan and Roosevelt are well represented by the ships that bear their names. Unfortunately, the country that they loved is squandering their legacy and becoming more like France before WWII.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9dba9ba2-5a3b-11dc-9bcd-0000779fd2ac.html
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Immigration
A Mexican teenager who is in the US illegally and is refusing treatment for tuberculosis has been put in jail. He was threatening to go back to Mexico. Health officials had been worried that he could expose more people to the disease. Instead, he faces deportation a process which could take several months and since he is a minor the process is further complicated. Four people who live with him (immigration status not mentioned) also tested positive for tuberculosis. How many more people will test positive because of this individual? All of the people who work and reside in the jail are now potentially exposed to this individual. This is a case where he should be forced to avail himself of the free health care that so many of his ilk enjoy.
Since he has such a great respect for our laws I am sure that he would willingly comply with any request to limit his travel and movement to protect others. Just as Andrew Speaker, the infected lawyer did earlier this year.
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Aug30/0,4670,TuberculosisYouth,00.html
Since he has such a great respect for our laws I am sure that he would willingly comply with any request to limit his travel and movement to protect others. Just as Andrew Speaker, the infected lawyer did earlier this year.
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Aug30/0,4670,TuberculosisYouth,00.html
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
.7 is the new 10
Maybe I am showing my age. But, I remember when 10 was the perfect number. Who can forget Bo Derek, cornrows and a macrame bikini? I digress. It seems that researchers in Britain have quantified the perfect body and they say that the magic number is .7. This number describes the hip to waist ratio. It seems that Jessica Alba possesses the magic number. Who am I to argue with PhD mathematicians?
This is also why it pays to read the British press.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/25/nwiggle125.xml
This is also why it pays to read the British press.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/25/nwiggle125.xml
Justice
Every once in a while there is a glimmer of hope in the world. This one occurred in Texas not surprisingly. It seems that a man took a mother and child hostage, handcuffed the mother and then decided it would be a good thing to slit the 3 year-old child's throat. Police officers arrived and found the mother handcuffed and covered in blood. The guy decided that it would be a good idea to charge the police with his knife, (Did he ever see Indiana Jones?) before being shot and killed by his next intended victims. The child is in critical condition and the nut job is still dead. Case closed.
http://www.myfoxaustin.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=4188274&version=12&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1
http://www.myfoxaustin.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=4188274&version=12&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Shocked Muslim World
The last of the animals from Abu Ghraib was convicted today. By reading the news accounts one would think that the most heinous crimes against humanity were being punished. In the lead in to the article, the AP writer refers to the incident that "shocked the Muslim world." Did anyone refer to the televised beheadings of innocent people by Muslim extremists as "shocking the civilized world?" Did they refer to the suicide bombers as "shocking the Jewish world", or "shocking the Christian world?"
Just a thought, Michael Vick will more than likely do less time than any of the military personnel from Abu Grahib. Justice ...
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Aug28/0,4670,AbuGhraibJordan,00.html
Just a thought, Michael Vick will more than likely do less time than any of the military personnel from Abu Grahib. Justice ...
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Aug28/0,4670,AbuGhraibJordan,00.html
Our Justice System is a Joke,- Part III
Only in America can a self-proclaimed pedophile get off on a technicality.
Only in America can an illegal alien be released on parole for the crime of child rape only to rape and murder again.
Only in America can you spend eighteen months in prison for illegal dog-fighting.
Only in America can a picture of a gun be considered threatening.
Only in America can you spend six months in jail for fixing up your property.
Where is the sense of proportion?
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/9406861.html
Only in America can an illegal alien be released on parole for the crime of child rape only to rape and murder again.
Only in America can you spend eighteen months in prison for illegal dog-fighting.
Only in America can a picture of a gun be considered threatening.
Only in America can you spend six months in jail for fixing up your property.
Where is the sense of proportion?
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/articles/9406861.html
A Viagra a Day
You have heard the story about an apple a day. Now there is research that shows that taking a Viagra each day can cure ED and more importantly, improve overall cardiovascular health. It is a good thing that this can be tied to overall cardiovascular health since it is unlikely that many prescription plans would be willing to pony up to the cost of one pill a day. However, maybe one day this stuff will be right along side the aspirin so that you can take one of each to prevent heart attacks and have a healthy circulatory system.
Also, it seems that riding a bike is bad for yor health. But, the wonder drug helps with that as well. Saddle up!
http://www.empowereddoctor.com/story_533.html
Also, it seems that riding a bike is bad for yor health. But, the wonder drug helps with that as well. Saddle up!
http://www.empowereddoctor.com/story_533.html
Monday, August 27, 2007
Journalistic Integrity - an Oxymoron
We can see political cartoons poking fun at everything and everyone. Jesus and Christians are especially favorite targets . Perhaps it is because they don't fight back. But, if anyone dares to poke fun at Islamic fundamentalists, Bad dog! One has to love the liberal media. So much for free speech, freedom of expression, journalistic integrity, etc.
I guess terrorism works.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294779,00.html
The offending strip
I guess terrorism works.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294779,00.html
The offending strip
Questions
I had an experience the other day that made me ask myself a few simple questions. I went to renew my automobile license tags. When my number was called, I realized the I did not have my current insurance cards with me. Having recently moved near the time the updated cards were sent, I had not yet received them. The clerk informed me that without the card I could not renew the license tag for my automobile.
I am a average, law-abiding citizen aside from the occasional speed deviations. However, I am now driving illegally until I get my new cards in the mail, and then renew my tags and get a new sticker. Because I am a law-abiding citizen, this actually matters to me and I will now need to take time out of my schedule to expedite the new cards and new tags. But, in the mean time, I still need to drive to work every day. By doing so, I am taking a risk of being caught and cited for driving without current tags and for not having an updated insurance card. Keep in mind that my insurance is paid in full and everything is up to date. I just don't have a current card that attests to this fact. If I do get pulled over, the price will be high I am certain. If I do get stopped for not having the right color tag on my vehicle, the police will then have the opportunity to run my plates, my driver's license and find out everything about me as it pertains to my legal status and record. If I had an outstanding warrant, they could legally take me into custody and I would be required to pay whatever penalty was due.
However, if I were an illegal alien pulled over for not having a tag, I would be issued a ticket and sent on my way. Even though, I am guilty of violating the borders of the United States and I do not belong here. By virtue of the fact that I am here illegally, I am showing my contempt for the law. Yet, in this case the law turns a blind eye. This made me think of another question, do illegals have insurance and registration tags for their cars? If so, how did they get them? If not, how are they driving? The logical conclusion is that the law only applies if you respect the law. If you don't then it must not apply. Adding insult to injury is the realization that the same law that they blatantly disregard then enables them to continue breaking the law and actually be rewarded for their crimes i.e. free health care, free education, free citizenship for their illegal offspring and then ultimately a free ticket to stay in the US. All of this is the reward for choosing to break the law.
With all of this incentive to violate the law, what is the incentive to keep it? I can save a lot of money if I just don't pay for the new tags. If I choose to disobey the law about paying taxes, I could save even more. If I show my contempt for that law will they give me a pass? So much for the impartiality and blindness of the law.
I am a average, law-abiding citizen aside from the occasional speed deviations. However, I am now driving illegally until I get my new cards in the mail, and then renew my tags and get a new sticker. Because I am a law-abiding citizen, this actually matters to me and I will now need to take time out of my schedule to expedite the new cards and new tags. But, in the mean time, I still need to drive to work every day. By doing so, I am taking a risk of being caught and cited for driving without current tags and for not having an updated insurance card. Keep in mind that my insurance is paid in full and everything is up to date. I just don't have a current card that attests to this fact. If I do get pulled over, the price will be high I am certain. If I do get stopped for not having the right color tag on my vehicle, the police will then have the opportunity to run my plates, my driver's license and find out everything about me as it pertains to my legal status and record. If I had an outstanding warrant, they could legally take me into custody and I would be required to pay whatever penalty was due.
However, if I were an illegal alien pulled over for not having a tag, I would be issued a ticket and sent on my way. Even though, I am guilty of violating the borders of the United States and I do not belong here. By virtue of the fact that I am here illegally, I am showing my contempt for the law. Yet, in this case the law turns a blind eye. This made me think of another question, do illegals have insurance and registration tags for their cars? If so, how did they get them? If not, how are they driving? The logical conclusion is that the law only applies if you respect the law. If you don't then it must not apply. Adding insult to injury is the realization that the same law that they blatantly disregard then enables them to continue breaking the law and actually be rewarded for their crimes i.e. free health care, free education, free citizenship for their illegal offspring and then ultimately a free ticket to stay in the US. All of this is the reward for choosing to break the law.
With all of this incentive to violate the law, what is the incentive to keep it? I can save a lot of money if I just don't pay for the new tags. If I choose to disobey the law about paying taxes, I could save even more. If I show my contempt for that law will they give me a pass? So much for the impartiality and blindness of the law.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Perspective
I have been posting pictures recently with the title of Perspective. I think that perspective is something that is sadly missing in America today. Many of the posts on this blog highlight the distorted perspective that we in the United States have.
I wrote less than two days ago that Michael Vick would be hailed as a hero for conquering his demons when he was released from prison. I was wrong. He is a hero today. Yesterday R.L. White, president of the Atlanta chapter of the NAACP said, "As a society, we should aid in his rehabilitation and welcome a new Michael Vick back into the community without a permanent loss of his career in football." He went on to say, "We further ask the NFL, Falcons, and the sponsors not to permanently ban Mr. Vick from his ability to bring hours of enjoyment to fans all over this country." Mr. White went on to make excuses for Michael Vick and even alluded to the idea that Vick took the plea bargain to cut his losses, and that Vick's true innocence or guilt may never be known. I guess Mr. White believed the Michael Vick of a few weeks ago who procalimed that he looked forward to proving his innocence. If that is the case, Mr. White must also believe that Vick's buddies forced him to front the money, buy the house, abuse the dogs, and watch the matches. Poor Michael, evil buddies.
Contrast Michael Vick's treatment with that of the 13 year old who drew a picture of what school officials called a gun and was suspended for 5 days because the drawing was perceived as a threat. The suspension was later reduced to three days. Who is more of a threat to society, A man who enjoys torturing animals or a really bad artist?
Perspective indeed!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294145,00.html 13 year old
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294149,00.html Michael Vick
I wrote less than two days ago that Michael Vick would be hailed as a hero for conquering his demons when he was released from prison. I was wrong. He is a hero today. Yesterday R.L. White, president of the Atlanta chapter of the NAACP said, "As a society, we should aid in his rehabilitation and welcome a new Michael Vick back into the community without a permanent loss of his career in football." He went on to say, "We further ask the NFL, Falcons, and the sponsors not to permanently ban Mr. Vick from his ability to bring hours of enjoyment to fans all over this country." Mr. White went on to make excuses for Michael Vick and even alluded to the idea that Vick took the plea bargain to cut his losses, and that Vick's true innocence or guilt may never be known. I guess Mr. White believed the Michael Vick of a few weeks ago who procalimed that he looked forward to proving his innocence. If that is the case, Mr. White must also believe that Vick's buddies forced him to front the money, buy the house, abuse the dogs, and watch the matches. Poor Michael, evil buddies.
Contrast Michael Vick's treatment with that of the 13 year old who drew a picture of what school officials called a gun and was suspended for 5 days because the drawing was perceived as a threat. The suspension was later reduced to three days. Who is more of a threat to society, A man who enjoys torturing animals or a really bad artist?
Perspective indeed!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294145,00.html 13 year old
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294149,00.html Michael Vick
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Dead Man Walking
It is good to see the EU so concerned about life and death in the US. It is even better to see the governor of Texas telling the Europeans what he thinks about their concern. However, I would offer an alternative the Europeans. If they do not want us to execute criminals they can take them off of our hands and provide for their well being as citizens of whatever EU nation decides to keep them. Of course, they would not be allowed back and would have their US citizenship revoked. If this is not acceptable, the Texan response is fine.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070822154244.pr7nrj8e&show_article=1&catnum=3
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070822154244.pr7nrj8e&show_article=1&catnum=3
Immigration
Immigration is a hot topic these days. Ours is a nation of immigrants. It is one of the factors that makes our country great. That being said, it is sad that on one hand we have the government doing everything it can to keep illegal aliens here who for the most part are a net drain on our society in terms of the social programs and services that they absorb versus the contribution that they make. Yet, this same government does everything it can to prevent highly skilled aliens from entering and remaining in the United States.
It seems ludicrous that we should send highly skilled professionals back to their home countries after they have taken advantage of our educational system at their own expense. Yet, we do everything short of amnesty to keep unskilled aliens who drain the system. This certainly speaks volumes about the powers that be and about us as a nation that elected them.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070822165309.j2pyixvd&show_article=1&catnum=3
It seems ludicrous that we should send highly skilled professionals back to their home countries after they have taken advantage of our educational system at their own expense. Yet, we do everything short of amnesty to keep unskilled aliens who drain the system. This certainly speaks volumes about the powers that be and about us as a nation that elected them.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070822165309.j2pyixvd&show_article=1&catnum=3
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Outrage
Finally! Michael Vick cops a plea. It was inevitable that as soon as his buddies started singing he would go for the plea bargain. Way to go Michael! The rate of his U-turn was exceeded only by his hubris before his buddies rolled. I don't know the specifics of the arrangement. However, I can speculate that jail time is not the big surprise nor was it the point of focus during negotiations. If I were to hazard a guess, the big news about the plea deal will be that there will be no gambling related charges. That at least leaves the door open for him to make a triumpant return to football when he is "changed" by his time in prison. I expect much fanfare about giving him another chance because he has paid his debt. If there are no gambling charges involved, that is a real possibility. In fact, I think that it is inevitable. I know Paris Hilton was certainly changed by her penance. Michael Vick will be even more of a "hero" for enduring the ignominy of "losing it all", doing "hard time" then making a comeback. In the end, I would be willing to bet (pardon the poor taste) that he will be back playing in the NFL. Remember Mike Tyson?
This whole situation has really made me think about the American public. One might imagine that this is a story about a poor role model. Maybe it is. For me there is a much more glaring light that has been shed on us as we react to this "event."
The level of outrage toward Mr. Vick has not been seen since the "torture" of peace loving suspects at Abu Ghraib Prison where some poor defenseless men were forced to play cheerleader and form a human pyramid in their skivvies. In front of a woman no less! Once again the American Public was outraged and the press unrelenting in their condemnation. Just like their condemnation of Mr. Vick. Was anyone outraged by the beheading of innocent journalists and aid workers by the Islamic terrorists for more than five minutes?
I just can not come to grips with the lack of perspective and the lack of long-term memory of the American people and the so-called journalists who "seek the truth". What Michael Vick did was reprehensible, disgusting, uncivilized, and many other things including illegal. But, in the grand scheme of things how do his actions affect our society as a whole? Is he trying to send us back to a 12th century theocracy? Is he trying to kill as many Americans as he can so that he can get his 70 virgins? Is he teaching children that it is an honorable thing to become a suicide bomber and kill as many infidels as possible when you blow yourself into thousands of bloody pieces?
Michael Vick deserves everything that he gets and I for one hope he never plays professional footbal again. But, there are so many more important that truly deserve outrage. Michael Vick is not worth the time or effort. The infiltration of and capitulation to radical Islam is more pressing as it pertains to the future of this Republic and the world.
This whole situation has really made me think about the American public. One might imagine that this is a story about a poor role model. Maybe it is. For me there is a much more glaring light that has been shed on us as we react to this "event."
The level of outrage toward Mr. Vick has not been seen since the "torture" of peace loving suspects at Abu Ghraib Prison where some poor defenseless men were forced to play cheerleader and form a human pyramid in their skivvies. In front of a woman no less! Once again the American Public was outraged and the press unrelenting in their condemnation. Just like their condemnation of Mr. Vick. Was anyone outraged by the beheading of innocent journalists and aid workers by the Islamic terrorists for more than five minutes?
I just can not come to grips with the lack of perspective and the lack of long-term memory of the American people and the so-called journalists who "seek the truth". What Michael Vick did was reprehensible, disgusting, uncivilized, and many other things including illegal. But, in the grand scheme of things how do his actions affect our society as a whole? Is he trying to send us back to a 12th century theocracy? Is he trying to kill as many Americans as he can so that he can get his 70 virgins? Is he teaching children that it is an honorable thing to become a suicide bomber and kill as many infidels as possible when you blow yourself into thousands of bloody pieces?
Michael Vick deserves everything that he gets and I for one hope he never plays professional footbal again. But, there are so many more important that truly deserve outrage. Michael Vick is not worth the time or effort. The infiltration of and capitulation to radical Islam is more pressing as it pertains to the future of this Republic and the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
