That is how I interpret their focus on women in the debate over climate change. They use a person's emotion instead of the facts to support a cause, which actually means nothing about the cause. Prove it, don't personalize it. And don't allow yourself to be fooled by such a simple tactic. Use facts, not emotion, to support your various causes.
From: http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009%5C11%5C20%5Cstory_20-11-2009_pg7_28
Thursday, November 19, 2009
1984
Is knowing a lie any better than not knowing?
No.
The government should guarantee a number is accurate 100% before reporting it. No more estimates, no more fictitious jobs. No more campaign lies and an end to having three health care bills at once so you can say one claim isn't in one bill, even when it is in another one. One bill at a time. You want to get rid of pre-existing conditions, then have a bill banning pre-existing conditions. I don't care if it is only five lines because the size doesn't impress me. The benefit will impress me.
Update: No more public speaking by Joe Biden.
No.
The government should guarantee a number is accurate 100% before reporting it. No more estimates, no more fictitious jobs. No more campaign lies and an end to having three health care bills at once so you can say one claim isn't in one bill, even when it is in another one. One bill at a time. You want to get rid of pre-existing conditions, then have a bill banning pre-existing conditions. I don't care if it is only five lines because the size doesn't impress me. The benefit will impress me.
Update: No more public speaking by Joe Biden.
Climate Change Hurts Women More
The U.N. study released this week says that women produce less carbon emissions but are the most affected by climate change. Quote:
"Poor women in poor countries are among the hardest hit by climate change, even though they contributed the least to it," said the United Nations Population Fund Executive Director, Ms Thoraya Ahmed Obaid.
"The poor are especially vulnerable to the effects of climate change, and the majority of the 1.5 billion people living on $1 a day or less are women," she added.
The report shows that the fight against climate change is more likely to be successful if policies, programmes and treaties take into account the needs, rights and potential of women.
It reveals that women are more likely than men to die in natural disasters--including those related to extreme weather--with this gap most pronounced where incomes are low and status differences between men and women are high.
The report shows that investments that empower women and girls--particularly education and health--bolster economic development and reduce poverty and have a beneficial impact on climate.
Excerpt over. The contradictions are startling. First they declare the de facto cause of climate change wealth, and say wealthy nations' climate change affects poorer nations, particularly poorer women, more. Then it says making women wealthy will have a beneficial impact on climate change.
Remember my false barriers post? If not read it. Already, knowing how wealth and male-female reasoning is used in this report I can direct you to why the U.N. report means absolutely nothing and how we can really look for an actual solution:
http://rhkinc.blogspot.com/2009/11/barrier-manipulation.html
News Article:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200911191053.html
"Poor women in poor countries are among the hardest hit by climate change, even though they contributed the least to it," said the United Nations Population Fund Executive Director, Ms Thoraya Ahmed Obaid.
"The poor are especially vulnerable to the effects of climate change, and the majority of the 1.5 billion people living on $1 a day or less are women," she added.
The report shows that the fight against climate change is more likely to be successful if policies, programmes and treaties take into account the needs, rights and potential of women.
It reveals that women are more likely than men to die in natural disasters--including those related to extreme weather--with this gap most pronounced where incomes are low and status differences between men and women are high.
The report shows that investments that empower women and girls--particularly education and health--bolster economic development and reduce poverty and have a beneficial impact on climate.
Excerpt over. The contradictions are startling. First they declare the de facto cause of climate change wealth, and say wealthy nations' climate change affects poorer nations, particularly poorer women, more. Then it says making women wealthy will have a beneficial impact on climate change.
Remember my false barriers post? If not read it. Already, knowing how wealth and male-female reasoning is used in this report I can direct you to why the U.N. report means absolutely nothing and how we can really look for an actual solution:
http://rhkinc.blogspot.com/2009/11/barrier-manipulation.html
News Article:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200911191053.html
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Economics
I take your dollar, promise to pay it back, and buy candy. I eat the candy and don't pay you back when you want me to. I just say I will, but not now. Meanwhile, every day I don't pay you back I take another dollar for more candy. You would get rather angry wouldn't you? You wouldn't let me take your dollar.
The government is doing very similar things. It is taking your dollars, creating jobs in fictitious districts, promises to give some of it back, and then says it is with holding your return in order to create another fictitious job as you are on the verge of losing your own.
America, our current situation with the spending levels topping the 12 trillion dollar debt mark is unsustainable. Many news reports then say how much that is per person. It doesn't matter. I didn't want that money to be spent, and sadly I was alive for at least 7 trillion dollars of that spending. I'm only 18 years old. However it doesn't matter how much that is per person because I am not going to pay that debt. I didn't spend that money. I just know I'm not giving the drug addict more drugs.
Just say no. I am not buying health insurance and I will not let the government pay my bill. Once you let the government pay for something you don't want or need they own you. I will not be a slave. On our current path in the next 18 years of my life I fear to see that not only will the government demand I pay, but tell me what job I will fulfill for maximum returns in order to pay.
We have already lost our freedom. It is time to take it back. You want change? Then actually change something and declare your independence and freedom from being controlled by the government. Respect the government, and understand you are the government. Any government operating against your wishes and controlling your life is one of tyranny.
To the human race, if you live under any government like this you must resist. Fight back before a global dark ages comes upon us.
The government is doing very similar things. It is taking your dollars, creating jobs in fictitious districts, promises to give some of it back, and then says it is with holding your return in order to create another fictitious job as you are on the verge of losing your own.
America, our current situation with the spending levels topping the 12 trillion dollar debt mark is unsustainable. Many news reports then say how much that is per person. It doesn't matter. I didn't want that money to be spent, and sadly I was alive for at least 7 trillion dollars of that spending. I'm only 18 years old. However it doesn't matter how much that is per person because I am not going to pay that debt. I didn't spend that money. I just know I'm not giving the drug addict more drugs.
Just say no. I am not buying health insurance and I will not let the government pay my bill. Once you let the government pay for something you don't want or need they own you. I will not be a slave. On our current path in the next 18 years of my life I fear to see that not only will the government demand I pay, but tell me what job I will fulfill for maximum returns in order to pay.
We have already lost our freedom. It is time to take it back. You want change? Then actually change something and declare your independence and freedom from being controlled by the government. Respect the government, and understand you are the government. Any government operating against your wishes and controlling your life is one of tyranny.
To the human race, if you live under any government like this you must resist. Fight back before a global dark ages comes upon us.
Stupid Economics
Obama's advice was as follows: Speaking in the heart of America's biggest lender, President Obama told Fox News in an interview Wednesday that the piling on of U.S. debt could drag the country into a "double-dip recession," though he said he's still considering additional tax incentives for businesses to reverse the rising unemployment rate.
Excerpt over. If debt could cause the recession to worsen, one would presume the next statement would be about lessening the debt. Instead, he proposes to increase the boom before the next bust by increasing the debt even more. This is just ridiculous.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/18/obama-warns-double-dip-recession/
Excerpt over. If debt could cause the recession to worsen, one would presume the next statement would be about lessening the debt. Instead, he proposes to increase the boom before the next bust by increasing the debt even more. This is just ridiculous.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/11/18/obama-warns-double-dip-recession/
Afghanistan Solutions
From Reuters:
Most Afghans see not Taliban militants but poverty, unemployment and government corruption as the main causes of war in their country, according to a report by a leading aid group released on Wednesday.
Excerpt over. Well, since the same issues in our country aren't even being addressed by the Obama administration, I think it is a safe bet that Afghanistan will not improve in the coming years.
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSSP426013
Most Afghans see not Taliban militants but poverty, unemployment and government corruption as the main causes of war in their country, according to a report by a leading aid group released on Wednesday.
Excerpt over. Well, since the same issues in our country aren't even being addressed by the Obama administration, I think it is a safe bet that Afghanistan will not improve in the coming years.
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSSP426013
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Fiscal Order for Maine
Some candidates for governor have been providing general ideas to get the budget in order. Here are three things which I see could save hundreds of millions of dollars:
End Dirigo Health.
Merge the overhead of Presque Isle and Fort Kent's universities.
Spend only on existing infrastructure before expanding within the bi-annual budget.
Disregard stipulations of further spending in regards to non-essential projects in the Stimulus.
End Dirigo Health.
Merge the overhead of Presque Isle and Fort Kent's universities.
Spend only on existing infrastructure before expanding within the bi-annual budget.
Disregard stipulations of further spending in regards to non-essential projects in the Stimulus.
Stop Foreign Aid Immediately
I demand this because of this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/17/millions-hungry-households-us-report
Yes, I am saying the hunger of an American is more important to me than the hunger of someone else. Deal with it.
Yes, I am saying the hunger of an American is more important to me than the hunger of someone else. Deal with it.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Journalism FAIL
I rarely post a full article's text as some are ridiculously long, but if I didn't you wouldn't believe me on this one (because I wouldn't believe myself if I told myself this one) :
Poll: Half of Southern Democrats dislike outburst
The Associated Press
COLUMBIA, S.C. -- About half of the Southern Democrats responding to a poll say they were either opposed or outraged by South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst as President Barack Obama addressed a joint session of Congress.
The State of Columbia reported that the Winthrop University poll also showed large majorities of both independents and Democrats reacted negatively to Wilson's interruption of Obama's speech by shouting "You lie!"
More than 43 percent of Southern Republicans liked it when Wilson berated Obama as he spoke in September.
Winthrop's poll, which included questions asked exclusively for The State, showed almost 68 percent of independents said they were opposed to Wilson's outburst. Overall, 30 percent of independents said they were opposed to and outraged by Wilson's actions.
Far fewer Southern Republicans - just over 11 percent - said they were outraged by Wilson's remark. But another 36 percent of Southern Republicans said they opposed Wilson's outburst.
Just under 65 percent of all those polled said they opposed Wilson's actions.
Nearly 30 percent of all poll participants said they not only opposed Wilson's actions, but were also outraged by them.
"It was stupid," said Charles Marshall, a 74-year-old retired marketing and sales representative who lives in Bluffton and backed Obama in the 2008 presidential election.
"He acted like a redneck," Marshall said of Wilson. "And I'm no elitist by any stretch of the imagination. He was appealing to the emotions of his constituency, and that's dumb."
Wilson apologized to Obama's chief of staff for his outburst. But he has made no apologies for the millions in campaign contributions that have poured in to him since he interrupted the president's speech with his shout.
"A lot of people have contributed because Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi and MoveOn.org have raised money for my opponent," Wilson said. "It was an understanding that I had become a target."
J. Chester Gambrell, a 57-year-old salesman who lives in Florence and who voted for U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., didn't approve of Wilson's actions.
"I'm not sure if that was the right time to say that, whether you think Barack Obama is a great guy or not, out of respect for the president," Gambrell said. "The man is president.
The survey was conducted Oct. 24-Nov. 7 by telephone. There were 866 respondents, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.
Information from: The State, http://www.thestate.com
Article over. Go back through and find the data for Democrats. It only mentions Independents. They seem to be getting confused. Just because Independents voted for Obama once, that doesn't make them automatic Democrats. While it can be inferred from the overall total, the actual figure for Democrats isn't even given in the article. Journalism FAIL.
Source:
http://www.thestate.com/statewire/story/1029538.html
Poll: Half of Southern Democrats dislike outburst
The Associated Press
COLUMBIA, S.C. -- About half of the Southern Democrats responding to a poll say they were either opposed or outraged by South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst as President Barack Obama addressed a joint session of Congress.
The State of Columbia reported that the Winthrop University poll also showed large majorities of both independents and Democrats reacted negatively to Wilson's interruption of Obama's speech by shouting "You lie!"
More than 43 percent of Southern Republicans liked it when Wilson berated Obama as he spoke in September.
Winthrop's poll, which included questions asked exclusively for The State, showed almost 68 percent of independents said they were opposed to Wilson's outburst. Overall, 30 percent of independents said they were opposed to and outraged by Wilson's actions.
Far fewer Southern Republicans - just over 11 percent - said they were outraged by Wilson's remark. But another 36 percent of Southern Republicans said they opposed Wilson's outburst.
Just under 65 percent of all those polled said they opposed Wilson's actions.
Nearly 30 percent of all poll participants said they not only opposed Wilson's actions, but were also outraged by them.
"It was stupid," said Charles Marshall, a 74-year-old retired marketing and sales representative who lives in Bluffton and backed Obama in the 2008 presidential election.
"He acted like a redneck," Marshall said of Wilson. "And I'm no elitist by any stretch of the imagination. He was appealing to the emotions of his constituency, and that's dumb."
Wilson apologized to Obama's chief of staff for his outburst. But he has made no apologies for the millions in campaign contributions that have poured in to him since he interrupted the president's speech with his shout.
"A lot of people have contributed because Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi and MoveOn.org have raised money for my opponent," Wilson said. "It was an understanding that I had become a target."
J. Chester Gambrell, a 57-year-old salesman who lives in Florence and who voted for U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., didn't approve of Wilson's actions.
"I'm not sure if that was the right time to say that, whether you think Barack Obama is a great guy or not, out of respect for the president," Gambrell said. "The man is president.
The survey was conducted Oct. 24-Nov. 7 by telephone. There were 866 respondents, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.
Information from: The State, http://www.thestate.com
Article over. Go back through and find the data for Democrats. It only mentions Independents. They seem to be getting confused. Just because Independents voted for Obama once, that doesn't make them automatic Democrats. While it can be inferred from the overall total, the actual figure for Democrats isn't even given in the article. Journalism FAIL.
Source:
http://www.thestate.com/statewire/story/1029538.html
Change the Majority of Fear
I want to leave an impact on the world. I want to do something that won't be forgotten in a generation. I do not want to be the name on the family tree that is remembered as the odd one that did nothing. I want to leave an impact.
I question college. I'm there now doing the essays and journals and tests and prelims and at first it was fulfilling, but now I see how pointless it all is. Every meal a person makes for their self is about survival. It leaves an impact because if you didn't eat, you would die. You take a test and fail, you can take another and pass. You go on whether you pass or fail for a month in college, yet if you didn't eat for a month you would die. You can fail a whole semester and still go on. Until you get that piece of paper.
I could die tomorrow and be remembered for nothing. I could die in four years with that piece of paper and be remembered for nothing. I could save someone's life tomorrow and be remembered. Should they not be remembered I wouldn't be remembered either, so I want a more direct approach. I want to be a name that no matter how many times history is rewritten, I will still be there for what I did.
It isn't enough to be a senator, or even a president. We remember some presidents because they are recent, but we really remember Washington, Lincoln, FDR, and Reagan. Why? Because they changed how the world thinks and sees itself. Egypt had many rulers, but we remember Cleopatra and King Tut, why? Because what they did changed how the world saw itself. King Tut changed how the world saw Egypt's past. Cleopatra changed how the Roman Empire existed.
You don't need to be a president or king to be remembered. Ben Franklin wasn't a positioned leader, but he is remembered. He has been dead for many generations but we know him. We know he was a patriot and diplomat and free thinker ahead of him just being a scientist. Why? Because anyone can be a scientist and figure out what he figured out. However, not everyone can sway the minds of people. Thoreau and Paine are remembered for changing how people saw government. I want to be remembered.
That piece of paper gained by college means absolutely nothing. The work put into something other than changing the world is worthless. Sure, you can gain pleasure from working for money and getting newer and shinier things, but your existence will have been wasted. Unless you change the world in a way that can be remembered more than two generations after you existed your life is worthless. That is why the Kaiser was just another leader of just another warring nation notable for it breaking records in number of dead. Hitler is remembered for changing the world. Good or bad, he changed the world.
I know you see this as true. Yet we do nothing about it. Why? It is that we don't want to change the world? I think we all would like to. Not being able to change the world is actually why voting is ignored by so many. So that can't be a reason, since we do want to change the world. Is it because although everyone wants to change the world we think only one or two people possibly can change the world? Are we afraid of the majority of fear?
I say we should rise above the majority of fear to change the world. We can see the benefits of our change in whether or not it reduces the fear of people and increases their willingness to strive to change the world. That would lead to more entrepreneurs, scientists, moral politicians, and leaders of all kinds than we ever dreamed of. The best part is this world of leaders can be formed by us all. We are the change we want to see. However, our existence will only be remembered if we take up the challenge and work to change the world. Otherwise, we will turn to dust just like that piece of paper.
I question college. I'm there now doing the essays and journals and tests and prelims and at first it was fulfilling, but now I see how pointless it all is. Every meal a person makes for their self is about survival. It leaves an impact because if you didn't eat, you would die. You take a test and fail, you can take another and pass. You go on whether you pass or fail for a month in college, yet if you didn't eat for a month you would die. You can fail a whole semester and still go on. Until you get that piece of paper.
I could die tomorrow and be remembered for nothing. I could die in four years with that piece of paper and be remembered for nothing. I could save someone's life tomorrow and be remembered. Should they not be remembered I wouldn't be remembered either, so I want a more direct approach. I want to be a name that no matter how many times history is rewritten, I will still be there for what I did.
It isn't enough to be a senator, or even a president. We remember some presidents because they are recent, but we really remember Washington, Lincoln, FDR, and Reagan. Why? Because they changed how the world thinks and sees itself. Egypt had many rulers, but we remember Cleopatra and King Tut, why? Because what they did changed how the world saw itself. King Tut changed how the world saw Egypt's past. Cleopatra changed how the Roman Empire existed.
You don't need to be a president or king to be remembered. Ben Franklin wasn't a positioned leader, but he is remembered. He has been dead for many generations but we know him. We know he was a patriot and diplomat and free thinker ahead of him just being a scientist. Why? Because anyone can be a scientist and figure out what he figured out. However, not everyone can sway the minds of people. Thoreau and Paine are remembered for changing how people saw government. I want to be remembered.
That piece of paper gained by college means absolutely nothing. The work put into something other than changing the world is worthless. Sure, you can gain pleasure from working for money and getting newer and shinier things, but your existence will have been wasted. Unless you change the world in a way that can be remembered more than two generations after you existed your life is worthless. That is why the Kaiser was just another leader of just another warring nation notable for it breaking records in number of dead. Hitler is remembered for changing the world. Good or bad, he changed the world.
I know you see this as true. Yet we do nothing about it. Why? It is that we don't want to change the world? I think we all would like to. Not being able to change the world is actually why voting is ignored by so many. So that can't be a reason, since we do want to change the world. Is it because although everyone wants to change the world we think only one or two people possibly can change the world? Are we afraid of the majority of fear?
I say we should rise above the majority of fear to change the world. We can see the benefits of our change in whether or not it reduces the fear of people and increases their willingness to strive to change the world. That would lead to more entrepreneurs, scientists, moral politicians, and leaders of all kinds than we ever dreamed of. The best part is this world of leaders can be formed by us all. We are the change we want to see. However, our existence will only be remembered if we take up the challenge and work to change the world. Otherwise, we will turn to dust just like that piece of paper.
City Mananger's Release
I've held back from making a statement on Ed Barrett being "encouraged" by the Bangor City Council to retire after 22 years on the job. I was hoping the council would either say why he should have gone or at least better explained the "disagreement" they had with his plan.
First, you do not fire someone who does their job and comes up with a proposal without having a plan of your own.
Secondly, someone in a respected position does not just go in the middle of the night from a job they had for 22 years. If wrong doing occurred, he did so with taxpayer money and taxpayer time. That alone deserves explanation.
I am going to leave the issue at that because the list of somewhat odd decisions and statements by the council since I started observing over a year ago have been growing and I am finding it hard to not just simply list every incident I've seen. A new councilor is there this year, so I will give Cary Weston time to shift the council's viewpoint of the intelligence of the residents of Bangor.
Should this shift not take place, you can forget the referendum on Obama next year because Bangor will be looking for new, transparent ideas.
First, you do not fire someone who does their job and comes up with a proposal without having a plan of your own.
Secondly, someone in a respected position does not just go in the middle of the night from a job they had for 22 years. If wrong doing occurred, he did so with taxpayer money and taxpayer time. That alone deserves explanation.
I am going to leave the issue at that because the list of somewhat odd decisions and statements by the council since I started observing over a year ago have been growing and I am finding it hard to not just simply list every incident I've seen. A new councilor is there this year, so I will give Cary Weston time to shift the council's viewpoint of the intelligence of the residents of Bangor.
Should this shift not take place, you can forget the referendum on Obama next year because Bangor will be looking for new, transparent ideas.
Guantanimo Bay Prisoners Trial In New York
While I am certainly not happy about the decision made, I am not surprised by it. I am more surprised that people didn't know this was coming. America, wake up. This is the leadership we have in place. This is not a moderate administration. It just isn't. They will place other nationalities and minorities of any form, other than opponents, ahead of common sense.
I am not being a bigot of any kind, I am observing what has been happening. Perhaps if you did the same you would notice it as well. What to do about this other than make myself aware of situations and ultimately treat others as I want to be treated I do not know.
I am not being a bigot of any kind, I am observing what has been happening. Perhaps if you did the same you would notice it as well. What to do about this other than make myself aware of situations and ultimately treat others as I want to be treated I do not know.
Yemen Situation Worsens
In the past week the situation in Yemen has escalated to levels worthy of accusations and counter accusations of responsibility for the Houthi rebel's success. Iran blames the U.S. for Houthi defeats, and demands Saudi Arabia stop getting involved. Saudi Arabia however can't really do this since the rebels crossed the border and started attacking Saudis. Yemen and Saudi Arabia are blaming Iran for arming the rebels, and the reason this matters is because the conflict has forced Saudi Arabia to evacuate 250 villages. Now, last I checked evacuating populated areas is a sign you are preparing for those areas to enter the conflict zone. So with yesterday's 250 and today's increase by 170 to a total 420 village evacuations the situation is worsening quickly. Pakistanis have also been fighting with the rebels which is something I just can't figure out a motive for other than the possible Taliban and Al Qaeda connection.
Why does this matter? Well, thus far Iran's involvement with Hamas and Hezbolla and the Somali Civil War has been ignored by the Arab world. Now, however, two clearly Arab nations are facing the end result of weapons and finance support by Iran to rebel and extremist groups. How the Arab nations unify or divide over this will be very indicative of the possible alliance system should war with Iran unfold.
However, the reason the situation may be worsening could be due to the effectiveness of the Saudi forces:
Meanwhile Saudi's armed forces arrested a sorcerer attempting to plant magic spells in the conflict zone in support of the Houthis, the Saudi newspaper Okaz reported.
The man was initially believed to be a refugee fleeing the conflict but security forces searched him and found amulets, animal remains and scrolls containing symbols.
The detainee admitted he was planning to plant amulets in the conflict zone to help the Houthi rebels sneak across the border and win their war against Saudi Arabia.
When asked why he had long nails, he claimed that he is obeying the order of the jinns, or spirits.
“The jinns will be infuriated and will kill me if I trim or clean my nails,” he told his interrogators.
Excerpt over. So as the Houthi rebels (an ethnic, traditional, and Shi'ite minority) are gaining ground, Saudi Arabia is cracking down on animists.
http://www.kippreport.com/2009/11/fighting-forces-mass-evacuation-in-saudi/
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/11/15/91350.html
Why does this matter? Well, thus far Iran's involvement with Hamas and Hezbolla and the Somali Civil War has been ignored by the Arab world. Now, however, two clearly Arab nations are facing the end result of weapons and finance support by Iran to rebel and extremist groups. How the Arab nations unify or divide over this will be very indicative of the possible alliance system should war with Iran unfold.
However, the reason the situation may be worsening could be due to the effectiveness of the Saudi forces:
Meanwhile Saudi's armed forces arrested a sorcerer attempting to plant magic spells in the conflict zone in support of the Houthis, the Saudi newspaper Okaz reported.
The man was initially believed to be a refugee fleeing the conflict but security forces searched him and found amulets, animal remains and scrolls containing symbols.
The detainee admitted he was planning to plant amulets in the conflict zone to help the Houthi rebels sneak across the border and win their war against Saudi Arabia.
When asked why he had long nails, he claimed that he is obeying the order of the jinns, or spirits.
“The jinns will be infuriated and will kill me if I trim or clean my nails,” he told his interrogators.
Excerpt over. So as the Houthi rebels (an ethnic, traditional, and Shi'ite minority) are gaining ground, Saudi Arabia is cracking down on animists.
http://www.kippreport.com/2009/11/fighting-forces-mass-evacuation-in-saudi/
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/11/15/91350.html
Thursday, November 12, 2009
What to do when your son is a racist?
I saw that question recently. I have the answer: beat them yourself.
Update: Two minutes after I first made this post, I already got several annoying emails. I simply want to clarify that after you are done beating them, you should beat yourself for teaching them such hate. Thank you.
Update 2: You people are way too sensitive. Seriously there is no justifiable reason for blind hatred in the modern era. You have a child with blind hatred? They deserve a just punishment. The reason you should be conducting the beating is because instead of having his/her hatred reinforced by having the beating come from those they incite to defensive violence, you should show them the equal evil in your own (insert false barrier here).
Update: Two minutes after I first made this post, I already got several annoying emails. I simply want to clarify that after you are done beating them, you should beat yourself for teaching them such hate. Thank you.
Update 2: You people are way too sensitive. Seriously there is no justifiable reason for blind hatred in the modern era. You have a child with blind hatred? They deserve a just punishment. The reason you should be conducting the beating is because instead of having his/her hatred reinforced by having the beating come from those they incite to defensive violence, you should show them the equal evil in your own (insert false barrier here).
Venezuela Perspectives
This video was recently brought to by attention by Stephanie. I was quite impressed with references by sources which approached the issue with common sense. Enjoy.
If you enjoy this form of news presentation I encourage you to look at other reports from newsy.com.
If you enjoy this form of news presentation I encourage you to look at other reports from newsy.com.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Common Sense 3
"The US ambassador in Kabul has written to the White House arguing against sending thousands more American troops to Afghanistan.
In a leaked cable, Karl Eikenberry expressed doubts about the competence of President Hamid Karzai's government."
Excerpt over. You have an enemy, the Taliban, who need to be defeated. Send the troops. If the Afghan government isn't functioning as needed, replace it. Having us not only oversee but run the election process to ensure minimal fraud is a possibility. One can not say we don't have the resources for it. If we have the resources to place ourselves trillions in debt, we can conduct a fair election.
Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8356094.stm
In a leaked cable, Karl Eikenberry expressed doubts about the competence of President Hamid Karzai's government."
Excerpt over. You have an enemy, the Taliban, who need to be defeated. Send the troops. If the Afghan government isn't functioning as needed, replace it. Having us not only oversee but run the election process to ensure minimal fraud is a possibility. One can not say we don't have the resources for it. If we have the resources to place ourselves trillions in debt, we can conduct a fair election.
Source:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8356094.stm
Giddy Republicans?
I think Republicans are becoming more popular because they have become more Conservative in fiscal and political issues, instead of emphasizing social issues. They have not, by my observation, become giddy at all.
More Angry Catholics
From: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/11/AR2009111116943.html
The article states:
The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it would be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city won't change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care.
Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.
Fearful that they could be forced, among other things, to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples, church officials said they would have no choice but to abandon their contracts with the city.
"If the city requires this, we can't do it," Susan Gibbs, spokeswoman for the archdiocese, said Wednesday. "The city is saying in order to provide social services, you need to be secular. For us, that's really a problem."
After the vote, the archdiocese sent out a statement accusing the council of ignoring the right of religious freedom.
Excerpt over. So much material in this one.
So because they won't be allowed to discriminate they will stop being charitable?
Isn't it ironic that a religious entity operating in the capital of a secular nation has trouble acting in a secular manner with secular funds?
Isn't it ironic that religious freedom, protected by the Constitution, sometimes claims to be able to over ride the other freedoms granted by the Constitution?
Questions are such a non-violent way of expressing anger don't you think?
The article states:
The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it would be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city won't change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care.
Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.
Fearful that they could be forced, among other things, to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples, church officials said they would have no choice but to abandon their contracts with the city.
"If the city requires this, we can't do it," Susan Gibbs, spokeswoman for the archdiocese, said Wednesday. "The city is saying in order to provide social services, you need to be secular. For us, that's really a problem."
After the vote, the archdiocese sent out a statement accusing the council of ignoring the right of religious freedom.
Excerpt over. So much material in this one.
So because they won't be allowed to discriminate they will stop being charitable?
Isn't it ironic that a religious entity operating in the capital of a secular nation has trouble acting in a secular manner with secular funds?
Isn't it ironic that religious freedom, protected by the Constitution, sometimes claims to be able to over ride the other freedoms granted by the Constitution?
Questions are such a non-violent way of expressing anger don't you think?
Health Insurance
I will not purchase health insurance under three conditions:
1. I do not have the money I will not buy health insurance.
2. I am able to afford to pay for regular doctor visits and am considered quite healthy, I will not purchase health insurance.
3. If I do have the money, but am mandated to do so by the government, I will not buy health insurance.
The flaw in requiring people to purchase health insurance is that there are some who simply can not afford it, and the fine is also not going to be paid. The sentence to prison means the entire existence, health care included, of a person will then be the cost of the government.
Should that provision of the health care bill become law, it will be time for civil disobedience against an unjust law.
1. I do not have the money I will not buy health insurance.
2. I am able to afford to pay for regular doctor visits and am considered quite healthy, I will not purchase health insurance.
3. If I do have the money, but am mandated to do so by the government, I will not buy health insurance.
The flaw in requiring people to purchase health insurance is that there are some who simply can not afford it, and the fine is also not going to be paid. The sentence to prison means the entire existence, health care included, of a person will then be the cost of the government.
Should that provision of the health care bill become law, it will be time for civil disobedience against an unjust law.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Freaky Origins
My blogging aspirations had a predecessor, and I've found it after three years and eleven months of completely forgetting it existed. Back then I was more focused on the alternate realities floating around in my head so I started a site on writing. Here was my first post then (I was such a nerd, then again, I still am) :
I am Randy Hughes-King. Hughes is part of my last name so don't think it is my middle. I go to high school and do a lot of homework. I like to write stories in my spare time and am considered a geek. I also wish to take over the world but my plan is only eight percent finished. My favorite television shows are Stargate SG1, Stargate Atlantis and Battlestar Galactica. My favorite books and movies are the Harry Potter series. I will often post ideas for stories that you can post replies to and hopefully they will be nice. When you make a complaint, tell what the complaint is, why it matters, compare it to another story and no vulgarity or lewd comments please.
I am Randy Hughes-King. Hughes is part of my last name so don't think it is my middle. I go to high school and do a lot of homework. I like to write stories in my spare time and am considered a geek. I also wish to take over the world but my plan is only eight percent finished. My favorite television shows are Stargate SG1, Stargate Atlantis and Battlestar Galactica. My favorite books and movies are the Harry Potter series. I will often post ideas for stories that you can post replies to and hopefully they will be nice. When you make a complaint, tell what the complaint is, why it matters, compare it to another story and no vulgarity or lewd comments please.
Message To Friends, Fans, Family, Foes
I will be shifting things soon. It will not be a "major" life shift, just moving things from stale and old accounts to a new, revitalized, and more "me" style. I've been putting this shift off for a long time but the current system is not going to work at all with my coming project. So, this blog may change to a new website, my various social networking sites will most likely all be altered but for the time being things stay the same as I prepare my new system. I'm saying it now so nobody does a double take and suffers shock when I unveil my upcoming project.
Monday, November 9, 2009
Interview With Bruce Poliquin
I recently interviewed Bruce Poliquin, a candidate for governor.
Of these two statements, which represents your thinking best: you can't spend without taxing, or you can't tax without spending?
(There was an initial confusion regarding the question, and it was eventually resolved as follows.)
We will tighten our belts before taxing. We can not predict a revenue stream accurately and so we have to be able to respond as best we can bi-annually. There are all kinds of prudent things to do, so if your able to have reserves then you're able to weather the storm during a two year budget better than you can in a one year budget. The problem is last year we depleted our reserves and added the stimulus budget with rules preventing reform. When you are insolvent you can't take on more debt-
So do you believe the federal government to be insolvent?
I am focused on Maine issues and that being said, the federal issue is that it is imprudent and reckless to commit 9 trillion dollars of spending without having a way to pay for it and that is just what the fed has done. They are either going to tax or print money which is unacceptable.
Some have raised eyebrows to several figures reported by your campaign. Specifically the claim that the State spends 6.8 billion each year, when it is 5.8 billion every two years. What is the plan to prevent such innacuracies in the future?
They are not innacuracies, we have a tremendous ability to make sure we have good data, and we do. If you really look at those numbers it includes federal money.
What are your thoughts on the recent election?
Clearly disappointed about the results on Question 4. Sometimes folks have to stand up for what is right. I am thrilled to have been part of the effort and would do it in a heartbeat. I still believe passing it would have been the right thing for the state and given us a new fiscal tool. It didn't turn out that way and makes it even more important our next governor has skills in management because we don't have the tools in the lawbook to have it done as a process.
Why do you believe Question 4 failed?
We were outspent 14 to 1 and that money came out of state. When you look at where the money came from it came from unions and those that have a vested interest in protecting the status quo. It is what it is. If you are unable to get your message out which is expensive.
So would you say the message or the finances of a campaign matters more?
Both, you have to have both. Very closely linked and you can not seperate the two. As governor I will be on the side of taxpayers of maine with my message.
Would you end the Dirigo health program?
Let me give you a longer answer than you were expecting. Dirigo health is a classic example of the problems we have in Augusta. In 2003 when it was signed the goal was to enroll 130,000 Mainers who were uninsured. The goal was to not cost Maine anything and reduce premiums and increase care to the citizens. Now 8 years later, we've enrolled 10,000 and only 4 thousand were uninsured and cost us 150 million dollars. The care has not gotten better. It should have been shut down years ago. However, we need to make sure the people in that program have a place to go.They are in that program based on their own good will and judgment. We can't just throw them on the street.
I give you that answer because a short answer would be an incomplete explanation. Knowing these facts Dirigo should be shut down.
What would your replacement for Dirigo look like?
Well we have to be careful and wait to see what is coming down from DC and just be ready when it comes if it comes. We know we need to increase competition and have to have a program that is patient centric. What we know that doesn't work is the public option which is Dirigo. We have to make sure they are being successful.
Will you support a federal public option?
I can't answer that because I don't have the details. Our public option was a failure.
Would you support a 9th and 10th amendment guarantee to the State Constitution?
I would have to look into more deeply. What matters to the people of Maine is whether they have someone in the Blaine house who makes sure the 10th amendment is respected. I support federal intervention only when the people and state can't do the job.
Let me give you an example of this. When the state accepted 300 million dollars to our medicare program we couldn't reform the broken program. There is no way I'll accept federal money if in the long term it will hurt the people of Maine. It is just another sign of gross fiscal mismanagement in Augusta.
Aside from yourself, who do you want to see from the Democrat side?
I don't know. We are focused on our efforts and have no idea who is coming up on the other side. I am completely of the belief that the voters of Maine are pragmatic and will say "do we want someone from the private sector and the real world managing businesses with great acumen, or someone who has created the mess we are in? We already have one of the worst business climates in the country with people leaving. We have retirees leaving because of taxes. The type of candidate they [Democrats] will put up will be a problem creator.
Do you include Mr. Mills in that description?
Mr. Mills in an Attorney who has been part of the Augusta beuracracy for two decades. I'm sure he is a nice man but the difference between his background and mine is very stark and I'll leave it at that.
Have you been looking to anyone for Attorney General yet?
We are working non-stop 7 days a week and have been for 6 months reaching the voters of Maine. We've been to Aroostook and Washington county. We are reaching out to all corners of Maine to make sure the next governor gets it right and in order to do that we have to listen to the voters of Maine. In 6 months of doing this and listening to thousands of Mainers at parades and fairs and political events and town hall meetings they are saying two things: first they want the next governor to be a proper manager of our state. Second: they want the next governor to have the management skills to get our fiscal house in order and I expect that they will hire someone who has that skill set and the experience and courage to address these issues head on.
[Poliquin intended to say his focus right now is on the people of Maine, and selecting a cabinet will come later.]
What is next in the coming months?
We are continuing to do what has been successful for us in the past and that is recruit volunteers. We have a small and growing army of volunteers. We are going to continue to build coalitions: folks that have a vested interest that this state be governed more effectively. Raise money so we can get our message out. We're going to make sure we have the financial resources to make our message get out and we are going to directly reach out to the voters in Maine through the tools in our campaign with email updates, online connection, and our ten year old mobile home... ten year old mobile home, we do more with less, that we converted into a campaign bus and are going all across the state.
Now I might add one more thing, I want to be direct, but also clear in my comments, and it comes with the 3rd point of my last remark. As you know our campaign is traditionally funded, we are going out to the voters of Maine making our point to them, answering their questions, and asking their support. There is no purer form of support than someone giving their 5 or 50 or 500 dollars to get our message out. The first reporting deadline for the candidates we raised six times as much money from six times- I misstated, three times as much money from three times as many donors as our closest competitor in the primary. We are hopeful and expect that by the end of the year we will also demonstrate that we have a grassroots movement.
To expand on that a little further, I think it is unconscionable that a candidate for the governor to accept tax payer money for their campaign. We are in a recession and low wage state, high taxed state, and some candidates for the governorship are simply sitting back and accepting tax payer money for their campaign. "Well you either need to be wealthy or take public money for your campaign" - that is an excuse and untrue. You need to work hard and get off the sofa. Anyone can do the hard work to build a grassroots network, a professional team. My background is blue collar Waterville, it is hard work and being prepared, and the people of Maine respect hard work and Mainers are getting that message and we will work just as hard as governor. You don't have to take taxpayer money- just work hard for support. That is a huge contrast between myself and one of my opponents in the primary.
I will point out that my requests for interviews with other candidates have either been declined or have no response.
Of these two statements, which represents your thinking best: you can't spend without taxing, or you can't tax without spending?
(There was an initial confusion regarding the question, and it was eventually resolved as follows.)
We will tighten our belts before taxing. We can not predict a revenue stream accurately and so we have to be able to respond as best we can bi-annually. There are all kinds of prudent things to do, so if your able to have reserves then you're able to weather the storm during a two year budget better than you can in a one year budget. The problem is last year we depleted our reserves and added the stimulus budget with rules preventing reform. When you are insolvent you can't take on more debt-
So do you believe the federal government to be insolvent?
I am focused on Maine issues and that being said, the federal issue is that it is imprudent and reckless to commit 9 trillion dollars of spending without having a way to pay for it and that is just what the fed has done. They are either going to tax or print money which is unacceptable.
Some have raised eyebrows to several figures reported by your campaign. Specifically the claim that the State spends 6.8 billion each year, when it is 5.8 billion every two years. What is the plan to prevent such innacuracies in the future?
They are not innacuracies, we have a tremendous ability to make sure we have good data, and we do. If you really look at those numbers it includes federal money.
What are your thoughts on the recent election?
Clearly disappointed about the results on Question 4. Sometimes folks have to stand up for what is right. I am thrilled to have been part of the effort and would do it in a heartbeat. I still believe passing it would have been the right thing for the state and given us a new fiscal tool. It didn't turn out that way and makes it even more important our next governor has skills in management because we don't have the tools in the lawbook to have it done as a process.
Why do you believe Question 4 failed?
We were outspent 14 to 1 and that money came out of state. When you look at where the money came from it came from unions and those that have a vested interest in protecting the status quo. It is what it is. If you are unable to get your message out which is expensive.
So would you say the message or the finances of a campaign matters more?
Both, you have to have both. Very closely linked and you can not seperate the two. As governor I will be on the side of taxpayers of maine with my message.
Would you end the Dirigo health program?
Let me give you a longer answer than you were expecting. Dirigo health is a classic example of the problems we have in Augusta. In 2003 when it was signed the goal was to enroll 130,000 Mainers who were uninsured. The goal was to not cost Maine anything and reduce premiums and increase care to the citizens. Now 8 years later, we've enrolled 10,000 and only 4 thousand were uninsured and cost us 150 million dollars. The care has not gotten better. It should have been shut down years ago. However, we need to make sure the people in that program have a place to go.They are in that program based on their own good will and judgment. We can't just throw them on the street.
I give you that answer because a short answer would be an incomplete explanation. Knowing these facts Dirigo should be shut down.
What would your replacement for Dirigo look like?
Well we have to be careful and wait to see what is coming down from DC and just be ready when it comes if it comes. We know we need to increase competition and have to have a program that is patient centric. What we know that doesn't work is the public option which is Dirigo. We have to make sure they are being successful.
Will you support a federal public option?
I can't answer that because I don't have the details. Our public option was a failure.
Would you support a 9th and 10th amendment guarantee to the State Constitution?
I would have to look into more deeply. What matters to the people of Maine is whether they have someone in the Blaine house who makes sure the 10th amendment is respected. I support federal intervention only when the people and state can't do the job.
Let me give you an example of this. When the state accepted 300 million dollars to our medicare program we couldn't reform the broken program. There is no way I'll accept federal money if in the long term it will hurt the people of Maine. It is just another sign of gross fiscal mismanagement in Augusta.
Aside from yourself, who do you want to see from the Democrat side?
I don't know. We are focused on our efforts and have no idea who is coming up on the other side. I am completely of the belief that the voters of Maine are pragmatic and will say "do we want someone from the private sector and the real world managing businesses with great acumen, or someone who has created the mess we are in? We already have one of the worst business climates in the country with people leaving. We have retirees leaving because of taxes. The type of candidate they [Democrats] will put up will be a problem creator.
Do you include Mr. Mills in that description?
Mr. Mills in an Attorney who has been part of the Augusta beuracracy for two decades. I'm sure he is a nice man but the difference between his background and mine is very stark and I'll leave it at that.
Have you been looking to anyone for Attorney General yet?
We are working non-stop 7 days a week and have been for 6 months reaching the voters of Maine. We've been to Aroostook and Washington county. We are reaching out to all corners of Maine to make sure the next governor gets it right and in order to do that we have to listen to the voters of Maine. In 6 months of doing this and listening to thousands of Mainers at parades and fairs and political events and town hall meetings they are saying two things: first they want the next governor to be a proper manager of our state. Second: they want the next governor to have the management skills to get our fiscal house in order and I expect that they will hire someone who has that skill set and the experience and courage to address these issues head on.
[Poliquin intended to say his focus right now is on the people of Maine, and selecting a cabinet will come later.]
What is next in the coming months?
We are continuing to do what has been successful for us in the past and that is recruit volunteers. We have a small and growing army of volunteers. We are going to continue to build coalitions: folks that have a vested interest that this state be governed more effectively. Raise money so we can get our message out. We're going to make sure we have the financial resources to make our message get out and we are going to directly reach out to the voters in Maine through the tools in our campaign with email updates, online connection, and our ten year old mobile home... ten year old mobile home, we do more with less, that we converted into a campaign bus and are going all across the state.
Now I might add one more thing, I want to be direct, but also clear in my comments, and it comes with the 3rd point of my last remark. As you know our campaign is traditionally funded, we are going out to the voters of Maine making our point to them, answering their questions, and asking their support. There is no purer form of support than someone giving their 5 or 50 or 500 dollars to get our message out. The first reporting deadline for the candidates we raised six times as much money from six times- I misstated, three times as much money from three times as many donors as our closest competitor in the primary. We are hopeful and expect that by the end of the year we will also demonstrate that we have a grassroots movement.
To expand on that a little further, I think it is unconscionable that a candidate for the governor to accept tax payer money for their campaign. We are in a recession and low wage state, high taxed state, and some candidates for the governorship are simply sitting back and accepting tax payer money for their campaign. "Well you either need to be wealthy or take public money for your campaign" - that is an excuse and untrue. You need to work hard and get off the sofa. Anyone can do the hard work to build a grassroots network, a professional team. My background is blue collar Waterville, it is hard work and being prepared, and the people of Maine respect hard work and Mainers are getting that message and we will work just as hard as governor. You don't have to take taxpayer money- just work hard for support. That is a huge contrast between myself and one of my opponents in the primary.
I will point out that my requests for interviews with other candidates have either been declined or have no response.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Obama Speaks (Not to Me)
From the New York Times:
Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. Owens election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, “Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit” Democratic voters “and it will encourage the extremists.”
Another freshman Democrat from New Mexico, Representative Martin Heinrich, said the president’s comments overall were reassuring. “If you want to see a recipe for failure,” Mr. Heinrich said, “don’t do the things you talked about in your campaigns and turn your back on your base. All the independent voters in the world don’t matter if the Democrats don’t turn out.”
“This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,” he added. “And me, personally, I don’t want to be on the wrong side of history.”
Excerpt over. So if health care does not pass, the extremists will be encouraged. Extremists huh? Would he mean Islamic extremists such as the one which attacked Fort Hood? I think he prefers to focus on his own twisted view of an extremist: someone who doesn't support him. As for Heinrich, apparently appealing to 30 percent of the nation is more important than appealing to 50 percent of the nation. Then, mentioning Social Security, just quite simply, and children look away, wtf.
As for the last sentence he said: We all know the victors in war write the history. Who writes it during peace?
Link: http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/07/lawmakers-detail-obamas-pitch/
Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. Owens election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, “Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit” Democratic voters “and it will encourage the extremists.”
Another freshman Democrat from New Mexico, Representative Martin Heinrich, said the president’s comments overall were reassuring. “If you want to see a recipe for failure,” Mr. Heinrich said, “don’t do the things you talked about in your campaigns and turn your back on your base. All the independent voters in the world don’t matter if the Democrats don’t turn out.”
“This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,” he added. “And me, personally, I don’t want to be on the wrong side of history.”
Excerpt over. So if health care does not pass, the extremists will be encouraged. Extremists huh? Would he mean Islamic extremists such as the one which attacked Fort Hood? I think he prefers to focus on his own twisted view of an extremist: someone who doesn't support him. As for Heinrich, apparently appealing to 30 percent of the nation is more important than appealing to 50 percent of the nation. Then, mentioning Social Security, just quite simply, and children look away, wtf.
As for the last sentence he said: We all know the victors in war write the history. Who writes it during peace?
Link: http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/07/lawmakers-detail-obamas-pitch/
Chavez Threatens War
Hugo Chavez of Venezuela has deployed 15,000 troops to the border with Colombia. Colombia is taking a liberal's approach and going to the UN and OAS. These are the same two organizations which took the side of Zelaya after he was removed for trying to rewrite the Honduran Constitution illegally (along with most South American leaders in that region, including Chavez and Uribe). Don't believe me? Read earlier posts on this blog for the Honduras situation, and the links after several quotes for the current news stories. Here is the first news story from Reuters:
During a Sunday television address, Chavez ordered his military to prepare for war as the best way to preserve peace in the region.Colombian President Alvaro Uribe shot back with a statement rejecting Chavez's remarks.
"Considering the threats of war enunciated by the government of Venezuela, the government of Colombia proposes going to the Organization of American States and the Security Council of the United Nations," the statement said.
Excerpt over. First, you only prepare for war for war. Slow down and read that sentence again. Absorb it. You only have a military if you are going to war. Costa Rica, keep up the good work. Now to the next news story from the AP:
President Hugo Chavez's government is sending 15,000 soldiers to the border with Colombia.
Repeating a frequent charge by Venezuela, Vice President Ramon Carrizalez accused Colombia on Thursday of intentionally allowing violence to spill over the border as a means of "destabilizing" Chavez's government.
"Colombia has been creating a pre-war atmosphere," Carrizalez said. Chavez has also called an agreement giving U.S. military personnel expanded access to Colombian bases a threat to Venezuela's security, but the Venezuelan troop buildup on the frontier has nothing to do with the pact signed last week, officials said.
Excerpt over. Lets pause and compare the last segment of that excerpt to the Reuters article:
For months Chavez has said that a military cooperation pact signed last month between Bogota and Washington could set the stage for a U.S. invasion of Venezuela from Colombian territory.
Excerpt over. Alright, so, the "not connected" and "connected" sentiments of Venezuela over the U.S. bases is going to be reported or not reported depending on which news source you read from.
On to a more important issue, why is Chavez doing this? Well, he has almost total control of his country and formed a new nation wide armed militia in the past few weeks, so when you have everything you want in your nation, what do you do? Well, actually, it turns out he doesn't have everything he needs in his country:
Severe shortages of electricity and water pose a growing risk to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and his Bolivarian revolution that is powered largely by the country's petroleum revenues.
Analysts who contest that interpretation and point instead to government sector mismanagement, a prolonged drought and rising demand cannot easily express themselves, because the media that aired their views have shut down.Chavez himself went on air to warn industries they would have their utilities cut off if they did not check wastage. For citizens fumbling in the dark due to power cuts, Chavez advised the use of a torch.
"If you get up at three in the morning to use the toilet, use a torch instead of turning the light on; that's enough light, you don't need more. Just leave the torch by the bed, it's that simple," Chavez said during an emergency Cabinet meeting, broadcast live.
He advised Venezuelans to get into the habit of showering for no more than three minutes.
Industry sources said that power generation plants nationalized by Chavez in 2007 needed not only new infusions of capital but also better management and due diligence to ensure their performance was competitive and made the best use of resources.
Chavez plans to personally make random surprise visits to factories and has warned those found wasting electricity or water will be punished summarily with closures.
He has also offered advice to shopping malls to save on power or generate their own.
Faced with the shortages, the government has reacted by targeting business, accusing industries of wasting resources through inefficient management of energy and water.
Excerpt over. There has been a theory that when the Soviet Union was about to collapse, a war with the West would have saved them. Clearly this was faultly logic because a war with Afghanistan helped send them over the edge. However, perhaps the thinking for this theory was that it would allow a better excuse for people's problems than "we're slaughtering your family because they blinked without our permission".
Considering Chavez's rationing of such obviously critical resources one can see that invading Colombia and blaming sabotage of their water supply is a much less harmful excuse for their popularity than saying either it is out of their control (which people believe is since they are moving to control everything else) or they can't fix, which both of those leads to anger and removal in favor of those who will solve the problem.
I would suggest Colombia pursue the diplomatic route, but for the sake of logic match the mobilization of Venezuela (do not go above it, just equal the forces) so you won't be entire defenseless if he attacks. We do not need a Barbarossa of South America to unfold. By we I mean the U.S. because you and I both know who will come to save the Colombians should there be war and a chance they would lose. However, with Obama, no guarantees.
The three news sources used in today's WW4 Reality Check:
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5A80B020091109
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hCIKDzMk3thB2iiP8uhH7lXThSCQD9BPNVDO0
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2009/11/06/Shortages-pose-a-risk-to-Venezuelas-Chavez/UPI-83391257525813/
During a Sunday television address, Chavez ordered his military to prepare for war as the best way to preserve peace in the region.Colombian President Alvaro Uribe shot back with a statement rejecting Chavez's remarks.
"Considering the threats of war enunciated by the government of Venezuela, the government of Colombia proposes going to the Organization of American States and the Security Council of the United Nations," the statement said.
Excerpt over. First, you only prepare for war for war. Slow down and read that sentence again. Absorb it. You only have a military if you are going to war. Costa Rica, keep up the good work. Now to the next news story from the AP:
President Hugo Chavez's government is sending 15,000 soldiers to the border with Colombia.
Repeating a frequent charge by Venezuela, Vice President Ramon Carrizalez accused Colombia on Thursday of intentionally allowing violence to spill over the border as a means of "destabilizing" Chavez's government.
"Colombia has been creating a pre-war atmosphere," Carrizalez said. Chavez has also called an agreement giving U.S. military personnel expanded access to Colombian bases a threat to Venezuela's security, but the Venezuelan troop buildup on the frontier has nothing to do with the pact signed last week, officials said.
Excerpt over. Lets pause and compare the last segment of that excerpt to the Reuters article:
For months Chavez has said that a military cooperation pact signed last month between Bogota and Washington could set the stage for a U.S. invasion of Venezuela from Colombian territory.
Excerpt over. Alright, so, the "not connected" and "connected" sentiments of Venezuela over the U.S. bases is going to be reported or not reported depending on which news source you read from.
On to a more important issue, why is Chavez doing this? Well, he has almost total control of his country and formed a new nation wide armed militia in the past few weeks, so when you have everything you want in your nation, what do you do? Well, actually, it turns out he doesn't have everything he needs in his country:
Severe shortages of electricity and water pose a growing risk to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and his Bolivarian revolution that is powered largely by the country's petroleum revenues.
Analysts who contest that interpretation and point instead to government sector mismanagement, a prolonged drought and rising demand cannot easily express themselves, because the media that aired their views have shut down.Chavez himself went on air to warn industries they would have their utilities cut off if they did not check wastage. For citizens fumbling in the dark due to power cuts, Chavez advised the use of a torch.
"If you get up at three in the morning to use the toilet, use a torch instead of turning the light on; that's enough light, you don't need more. Just leave the torch by the bed, it's that simple," Chavez said during an emergency Cabinet meeting, broadcast live.
He advised Venezuelans to get into the habit of showering for no more than three minutes.
Industry sources said that power generation plants nationalized by Chavez in 2007 needed not only new infusions of capital but also better management and due diligence to ensure their performance was competitive and made the best use of resources.
Chavez plans to personally make random surprise visits to factories and has warned those found wasting electricity or water will be punished summarily with closures.
He has also offered advice to shopping malls to save on power or generate their own.
Faced with the shortages, the government has reacted by targeting business, accusing industries of wasting resources through inefficient management of energy and water.
Excerpt over. There has been a theory that when the Soviet Union was about to collapse, a war with the West would have saved them. Clearly this was faultly logic because a war with Afghanistan helped send them over the edge. However, perhaps the thinking for this theory was that it would allow a better excuse for people's problems than "we're slaughtering your family because they blinked without our permission".
Considering Chavez's rationing of such obviously critical resources one can see that invading Colombia and blaming sabotage of their water supply is a much less harmful excuse for their popularity than saying either it is out of their control (which people believe is since they are moving to control everything else) or they can't fix, which both of those leads to anger and removal in favor of those who will solve the problem.
I would suggest Colombia pursue the diplomatic route, but for the sake of logic match the mobilization of Venezuela (do not go above it, just equal the forces) so you won't be entire defenseless if he attacks. We do not need a Barbarossa of South America to unfold. By we I mean the U.S. because you and I both know who will come to save the Colombians should there be war and a chance they would lose. However, with Obama, no guarantees.
The three news sources used in today's WW4 Reality Check:
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSTRE5A80B020091109
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hCIKDzMk3thB2iiP8uhH7lXThSCQD9BPNVDO0
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2009/11/06/Shortages-pose-a-risk-to-Venezuelas-Chavez/UPI-83391257525813/
Saturday, November 7, 2009
One Republican Who Will Not Return
Anh Cao, I truly believe, has guaranteed the end of his GOP career tonight.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Economic Systems Simplified
Socialism: x + you = What we say its value is....
Progressive: What we say your value is... = 1 product
Ordoliberalism: x hour = 1 dollar
Capitalism: x product = 1 dollar
Progressive: What we say your value is... = 1 product
Ordoliberalism: x hour = 1 dollar
Capitalism: x product = 1 dollar
Bruce Poliquin Speaks Again
I have his words (not word for word for word, but pretty accurate) coming to a blog near you very soon. For what I have polished in my typing translation of the interview here is one of the first completed answers:
Me: Would you end the Dirigo health program?
Bruce Poliquin: "Let me give you a longer answer than you were expecting. Dirigo health is a classic example of the problems we have in Augusta. In 2003 when it was signed the goal was to enroll 130,000 Mainers who were uninsured. The goal was to not cost Maine anything and reduce premiums and increase care to the citizens. Now 8 years later, we've enrolled 10,000 and only 4 thousand were uninsured and cost us 150 million dollars. The care has not gotten better. It should have been shut down years ago. However, we need to make sure the people in that program have a place to go.They are in that program based on their own good will and judgment. We can't just throw them on the street."
"I give you that answer because a short answer would be an incomplete explanation. Knowing these facts Dirigo should be shut down."
Me: Would you end the Dirigo health program?
Bruce Poliquin: "Let me give you a longer answer than you were expecting. Dirigo health is a classic example of the problems we have in Augusta. In 2003 when it was signed the goal was to enroll 130,000 Mainers who were uninsured. The goal was to not cost Maine anything and reduce premiums and increase care to the citizens. Now 8 years later, we've enrolled 10,000 and only 4 thousand were uninsured and cost us 150 million dollars. The care has not gotten better. It should have been shut down years ago. However, we need to make sure the people in that program have a place to go.They are in that program based on their own good will and judgment. We can't just throw them on the street."
"I give you that answer because a short answer would be an incomplete explanation. Knowing these facts Dirigo should be shut down."
Common Sense 2
A person has taken the lives of others today. My sympathies to those victims as well.
However yesterday a person took lives as well. The questioning of why he did so naturally began. Some revelations, not just questions, were avoided for the sake of avoiding, instead of panic, offense. To avoid panic would have not only been sensible but acceptable. However, with holding the truth on the basis of not offending someone is an insult. To presume the populace incapable of behaving in a civil manner upon gaining knowledge is not the purpose of the government nor the media.
To justify either as actions for the common good is a display of ignorance. A democracy of any form, especially one where individual action is encouraged, requires it's populace to be fully informed to function best. The common good is best achieve when the populace is informed enough to have individuals act under motivation from awareness as opposed to obedience.
However yesterday a person took lives as well. The questioning of why he did so naturally began. Some revelations, not just questions, were avoided for the sake of avoiding, instead of panic, offense. To avoid panic would have not only been sensible but acceptable. However, with holding the truth on the basis of not offending someone is an insult. To presume the populace incapable of behaving in a civil manner upon gaining knowledge is not the purpose of the government nor the media.
To justify either as actions for the common good is a display of ignorance. A democracy of any form, especially one where individual action is encouraged, requires it's populace to be fully informed to function best. The common good is best achieve when the populace is informed enough to have individuals act under motivation from awareness as opposed to obedience.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Terror Attack in Fort Hood
I don't understand the justification that he didn't want to go to war. If you don't want to go to war, why do you turn your home into a war zone? Hasan also did this representing himself as Muslim instead of an American. As far as I am concerned, this was a terrorist attack. Sure he was not affiliated to any group, but he used the same tactics in a randomized fashion as the terrorists in the Middle East.
A Radical Islamist
My definition may not matter to anyone other than myself, but I consider it any Muslim who considers two things:
1. Violence over peaceful action.
2. Considers themselves Islamic first instead of American when they are serving in our armed forces.
1. Violence over peaceful action.
2. Considers themselves Islamic first instead of American when they are serving in our armed forces.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
301st Post A New Beginning
For those looking for the election information: Question 1 passed. TABOR failed, and Marijuana for medicinal purposes is legal. The rest, look it up yourself.
I support same-sex marriage while supporting straight forward sex education basics (protection, abstinence, the birthing video to scare them from doing it anyway) to students only after parental permission. I oppose abortion as a form of birth control but accept it in the case of rape, incest, or medical necessity for the life of the mother. I oppose the personal use of drugs, but will let someone stupid enough to want to use them simply go ahead and use them. I will not, however, be cleaning up the mess afterwards unless they show commitment to helping themselves clean up. I support a balanced budget and reduction of the national debt. I oppose government interventions into our personal lives including finance. I support a strong military and believe voting to be a civic duty. I agree that guns are a protection against tyranny and should not be banned. I recognize a higher power as the source of my rights but do not believe an interpretation of that power should be the basis of any government. I oppose corruption at every turn especially if it involves someone I know.
I am a moderate. I am a conservative. The two are not contradictions, but the same thing. It is time Conservatives stood up and let the country know that no longer will we be divided from a political party because one side wants Socialism and the other wants Theocracy. It is time Conservatives stand up to politicians claiming to represent us and say we represent ourselves from now on as a true Conservative should. Religious Conservatives fail to recognize the seperation of church and state well enough to control themselves from ignoring it when in power. They also often fail to uphold other forms of conservative thought when they lose grips on their church and state barriers. George Bush represents that exactly. He was not a conservative when he left office: he was a religiously inspired lame duck. I officially declare my personal definition of Conservative thought to lack an organized religion as a source of ideals. I declare we use common sense and our observations to move forward in a rational manner. I say it is time for Conservatives to no longer look away when someone they know does wrong but instead bring them to justice and let the world be better for it. Stand up because our voices are being lost and our values being destroyed by all sides. Being in the middle means a squeeze on both sides in enevitable, and that squeeze is happening. So it is time to push back and let ourselves be heard!
I support same-sex marriage while supporting straight forward sex education basics (protection, abstinence, the birthing video to scare them from doing it anyway) to students only after parental permission. I oppose abortion as a form of birth control but accept it in the case of rape, incest, or medical necessity for the life of the mother. I oppose the personal use of drugs, but will let someone stupid enough to want to use them simply go ahead and use them. I will not, however, be cleaning up the mess afterwards unless they show commitment to helping themselves clean up. I support a balanced budget and reduction of the national debt. I oppose government interventions into our personal lives including finance. I support a strong military and believe voting to be a civic duty. I agree that guns are a protection against tyranny and should not be banned. I recognize a higher power as the source of my rights but do not believe an interpretation of that power should be the basis of any government. I oppose corruption at every turn especially if it involves someone I know.
I am a moderate. I am a conservative. The two are not contradictions, but the same thing. It is time Conservatives stood up and let the country know that no longer will we be divided from a political party because one side wants Socialism and the other wants Theocracy. It is time Conservatives stand up to politicians claiming to represent us and say we represent ourselves from now on as a true Conservative should. Religious Conservatives fail to recognize the seperation of church and state well enough to control themselves from ignoring it when in power. They also often fail to uphold other forms of conservative thought when they lose grips on their church and state barriers. George Bush represents that exactly. He was not a conservative when he left office: he was a religiously inspired lame duck. I officially declare my personal definition of Conservative thought to lack an organized religion as a source of ideals. I declare we use common sense and our observations to move forward in a rational manner. I say it is time for Conservatives to no longer look away when someone they know does wrong but instead bring them to justice and let the world be better for it. Stand up because our voices are being lost and our values being destroyed by all sides. Being in the middle means a squeeze on both sides in enevitable, and that squeeze is happening. So it is time to push back and let ourselves be heard!
Election Results Part 1
Tonight I wanted to wait for Maine results to come in to do my report on the results but Question 1 is going back and forth within 5 thousand votes as the reports come in. So nationally Republicans kicked donkey today sweeping Virginia and it is projected they won the New Jersey gubernatorial race. New York's 23rd is facing numerous reporting issues among them a town that is not going to post their results online. My thoughts are this town must be Amish. TABOR seems to have failed at first glance, and the Bangor Daily News site I was using was posting voter turnout at 108 percent so I am not sure the numbers for them add up anymore, but it will all be sorted out later. More to come.
Governor Race Fielded
So far, with hopefully the field set for primaries and the run to the ballot, here is a list of all candidates for Governor:
Democrats:
Donna Dion
Dawn Hill
Eriq Manson
Libby Mitchell
Steve Rowe
Rosa Scarcelli
Peter Truman
Republicans:
Matt Jacobson
Paul Lepage
Peter Mills
Les Otten
Bruce Poliquin
Green Party:
Patrick Quinlan
Lynne Williams
Independent:
Sam Bailey
Beverly Cooper-Pete
Eliot Cutler
Augustus Edgerton
Alex Hammer
John Whitcomb
Personally to choose who I would prefer to see in the final election would include Bruce Poliquin for the GOP side and Rosa Scarcelli for the Democrat side. The other candidates do not have platforms I see as winning over more than half of Maine and Scarcelli as an underdog has her work cut out for her.
Democrats:
Donna Dion
Dawn Hill
Eriq Manson
Libby Mitchell
Steve Rowe
Rosa Scarcelli
Peter Truman
Republicans:
Matt Jacobson
Paul Lepage
Peter Mills
Les Otten
Bruce Poliquin
Green Party:
Patrick Quinlan
Lynne Williams
Independent:
Sam Bailey
Beverly Cooper-Pete
Eliot Cutler
Augustus Edgerton
Alex Hammer
John Whitcomb
Personally to choose who I would prefer to see in the final election would include Bruce Poliquin for the GOP side and Rosa Scarcelli for the Democrat side. The other candidates do not have platforms I see as winning over more than half of Maine and Scarcelli as an underdog has her work cut out for her.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Barrier Manipulation
As a human being you and I are priceless. Upon conception or birth, which ever occasion you choose, we all have equal potential. Nothing of our existance at that time seperated us from our equal helplessness and potential. Our race, orientation, culture, faith, bloodline, and wealth are things our inherent innocence leaves us ignorant of. Growing and learning of these things in society today forces the raising of a false barrier to success in society. A false barrier is one where a person can benefit without overcoming it. These barriers work against and for you depending on circumstance. I believe that a problem in America is the manipulation of these barriers instead of their removal. False barriers rely on the acceptance of many to be susceptible to manipulation. The only real barrier is that of the work and effort required for success. Being a true barrier it can not be manipulated for benefit; you either over come or you don't succeed.
These false barriers, I believe, are being manipulated on a scale never seen before in history. This is not specifically because there are more manipulations, but because of the source of these manipulations. The U.S. government has manipulated the false barriers across all levels of society for at least the past six years. On numerous instances the race and wealth barriers have been manipulated for the benefit of a political leadership in a Democratic Republic hoping to get elected by a populace they believe is as ignorant as a baby.
A solution to this problem is to challenge only the real barriers to your success and not allow the government to tell you which barriers you care about most.
These false barriers, I believe, are being manipulated on a scale never seen before in history. This is not specifically because there are more manipulations, but because of the source of these manipulations. The U.S. government has manipulated the false barriers across all levels of society for at least the past six years. On numerous instances the race and wealth barriers have been manipulated for the benefit of a political leadership in a Democratic Republic hoping to get elected by a populace they believe is as ignorant as a baby.
A solution to this problem is to challenge only the real barriers to your success and not allow the government to tell you which barriers you care about most.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Dirigo State Opportunity
How about we, the Dirigo state, take the lead once again in America. Let us have a year of politics without calling someone a Nazi. Please, we can end the madness by simply having civility and common sense.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Sarah Palin Continues Reagan Principles
In a recent statement regarding her endorsement of Doug Hoffman, she said the following:
Doug Hoffman stands for the principles that all Republicans should share: smaller government, lower taxes, strong national defense, and a commitment to individual liberty.
Quote over. Not mentioning pro-growth policies I forgive, but she mentions almost word for word the same principles Reagan stated were the core of Conservative thought. It should be noted Hoffman is running as the Conservative Party candidate and not a Republican.
Religious Right ideas and Conservativism may agree on some things, but the Religious Right does not represent Conservatives; only a Conservative can.
Doug Hoffman stands for the principles that all Republicans should share: smaller government, lower taxes, strong national defense, and a commitment to individual liberty.
Quote over. Not mentioning pro-growth policies I forgive, but she mentions almost word for word the same principles Reagan stated were the core of Conservative thought. It should be noted Hoffman is running as the Conservative Party candidate and not a Republican.
Religious Right ideas and Conservativism may agree on some things, but the Religious Right does not represent Conservatives; only a Conservative can.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Walk along with nothing better to do
Just see the sights and enjoy the view
Yet as you walk you hear a fight start to brew
A man throws her against the wall and you enter with only a single clue
To intervene on her behalf
As he strikes and makes a laugh
Your bound to make sure she isn't another dot on a graph
As you shout for him to stop
He doesn't so you give him a bop
He turns and you suddenly wish there were some cops
The guy pulls out a knife
Stabs you seven times trying to end your life
You fall back hoping this is the end of her strife
As you scream in pain entering a whole new fight
Later as you lay and recover
You think of her and wonder
Before this lightning had there been other rolls of thunder?
What made that man go asunder?
How can we turn on those we love?
Clip their wings and cage them like doves?
The tears fall like boulders in troves,
so I wish you all luck in having safer homes.
Just see the sights and enjoy the view
Yet as you walk you hear a fight start to brew
A man throws her against the wall and you enter with only a single clue
To intervene on her behalf
As he strikes and makes a laugh
Your bound to make sure she isn't another dot on a graph
As you shout for him to stop
He doesn't so you give him a bop
He turns and you suddenly wish there were some cops
The guy pulls out a knife
Stabs you seven times trying to end your life
You fall back hoping this is the end of her strife
As you scream in pain entering a whole new fight
Later as you lay and recover
You think of her and wonder
Before this lightning had there been other rolls of thunder?
What made that man go asunder?
How can we turn on those we love?
Clip their wings and cage them like doves?
The tears fall like boulders in troves,
so I wish you all luck in having safer homes.
Working Families Party
The political wing of ACORN and the weld connecting the Democratic Party to ACORN has appeared in the news for voter fraud and possibly stealing an election.
For example:
Thirty-eight forged or fraudulent ballots have been thrown out -- enough votes, an election official admits, to likely have tipped the city council and county elections in November to the Democrats.
Excerpt over. They may have stolen an election. This isn't your standard accusation of gerrymandering or disenfranchising voters, this is inventing votes. Who did this? Take a read:
Someone took my signature and voted with it and I felt extremely violated," Suozzo [said]. He is a soft-spoken 28-year-old environmental engineer who says he never saw, let alone signed, the Working Families Party Absentee ballot application that carried his supposed signature. He was flabbergasted that someone would vote for him and submit it.
Excerpt over. The WFP, highlighted as the political side of ACORN in my assessment, should face the same pressure as ACORN. I say that for a time period of two years no WFP candidate (even when affiliated with other political parties) can receive Election Funds from the government. Considering the scale tipping they are willing to take when the rules are provided for them to follow, the scales should be tipped against their candidates as a punishment for tarnishing the most valued civic duty in our nation.
Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/20/tried-steal-election-ny-voter-fraud-case-heats/
For example:
Thirty-eight forged or fraudulent ballots have been thrown out -- enough votes, an election official admits, to likely have tipped the city council and county elections in November to the Democrats.
Excerpt over. They may have stolen an election. This isn't your standard accusation of gerrymandering or disenfranchising voters, this is inventing votes. Who did this? Take a read:
Someone took my signature and voted with it and I felt extremely violated," Suozzo [said]. He is a soft-spoken 28-year-old environmental engineer who says he never saw, let alone signed, the Working Families Party Absentee ballot application that carried his supposed signature. He was flabbergasted that someone would vote for him and submit it.
Excerpt over. The WFP, highlighted as the political side of ACORN in my assessment, should face the same pressure as ACORN. I say that for a time period of two years no WFP candidate (even when affiliated with other political parties) can receive Election Funds from the government. Considering the scale tipping they are willing to take when the rules are provided for them to follow, the scales should be tipped against their candidates as a punishment for tarnishing the most valued civic duty in our nation.
Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/20/tried-steal-election-ny-voter-fraud-case-heats/
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Time for Honesty
I haven't been posting as much as I'd like to. I have followed the process of events in Venezuela for several years now, and watched how freedom of speech has slowly been wiped out. Cuba is cracking down on bloggers, and China has strengthened its "Great Firewall of China". I have been watching the opening salvos of the Fox News v. White House battle and am greatly concerned: the White House has gone to the extent where a reversal of their position will simply end their credibility and leave us with three years of basically useless government. They may be there and they will be crying, but America will have put them in the corner, turned out the lights, and closed the door.
To watch the situation go this far this fast is the same thing going on in other countries around the world. America is on a dangerous path, and my blog has already made me the target of some, but to have real power behind the attacks against me is something, to be honest, I do fear.
I'm not regretting what I post at all. I am fearful of the power some will have if they are able to say what I can post, or to tell me I can't post at all. Even worse is my fear that I will be punished for what I have posted: which is the truth followed by my opinion.
To watch the situation go this far this fast is the same thing going on in other countries around the world. America is on a dangerous path, and my blog has already made me the target of some, but to have real power behind the attacks against me is something, to be honest, I do fear.
I'm not regretting what I post at all. I am fearful of the power some will have if they are able to say what I can post, or to tell me I can't post at all. Even worse is my fear that I will be punished for what I have posted: which is the truth followed by my opinion.
Halloween Political Correctness
A costume with a gray alien in a jumpsuit labeled "Illegal Alien" was removed due to immigrant rights group's demands.
I am only angered by this because I've made that joke for years during Halloween. People always joke I'm from another planet and should go back, so I chide back "yes, I'm an illegal alien, I forgot to get my passport from Mars." This simply shuts everyone up so we can move on to something more constructive. It becomes either silent, awkward, or both and that is just how I like it when I get insulted.
Now, taking that joke and saying other people can't indulge in expressing it through other, possibly artistic, means is simply an attempt to deny freedom of speech. Look at all the offensive things done to religions in this country protected by freedom of speech, if a person who has broken the law can't take a joke then they should simply leave the country.
I am only angered by this because I've made that joke for years during Halloween. People always joke I'm from another planet and should go back, so I chide back "yes, I'm an illegal alien, I forgot to get my passport from Mars." This simply shuts everyone up so we can move on to something more constructive. It becomes either silent, awkward, or both and that is just how I like it when I get insulted.
Now, taking that joke and saying other people can't indulge in expressing it through other, possibly artistic, means is simply an attempt to deny freedom of speech. Look at all the offensive things done to religions in this country protected by freedom of speech, if a person who has broken the law can't take a joke then they should simply leave the country.
With Friends Like These...
It has been revealed, allegedly, that the Italian Secret Service paid the Taliban to not attack their forces in Afghanistan. This deal ended when French forces took over as the region's NATO force of control and the French sent in troops expecting the ease the Italians had there, leading to the deaths of 10 French soldiers when confronted by the Taliban. This was the worst loss for France in over 25 years.
France has had a massive increase in demands to withdraw its forces ever since.
So what should our military's response be?
I say get out of our way. We are pulling out of Iraq, or so we are told, so how about we take some of those 140,000 troops, bring them home, send some of our other 1 million strong forces over to Afghanistan to replace all NATO and otherwise forces. Let this be a U.S. and Afghanistan military war. The Europeans don't have the stomach for a war obviously. So they should get out of the line of fire and let us do the job that needs to be done.
You see, in World War 2 allies worked together to win the war. We raced for control of Sicily with British and American forces. With the Allies and Soviet forces we raced to Berlin. The war had allies operating jointly, but separately but the difference between then and now they raced to win. We seem to be in a race to quit with the other nations.
Whether it be Spain's shameless withdrawal of troops from Iraq to the lesser vocal but still very active withdrawals by other nations from Iraq to the current calls for withdrawals in almost every nation in Europe and Canada, we have joined those calls.
Iraq was luck because of the surge. Afghanistan? It is at its worst right now. A withdrawal of forces would lead to a collapse of the Afghan government and the return of Taliban control and continuous civil war which would grant the Taliban new recruits constantly. Long road traveled would lead to more attacks on the U.S.
So instead of letting the situation get worse by having cowardly allies or withdrawals let the American forces take over and do the job the way it needs to be done.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/16/world/europe/16italy.html?em
France has had a massive increase in demands to withdraw its forces ever since.
So what should our military's response be?
I say get out of our way. We are pulling out of Iraq, or so we are told, so how about we take some of those 140,000 troops, bring them home, send some of our other 1 million strong forces over to Afghanistan to replace all NATO and otherwise forces. Let this be a U.S. and Afghanistan military war. The Europeans don't have the stomach for a war obviously. So they should get out of the line of fire and let us do the job that needs to be done.
You see, in World War 2 allies worked together to win the war. We raced for control of Sicily with British and American forces. With the Allies and Soviet forces we raced to Berlin. The war had allies operating jointly, but separately but the difference between then and now they raced to win. We seem to be in a race to quit with the other nations.
Whether it be Spain's shameless withdrawal of troops from Iraq to the lesser vocal but still very active withdrawals by other nations from Iraq to the current calls for withdrawals in almost every nation in Europe and Canada, we have joined those calls.
Iraq was luck because of the surge. Afghanistan? It is at its worst right now. A withdrawal of forces would lead to a collapse of the Afghan government and the return of Taliban control and continuous civil war which would grant the Taliban new recruits constantly. Long road traveled would lead to more attacks on the U.S.
So instead of letting the situation get worse by having cowardly allies or withdrawals let the American forces take over and do the job the way it needs to be done.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/16/world/europe/16italy.html?em
Friday, October 16, 2009
Gary Locke and Missile Tech
The current head of the Commerce Department, Gary Locke is a very unique Democrat (yes, Democrat, he served as governor of Washington). Now he controls, well, here is the article:
President Obama recently shifted authority for approving sales to China of missile and space technology from the White House to the Commerce Department. The president issued a little-noticed "presidential determination" Sept. 29 that delegated authority for determining whether missile and space exports should be approved for China to Commerce Secretary Gary Locke.
Excerpt over. I didn't know the White House had any issues in dealing with these problems. If it isn't broken, don't fix it. However, as for the risk, lets look at what Gary's priorities are shall we? I mean, his record should show if he actually puts money ahead of, say, the American people:
Among his spending-reduction proposals were laying off thousands of state employees; reducing health coverage; freezing most state employees' pay; and cutting funding for nursing homes and programs for the developmentally disabled. In his final budget, Locke suspended two voter-passed, pro-school initiatives while cutting state education funding. That same state budget, though, had record-high allocations for construction projects.
Excerpt over. The Wikipedia article used here is sourced, and the sources check out for the most part, several are broken (thanks Yahoo) but most check out.
So in the sake of money over us, I think it is quite clear he will go with money. Should we really let him handle sensitive materials when given the option to put them on the open, or not so open, market?
Common sense people.
President Obama recently shifted authority for approving sales to China of missile and space technology from the White House to the Commerce Department. The president issued a little-noticed "presidential determination" Sept. 29 that delegated authority for determining whether missile and space exports should be approved for China to Commerce Secretary Gary Locke.
Excerpt over. I didn't know the White House had any issues in dealing with these problems. If it isn't broken, don't fix it. However, as for the risk, lets look at what Gary's priorities are shall we? I mean, his record should show if he actually puts money ahead of, say, the American people:
Among his spending-reduction proposals were laying off thousands of state employees; reducing health coverage; freezing most state employees' pay; and cutting funding for nursing homes and programs for the developmentally disabled. In his final budget, Locke suspended two voter-passed, pro-school initiatives while cutting state education funding. That same state budget, though, had record-high allocations for construction projects.
Excerpt over. The Wikipedia article used here is sourced, and the sources check out for the most part, several are broken (thanks Yahoo) but most check out.
So in the sake of money over us, I think it is quite clear he will go with money. Should we really let him handle sensitive materials when given the option to put them on the open, or not so open, market?
Common sense people.
Campaign Note
The recent path of the gubernatorial elections has increased the number of those running and while every candidate may be important, unless they say something not already said I will probably give it a pass. However, there is one tactic of fund raising being used by Lynne Williams in her recent email:
But this can't happen without YOUR participation.To qualify for Maine Clean Election funds I MUST raise a minimum of $40,000 in seed money paid directly to the campaign AND collect a minimum of 3,250 $5 Qualifying Contributions for the Maine Clean Election fund. Once we meet these goals, we will qualify for $800,000 in Clean Election funding, so your $105 in contributions can yield a 7,200 percent return on your investment to allow my campaign to move forward on the issues of importance to you and to Maine.
Email quote over. The Maine Clean Election fund is, in fact, already paid by us. So we are not actually get the return she says. We also are not getting the return because her campaign, not us, is getting the funds. Would you, if a person came to your door, give them a hundred dollars if they said that with your one hundred dollars they were guaranteed $7,200 which they would not give back to you? Of course not, it would sound like a scam. Which, in essence, campaign funding really is a scam. It is a false investment, and for some reason people in this country, rich and poor, are willing to place money in these no-guarantee places. The lottery is among them, so are drugs (including tobacco and alcohol), and campaigns for politicians.
Common sense tells you a scam is a scam, but for some reason people think they can get big returns without risk, and then wonder why they don't have enough money. Guaranteed investments, such as a savings account, or a government bond (considered guaranteed) need to be looked at right now. The stock market is about as much of a science as voodoo, so I suggest against it. Thank you for reading.
But this can't happen without YOUR participation.To qualify for Maine Clean Election funds I MUST raise a minimum of $40,000 in seed money paid directly to the campaign AND collect a minimum of 3,250 $5 Qualifying Contributions for the Maine Clean Election fund. Once we meet these goals, we will qualify for $800,000 in Clean Election funding, so your $105 in contributions can yield a 7,200 percent return on your investment to allow my campaign to move forward on the issues of importance to you and to Maine.
Email quote over. The Maine Clean Election fund is, in fact, already paid by us. So we are not actually get the return she says. We also are not getting the return because her campaign, not us, is getting the funds. Would you, if a person came to your door, give them a hundred dollars if they said that with your one hundred dollars they were guaranteed $7,200 which they would not give back to you? Of course not, it would sound like a scam. Which, in essence, campaign funding really is a scam. It is a false investment, and for some reason people in this country, rich and poor, are willing to place money in these no-guarantee places. The lottery is among them, so are drugs (including tobacco and alcohol), and campaigns for politicians.
Common sense tells you a scam is a scam, but for some reason people think they can get big returns without risk, and then wonder why they don't have enough money. Guaranteed investments, such as a savings account, or a government bond (considered guaranteed) need to be looked at right now. The stock market is about as much of a science as voodoo, so I suggest against it. Thank you for reading.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Deja Vu?
On 9/11 I had a feeling. It was of knowing something was going on that was bigger than us, but not knowing what it was. I was just young, but after a day of the two towers being hit when she told is the Pentagon had been hit, I told my teacher we were under attack. I didn't know by who or why, I just knew I suddenly cared.
I've been tracking the reports from Afghanistan, Somalia, and our own corrupt politics for a while now and today was a series of events that don't make sense to me.
Barack Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize doesn't add up. It isn't just me, nobody at the university could believe it, we all agree, liberals and conservatives, that he hasn't done anything to deserve it.
Then I see we are abandoning a base in Afghanistan where some of our troops died recently, and this is just another move in that country that doesn't add up to me. We are at war, and we should fight to win which means keeping the enemy on the run, not letting them put us on the run.
Add this to Ethiopia's attack on the Somaliland government, supposedly an ally, Iran helping Venezuela find uranium, and Socialists taking over Greece and while not as apparent as 9/11, something is going on. I do not know what it is, but there is something big in motion that I can't figure it out. I've had this feeling for a while, but not as powerful a feeling as it is today. So I thought I might as well let you know, so clarity might be gained somehow if we compare notes so to speak.
I've been tracking the reports from Afghanistan, Somalia, and our own corrupt politics for a while now and today was a series of events that don't make sense to me.
Barack Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize doesn't add up. It isn't just me, nobody at the university could believe it, we all agree, liberals and conservatives, that he hasn't done anything to deserve it.
Then I see we are abandoning a base in Afghanistan where some of our troops died recently, and this is just another move in that country that doesn't add up to me. We are at war, and we should fight to win which means keeping the enemy on the run, not letting them put us on the run.
Add this to Ethiopia's attack on the Somaliland government, supposedly an ally, Iran helping Venezuela find uranium, and Socialists taking over Greece and while not as apparent as 9/11, something is going on. I do not know what it is, but there is something big in motion that I can't figure it out. I've had this feeling for a while, but not as powerful a feeling as it is today. So I thought I might as well let you know, so clarity might be gained somehow if we compare notes so to speak.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Should Schools Pay For Sports?
Fundamentally, humans are evolved not because of our ability to wrestle a rhino. We are evolved because of our brains, and the things which strengthen our minds should be valued more than the things which strengthen our fists. It takes a lot of effort to wrestle someone, but just a twitch to pull a trigger.
We'll talk about who survives the apocalypse when it actually comes.
We'll talk about who survives the apocalypse when it actually comes.
Social Security Solution
We all hear about Social Security having problems and running out. We never hear of a solution. I will warn you this is going to be a long post, this is a big problem. This post, however, if followed in full by everyone in the country, would solve our social security woes (unless proven otherwise).
Where to start, this is big. We know its a problem and we know that nobody has a solution which works when keeping Social Security in existance. The problem that has brought the house of cards down: more old people than young people.
This can't be solved by killing old people, well, it could, but that just isn't nice. It is worse than nice: it is age genocide. We don't do that in this nation.
We could just print money to pay for it but that would lead (among our current spending) to hyperinflation.
So what should we do? I say we end the program.
Please stop running around like the end of the world is approaching. Hear my case before screaming about my evil heartless existence.
How do we end it? We could just stop paying now and witness our elderly bankrupt families who care enough to try and care for their elders, and see the elderly without caring families homeless in our streets and killing themselves to give mercy to their families wallets.
That isn't what I meant by end the program. We need to phase out the program in a way that new entries do not expect to receive the benefits but those who were promised those benefits receive them.
Hear that? Those who worked thinking they were going to get it will get it, those just starting won't get it.
Solution: an alternative.
Fact of life is you do not (if your lucky) work until the day you die. So having a place, an account, to put your money for retirement (still by government mandate) is the best option. An account where you pay the Social Security tax (possibly even Medicare, but that isn't the program I studied for this) and the cash builds up without having it pay for someone else, the government, or a bank's bad loans. An account which can only be increased until you retire and can only be touched by you.
Why this approach of a mandated approach to retirement? People just don't, en masse, plan for the future. Think of this: when you were 18 did you think of how you were going to pay the bills when you retired? People really don't think about saving. This account would allow that, but there is a catch.
All those people who were promised their retirement will still get it. How will we pay for it? Well, everyone will still pay the Social Security tax. Yes, a double dose of taxes for people. It is a very painful thing I know, but hey, such a problem requires some unsavory solutions. You have a better solution, let me know.
This will allow the funds to be raised to pay for social security without (long term) leading to the unending bankruptcy of the nation.
Four paragraphs and things sound pretty sound, but wait, there is more. The fund can not stop raising (as in collecting, not increasing) the Social Security double tax (double in the sense that it goes to two places) until the last person receiving benefits has, well, stopped receiving those benefits. This means having a shift of Social Security to just handling retirement accounts, and allowing and creating other programs for disabilities and other things.
When a person with the account dies, the funds should go to declared beneficiaries. Will you get all the funds when a person dies? No, the government will never let go of that inheritance tax. So basically, when a person dies, half of the funds in their account will go to the heir, and half to the government. This way the government still gets it's cut to pay for managing the accounts.
The agency could be called the Retirement Account Agency, and a requirement of a yearly audit would ensure proper handling of the finances.
Now the rate someone withdraws their retirement should be left up to them. I would personally recommend people prepare to live for 100 years. Odds are you probably won't live 100 years, but planning that far ahead will give you some breathing room to give a helpful boost to your beneficiaries for funeral costs and other purposes.
You got a better idea? Let me hear about it. Think my plan won't work, let me know why.
Where to start, this is big. We know its a problem and we know that nobody has a solution which works when keeping Social Security in existance. The problem that has brought the house of cards down: more old people than young people.
This can't be solved by killing old people, well, it could, but that just isn't nice. It is worse than nice: it is age genocide. We don't do that in this nation.
We could just print money to pay for it but that would lead (among our current spending) to hyperinflation.
So what should we do? I say we end the program.
Please stop running around like the end of the world is approaching. Hear my case before screaming about my evil heartless existence.
How do we end it? We could just stop paying now and witness our elderly bankrupt families who care enough to try and care for their elders, and see the elderly without caring families homeless in our streets and killing themselves to give mercy to their families wallets.
That isn't what I meant by end the program. We need to phase out the program in a way that new entries do not expect to receive the benefits but those who were promised those benefits receive them.
Hear that? Those who worked thinking they were going to get it will get it, those just starting won't get it.
Solution: an alternative.
Fact of life is you do not (if your lucky) work until the day you die. So having a place, an account, to put your money for retirement (still by government mandate) is the best option. An account where you pay the Social Security tax (possibly even Medicare, but that isn't the program I studied for this) and the cash builds up without having it pay for someone else, the government, or a bank's bad loans. An account which can only be increased until you retire and can only be touched by you.
Why this approach of a mandated approach to retirement? People just don't, en masse, plan for the future. Think of this: when you were 18 did you think of how you were going to pay the bills when you retired? People really don't think about saving. This account would allow that, but there is a catch.
All those people who were promised their retirement will still get it. How will we pay for it? Well, everyone will still pay the Social Security tax. Yes, a double dose of taxes for people. It is a very painful thing I know, but hey, such a problem requires some unsavory solutions. You have a better solution, let me know.
This will allow the funds to be raised to pay for social security without (long term) leading to the unending bankruptcy of the nation.
Four paragraphs and things sound pretty sound, but wait, there is more. The fund can not stop raising (as in collecting, not increasing) the Social Security double tax (double in the sense that it goes to two places) until the last person receiving benefits has, well, stopped receiving those benefits. This means having a shift of Social Security to just handling retirement accounts, and allowing and creating other programs for disabilities and other things.
When a person with the account dies, the funds should go to declared beneficiaries. Will you get all the funds when a person dies? No, the government will never let go of that inheritance tax. So basically, when a person dies, half of the funds in their account will go to the heir, and half to the government. This way the government still gets it's cut to pay for managing the accounts.
The agency could be called the Retirement Account Agency, and a requirement of a yearly audit would ensure proper handling of the finances.
Now the rate someone withdraws their retirement should be left up to them. I would personally recommend people prepare to live for 100 years. Odds are you probably won't live 100 years, but planning that far ahead will give you some breathing room to give a helpful boost to your beneficiaries for funeral costs and other purposes.
You got a better idea? Let me hear about it. Think my plan won't work, let me know why.
Bruce Poliquin Interview
I had an interview today with Bruce Poliquin, a Republican candidate for governor. The conference call was very successful, many questions were asked and the responses were to the point and (for my taste anyway) very well spoken. We covered many topics. The first being education in which several points were made. First, he knows the schools work best without the state running them. He has the experience in managing and common sense, very important quality there to be able to balance the struggle of state and school board sovereignty. However, he did not give a specific answer to how state funds would be given if the state was giving no input.
The position of the governor on social issues being provided by the Constitution was avoided, but he did say that social issues such as same sex marriage should only be approved by the voters. He as governor does not feel like such an issue is best resolved for 1.3 million people just by his approval. He is very aware of the process that makes Maine unique in terms of voter petitions and supports that being used on such problems.
Reduced taxes in an all encompassing approach to making the code simpler is one of his primary goals. The need to expand business and give it, at least on the state level, the room it needs to grow with a combination of fewer and more streamlined regulations. The environment for business, Bruce says, needs to be made more attractive so we get the businesses we need to keep our kids here, provide jobs we need, and expand our economy.
However, politics is rarely without controversy. So I asked my first question on campaign controversy ever, which was a moment where Bruce became very passionate.
On the issue of a recent debacle in Portland, he said the accusations are baseless. He was invited like all other candidates, and his campaign accepted instantly. It was going to be a fundraiser event for the Portland City Republicans, not for the Poliquin Campaign. His campaign offered to pay for the campaign fee of $750 for their campaign to be represented, thus saving the Portland Republicans money so the event would not cost the group any funds. The other campaigns it seems made a completely false accusation in order to, by my own understanding of the situation, avoid paying the fee. He continues to be willing to fulfill that commitment at any time. Poliquin's campaign, however, supports giving voters as many opportunities to know the candidates and will take part in as many debates as possible.
To conclude: Bruce says the accusations were baseless and there will never be a conflict of interest with his campaign.
[The event in Portland was boycotted by the other campaigns on allegations of the Poliquin Campaign having a staff member benefiting from the fundraiser and, as the report I read stated, making this into a campaign fundraiser instead of the Portland City Committee fundraiser. Personally, I trust Bruce since no state filings for campaign ethics have occurred and his statements were either Emmy worthy performances or pure honesty.]
As I remember more of our half-hour conversation, I'll let you know. One thing you can be certain of: Bruce Poliquin is one of the most energetic people in politics I have ever seen. He has constant positivity and faith in this state and its people. Some candidates focus on other campaigns, but his is entirely focused on his message and policies.
There is another side of the story here. The outreach of the Poliquin campaign is one of the best I've ever seen. This opportunity to talk with Bruce was given to me by their invitation. I didn't even have to ask for it. My three emails each to the other candidates still go unanswered. However I've gotten two opportunities to speak with Bruce already and both times it was their outreach which gave me that opportunity.
I've written before about how a campaign needs a good outreach, and the Poliquin campaign has one which continues to have my support.
The position of the governor on social issues being provided by the Constitution was avoided, but he did say that social issues such as same sex marriage should only be approved by the voters. He as governor does not feel like such an issue is best resolved for 1.3 million people just by his approval. He is very aware of the process that makes Maine unique in terms of voter petitions and supports that being used on such problems.
Reduced taxes in an all encompassing approach to making the code simpler is one of his primary goals. The need to expand business and give it, at least on the state level, the room it needs to grow with a combination of fewer and more streamlined regulations. The environment for business, Bruce says, needs to be made more attractive so we get the businesses we need to keep our kids here, provide jobs we need, and expand our economy.
However, politics is rarely without controversy. So I asked my first question on campaign controversy ever, which was a moment where Bruce became very passionate.
On the issue of a recent debacle in Portland, he said the accusations are baseless. He was invited like all other candidates, and his campaign accepted instantly. It was going to be a fundraiser event for the Portland City Republicans, not for the Poliquin Campaign. His campaign offered to pay for the campaign fee of $750 for their campaign to be represented, thus saving the Portland Republicans money so the event would not cost the group any funds. The other campaigns it seems made a completely false accusation in order to, by my own understanding of the situation, avoid paying the fee. He continues to be willing to fulfill that commitment at any time. Poliquin's campaign, however, supports giving voters as many opportunities to know the candidates and will take part in as many debates as possible.
To conclude: Bruce says the accusations were baseless and there will never be a conflict of interest with his campaign.
[The event in Portland was boycotted by the other campaigns on allegations of the Poliquin Campaign having a staff member benefiting from the fundraiser and, as the report I read stated, making this into a campaign fundraiser instead of the Portland City Committee fundraiser. Personally, I trust Bruce since no state filings for campaign ethics have occurred and his statements were either Emmy worthy performances or pure honesty.]
As I remember more of our half-hour conversation, I'll let you know. One thing you can be certain of: Bruce Poliquin is one of the most energetic people in politics I have ever seen. He has constant positivity and faith in this state and its people. Some candidates focus on other campaigns, but his is entirely focused on his message and policies.
There is another side of the story here. The outreach of the Poliquin campaign is one of the best I've ever seen. This opportunity to talk with Bruce was given to me by their invitation. I didn't even have to ask for it. My three emails each to the other candidates still go unanswered. However I've gotten two opportunities to speak with Bruce already and both times it was their outreach which gave me that opportunity.
I've written before about how a campaign needs a good outreach, and the Poliquin campaign has one which continues to have my support.
Friday, October 2, 2009
Afghanistan
The White House has rejected the call for more troops in Afghanistan. They wish to take a more reconstructive approach.
You can not build a school and have the benefits when the Taliban just have the workers building it bribe them not to attack, and when the school is finished burn the school down because we can't provide enough security. You need to secure the situation before you rebuild the nation. I really wish our president would do his job and use common sense at the same time.
You can not build a school and have the benefits when the Taliban just have the workers building it bribe them not to attack, and when the school is finished burn the school down because we can't provide enough security. You need to secure the situation before you rebuild the nation. I really wish our president would do his job and use common sense at the same time.
Pacific Gone Wild
I want to send my condolences to the people of Samoa and wish them a quick recovery to normalcy, if possible. The people of Indonesia in the earthquake have the world's support, as do the super-typhoon victims in the Philipines.
What you may not have read about during all of this is two American soldiers killed in a fight against Abu Sayaff in one of the lower Philipine islands. Just so you know, we have, by my last count, 5,000 active troops there fighting the war on terror.
What you may not have read about during all of this is two American soldiers killed in a fight against Abu Sayaff in one of the lower Philipine islands. Just so you know, we have, by my last count, 5,000 active troops there fighting the war on terror.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Constitutional Alert
From: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/technology/02distracted.html?hp
Quote:
Federal employees will no longer be allowed to send text messages while driving government vehicles or when driving their own cars and using cellphones paid for by the government, according to an executive order signed Wednesday night by President Obama.
Quote over. Does this mean that in states without a texting law, Federal Employees, in their own cars with their own cell phones, will still be breaking the law? Does a Federal Law in this actually have any method of enforcement?
The Federal government says it is only on federal employees, but the income tax was just on the wealthiest one percent in this country at one time. It is only a matter of time until this is expanded to everyone regardless of state laws.
Quote:
Federal employees will no longer be allowed to send text messages while driving government vehicles or when driving their own cars and using cellphones paid for by the government, according to an executive order signed Wednesday night by President Obama.
Quote over. Does this mean that in states without a texting law, Federal Employees, in their own cars with their own cell phones, will still be breaking the law? Does a Federal Law in this actually have any method of enforcement?
The Federal government says it is only on federal employees, but the income tax was just on the wealthiest one percent in this country at one time. It is only a matter of time until this is expanded to everyone regardless of state laws.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Whoopie, Your Not Funny
To say that the convicted rapist movie director "didn't rape rape, you know" is not funny. It is in fact not only stupid but detrimental to common civility in our country. (He was convicted of statutory rape.)
Syria- Swing Nation? Skip if under 18.
Do not read if under the age of 18, I'm serious. Don't, this is a very mature post, the first and hopefully the last, but it was just too good to not write about.
I think Syria would be on Iran's side in a war. Some in the news are saying otherwise. Obviously we need to take a rational look at the most recent public issue for Syria. While we are talking about health care, Russia about its alcohol and drug problems, Syria is focusing on something addressed, for the most part, over a hundred years ago.
What is this issue? Follow the link to find out. I will however give some very very very very memorable quotes from this debate raging in Syria:
"Come on guys," he wrote, arguing Syrians "should not be silent about it because of modesty."
Fadal then listed "the problems caused by this abominable practice," among them a loss of focus, physical inactivity, testicular pain, bloody excretions after excessive [performance], and loss of ones ability to control urination.
"Boys are unable to concentrate on their studies and are looking very pale before prematurely ejaculating and losing consciousness in schools. Their balls are blue and sore as hell and when they sneeze or cough they are allegedly pissing in their pants. They are falling on their backs after bleeding to death from their weenies."
"Girls, Lord Have Mercy on us all, are doing this despicable, blinding and atrocious act secretly without the written consent of their male pimp," Fares continued. "They, someone hold me please before I pass out, are losing their virginity to their fingers out of wedlock."
"Let's move ahead, forge our destiny and join forces together in beating our meats and beating around the bushes, to reach an unprecedented Syrian Orgasm
Blogger Yazan Badran, from Latakia, Syria, then started a campaign in favor of (rather than against) moral decay, calling on his readers to listen to heavy metal, smoke joints, eat publicly during Ramadan, drink hard liquor and engage in public sexual experimentation.
"You shall skip school and stay home enjoying the vast porn directory on the Internet," he wrote. "Your plan for the day should include nothing but long sessions of masturbation."
Quotes over, well, wait, there is one more that just can't be left out:
"You see why we're a little disappointed with Obama here in Syria," he added. "We expected him to help, in particular with the rampant problem of masturbation."
Quotes over. I wonder what- No. Just no.
From: http://www.themedialine.org/news/news_detail.asp?NewsID=26617
I think Syria would be on Iran's side in a war. Some in the news are saying otherwise. Obviously we need to take a rational look at the most recent public issue for Syria. While we are talking about health care, Russia about its alcohol and drug problems, Syria is focusing on something addressed, for the most part, over a hundred years ago.
What is this issue? Follow the link to find out. I will however give some very very very very memorable quotes from this debate raging in Syria:
"Come on guys," he wrote, arguing Syrians "should not be silent about it because of modesty."
Fadal then listed "the problems caused by this abominable practice," among them a loss of focus, physical inactivity, testicular pain, bloody excretions after excessive [performance], and loss of ones ability to control urination.
"Boys are unable to concentrate on their studies and are looking very pale before prematurely ejaculating and losing consciousness in schools. Their balls are blue and sore as hell and when they sneeze or cough they are allegedly pissing in their pants. They are falling on their backs after bleeding to death from their weenies."
"Girls, Lord Have Mercy on us all, are doing this despicable, blinding and atrocious act secretly without the written consent of their male pimp," Fares continued. "They, someone hold me please before I pass out, are losing their virginity to their fingers out of wedlock."
"Let's move ahead, forge our destiny and join forces together in beating our meats and beating around the bushes, to reach an unprecedented Syrian Orgasm
Blogger Yazan Badran, from Latakia, Syria, then started a campaign in favor of (rather than against) moral decay, calling on his readers to listen to heavy metal, smoke joints, eat publicly during Ramadan, drink hard liquor and engage in public sexual experimentation.
"You shall skip school and stay home enjoying the vast porn directory on the Internet," he wrote. "Your plan for the day should include nothing but long sessions of masturbation."
Quotes over, well, wait, there is one more that just can't be left out:
"You see why we're a little disappointed with Obama here in Syria," he added. "We expected him to help, in particular with the rampant problem of masturbation."
Quotes over. I wonder what- No. Just no.
From: http://www.themedialine.org/news/news_detail.asp?NewsID=26617
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
University of the Stupid
From: http://schoolsmatter.blogspot.com/2009/09/seeking-solidarity-among-k-12-and.html
There is a protest in which a building on the UCSC campus has been taken over by students and faculty in protest of the California budget cuts.
After the blog author mentions the back story and introduces the interview, one of the people he interviews states the start of their movement following the start of the protests:
[S]ome of us walked in uninvited on the large undergraduate lectures of those professors who failed to honor the picket line to make an emergency announcement about the Walkout.
Quote over. Civility is clearly not a guideline of this campaign. While their teachers go on strike, others try to do their jobs and actually teach. Seeing this as unacceptable they disrupt the non-striking professors classes. It goes on to their complaints:
The Community Studies program was gutted; minority student programs were cut back; faculty searches for departments desperate for replacements, such as the History of Consciousness, were cancelled; health-care costs for graduate students were forced up;
Quote over. "History of Consciousness" was canceled, what evils! I'm not sure what Community Studies entails, whether it is a sub-section of biology or a society examination class, I think observing demographics in political science, or the biology in zoology or basic biology covers that topic. How dare health care costs rise with the actual cost of health care! Seriously, these people think everything as a necessity, a right guaranteed to them based on their misinterpretation of the highest law of the land: The Constitution, not the Declaration of Human Rights.
But wait, there is more:
We would like to see a broad social movement against cuts to education and all other state social programs and services.
Quote over. So, despite having a massive shortfall in the California state budget, and a vote by the people saying there should be no increase in taxes, somehow 25% of the shortfall should still not be cut. The logic is non-existent in these people I swear.
But wait, there is still more:
The one-day Walkout and our occupation are only first-steps, the genesis of a year-long or multi-year effort to take back the UC, to rewrite its priorities in the interest of public education and not privatization.
Quote over. A revolution is what they are talking about. Also, to say they shouldn't move to privatization is very ignorant of them. The school isn't privatizing, the cuts are based on the public sector's budget!
But wait, yes, there is more:
We want to express our thanks for the support across the nation. Why stop at the borders of California? Let's take this effort to escalate to the nation as well! Public universities are being run like corporations all across the U.S. This must be brought to an end.
Quote over. So because corporations operate for a profit, and the public sector is being run to just be balanced, the university system is like a corporation? There is no profit in the state budgets! The state budgets have no money to spend so how this person ever thinks the state could afford it is ridiculous.
You know the phrase:
A broad-based social movement that has the capacity to articulate an alternative collective vision to the narrow, corporatist special-interests that control our budgets and strategic planning will be necessary. Nobody is sure what this will look like yet.
For now, we believe one of the first steps to building such a movement is to show that escalation and occupation is necessary and possible. We hope that groups of students, faculty, and everyday Californians can begin to see themselves, too, as people who can organize, occupy, and escalate to fight back.
Quote over. So while they do not know what the solution is or what it will look like, more protests like their own are certainly going to simply bring the answers forth from the vast collective minds in solidarity of protest about the same thing. They think that if others do the exact same thing they are doing somehow an answer to the problems will appear from their movement, which so far has no solutions.
To the people who want a solid community of one thought which results in the communal efforts to solve a problem by expanding the community, not the openness to ideas, as an approach to providing solutions: open your eyes and look at the big picture. Just because you protest does not mean the legislatures which had budget cuts did not try to solve the problem. Just because you protest and join together with others does not mean the legislatures will magically come up with a solution to appease your anger. It does not work like that. You don't like something, do the constructive American thing and solve it yourself.
There is a protest in which a building on the UCSC campus has been taken over by students and faculty in protest of the California budget cuts.
After the blog author mentions the back story and introduces the interview, one of the people he interviews states the start of their movement following the start of the protests:
[S]ome of us walked in uninvited on the large undergraduate lectures of those professors who failed to honor the picket line to make an emergency announcement about the Walkout.
Quote over. Civility is clearly not a guideline of this campaign. While their teachers go on strike, others try to do their jobs and actually teach. Seeing this as unacceptable they disrupt the non-striking professors classes. It goes on to their complaints:
The Community Studies program was gutted; minority student programs were cut back; faculty searches for departments desperate for replacements, such as the History of Consciousness, were cancelled; health-care costs for graduate students were forced up;
Quote over. "History of Consciousness" was canceled, what evils! I'm not sure what Community Studies entails, whether it is a sub-section of biology or a society examination class, I think observing demographics in political science, or the biology in zoology or basic biology covers that topic. How dare health care costs rise with the actual cost of health care! Seriously, these people think everything as a necessity, a right guaranteed to them based on their misinterpretation of the highest law of the land: The Constitution, not the Declaration of Human Rights.
But wait, there is more:
We would like to see a broad social movement against cuts to education and all other state social programs and services.
Quote over. So, despite having a massive shortfall in the California state budget, and a vote by the people saying there should be no increase in taxes, somehow 25% of the shortfall should still not be cut. The logic is non-existent in these people I swear.
But wait, there is still more:
The one-day Walkout and our occupation are only first-steps, the genesis of a year-long or multi-year effort to take back the UC, to rewrite its priorities in the interest of public education and not privatization.
Quote over. A revolution is what they are talking about. Also, to say they shouldn't move to privatization is very ignorant of them. The school isn't privatizing, the cuts are based on the public sector's budget!
But wait, yes, there is more:
We want to express our thanks for the support across the nation. Why stop at the borders of California? Let's take this effort to escalate to the nation as well! Public universities are being run like corporations all across the U.S. This must be brought to an end.
Quote over. So because corporations operate for a profit, and the public sector is being run to just be balanced, the university system is like a corporation? There is no profit in the state budgets! The state budgets have no money to spend so how this person ever thinks the state could afford it is ridiculous.
You know the phrase:
A broad-based social movement that has the capacity to articulate an alternative collective vision to the narrow, corporatist special-interests that control our budgets and strategic planning will be necessary. Nobody is sure what this will look like yet.
For now, we believe one of the first steps to building such a movement is to show that escalation and occupation is necessary and possible. We hope that groups of students, faculty, and everyday Californians can begin to see themselves, too, as people who can organize, occupy, and escalate to fight back.
Quote over. So while they do not know what the solution is or what it will look like, more protests like their own are certainly going to simply bring the answers forth from the vast collective minds in solidarity of protest about the same thing. They think that if others do the exact same thing they are doing somehow an answer to the problems will appear from their movement, which so far has no solutions.
To the people who want a solid community of one thought which results in the communal efforts to solve a problem by expanding the community, not the openness to ideas, as an approach to providing solutions: open your eyes and look at the big picture. Just because you protest does not mean the legislatures which had budget cuts did not try to solve the problem. Just because you protest and join together with others does not mean the legislatures will magically come up with a solution to appease your anger. It does not work like that. You don't like something, do the constructive American thing and solve it yourself.
We are doomed *really doesn't matter what number*
"This is not an American battle; this is a NATO mission"
-Barack Obama, on Afghanistan.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-09/30/content_12131915.htm
In the event you hadn't noticed, it is an American battle as long as Americans are in the fight. As long as Americans have shed blood in the conflict it is an American war. Sure, other nations can call it otherwise to their liking, but for us in the U.S. that is what matters: Our troops, our war. End of story. We will win our wars, or that should be our constant commitment. To delegate the most advanced force in the world to an allied structure is fine, but to have that structure, notorious for paper shuffling, command our forces is a disgrace. We lead NATO, not the other way around. We lead the world, not the other way around.
Mr. Obama, lead this nation, instead of following the world.
-Barack Obama, on Afghanistan.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-09/30/content_12131915.htm
In the event you hadn't noticed, it is an American battle as long as Americans are in the fight. As long as Americans have shed blood in the conflict it is an American war. Sure, other nations can call it otherwise to their liking, but for us in the U.S. that is what matters: Our troops, our war. End of story. We will win our wars, or that should be our constant commitment. To delegate the most advanced force in the world to an allied structure is fine, but to have that structure, notorious for paper shuffling, command our forces is a disgrace. We lead NATO, not the other way around. We lead the world, not the other way around.
Mr. Obama, lead this nation, instead of following the world.
Guinea- Conakry Massacre
Whether it is 58, 87, or 157 killed, depending on the source, a massacre of people demanding nothing less than freedom and democracy occurred in Guinea's capital. Instead of sanctioning Honduras, where is the Obama outrage against Guinea's actions? Last year I saw the events taking place in the coup and thought the promises of democratic elections was sound. At the time no massacres were taking place, just awkward military patrols that made everyone confused. (The coup last year came after the death of their 30+ year ruler who himself came to power in a coup.)
Initially, they promised free elections the world could monitor and the coup leader said he would not run. Now he is running and the election is going to occur later than promised. Finally, his soldiers have slaughtered a democracy protest at a soccer stadium. The various methods of killing are numerous, and women were degraded. Where is the call for sanctions and the demand for the rule of law?
The White House still condemns Honduras despite the calls for violence coming not from the interim government, but Zelaya. Yet they chose the side of Chavez in that case. In Iran Obama chose to not interfere. He then chose to obviously interfere in Honduras. So far the path chosen as been silence on Guinea, highlighting the lack of consistency this administration has in support of "freedom". It is clear the United States government no longer is advocating freedom in the world, but is giving a pass to tyranny.
Initially, they promised free elections the world could monitor and the coup leader said he would not run. Now he is running and the election is going to occur later than promised. Finally, his soldiers have slaughtered a democracy protest at a soccer stadium. The various methods of killing are numerous, and women were degraded. Where is the call for sanctions and the demand for the rule of law?
The White House still condemns Honduras despite the calls for violence coming not from the interim government, but Zelaya. Yet they chose the side of Chavez in that case. In Iran Obama chose to not interfere. He then chose to obviously interfere in Honduras. So far the path chosen as been silence on Guinea, highlighting the lack of consistency this administration has in support of "freedom". It is clear the United States government no longer is advocating freedom in the world, but is giving a pass to tyranny.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Honduras Elections
Based on a New York Times op ed, I got some ideas to give perspective on Honduras.
The upcoming elections have been denounced by many nations and said that it will not change their stance on Honduras (which is to return Zelaya to power, which would have him in office longer than he is allowed by the Constitution of Honduras).
If the leaders of Burma said they were going to hold free and fair elections, would we say no simply because they are currently run by a dictatorship?
Let the elections be the voice of the people and respect that voice as you would any other when allowed freely.
Update: I had lost the article in my travels, but I found it again. It was from the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704471504574439090743723958.html
The upcoming elections have been denounced by many nations and said that it will not change their stance on Honduras (which is to return Zelaya to power, which would have him in office longer than he is allowed by the Constitution of Honduras).
If the leaders of Burma said they were going to hold free and fair elections, would we say no simply because they are currently run by a dictatorship?
Let the elections be the voice of the people and respect that voice as you would any other when allowed freely.
Update: I had lost the article in my travels, but I found it again. It was from the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704471504574439090743723958.html
Summary of Thoughts
Iran has a nuclear facility that has been kept secret not only by our government but Iran as well. The United Nations IAEA misses it completely. Unless Iran opens up completely by the end of the year, we will be at war by January, if not sooner.
The Post Office is going to need a bailout. They lost four billion dollars in September.
Earlier in August the Federal Reserve requested that the debt limit be raised, again.
Summary: I told you so.
This message brought to you, sponsored by, and proven by the facts of life; otherwise known as the reality of the world around you.
The Post Office is going to need a bailout. They lost four billion dollars in September.
Earlier in August the Federal Reserve requested that the debt limit be raised, again.
Summary: I told you so.
This message brought to you, sponsored by, and proven by the facts of life; otherwise known as the reality of the world around you.
Corruption
Corruption can never be eliminated. However, it can be controlled and brought within the reach of punishment. This is a realization which recognizes the ever persistent fact that humans have emotions. The system which best recognizes that greed is inherent in human behavior will be the system which is best in the world. Capitalism is one of those systems.
Saturday, September 26, 2009
We Are Saved 1
The discussion over civility that has arisen over recent events is a good sign for this country. Not only is "civil behavior" and "civility" commonly being used, but they are not having to place definitions with them. These two things show that this country not only remembers the days of civility, but wants them back in a way that makes us never forget.
What DO Conservatives Fundamentally Believe In?
I have always known colleges are liberally bent, nobody denies this at all. I accept that. However, there is a textbook for my reading/history class ("A People and a Nation")which has no sources and opinions which are lies or don't make sense.
For example, it mentions conservatives in the 1760s supporting the British control of the colonies. This is not possible because "conservative" thought and policy did not begin to form until the 1790s in France. While some ideas can be identified as conservative, remaining with the British Empire was not one of them.
In fact, it is the Founding Fathers, the ones who separated from Britain and formed this nation, which are looked to for the ideas of American conservatism. Wikipedia explains it as: Conservatism refers to various political and social philosophies that support tradition and the status quo.
This is a lie. In the context of a classroom many do not know the difference between worldwide conservatives and U.S. conservatives. In evidence, one person in the classroom said "they are people who want to conserve the environment right?" While conservatives may believe that depending on their stance on the issue, that is not the fundamental core of Conservative beliefs.
I have gone to GOP meetings for the past year regularly in various forms and never has maintaining the status quo come up as a goal. It has always made a focus on a reverse heirarchy, like our Founding Fathers believed in, which started from the bottom up, not top down. Conservatives will enable the individual, then the family, then the community, then the state, then the government to care for their needs. When you have a strong government and a weak populace you have a dictatorship. When you have a strong people and a "weak" government you have a successful Democracy. A government with a division of powers with elected representatives that make the top a gauranteed entity of force you have a Republic. We have a Republic where the Founding Fathers knew that government was a necessary evil, but as little as possible was desired to have a strong populace. Today, the government is growing in power while our population is being weakened by taxes, poor education (involving lies), and a government which takes our ability to work and removes it through various policies which make us reliant upon the government.
This book that also says "There was no definition of civil rights in America before the Civil War." Three things off the top of my head: Magna Carta, Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights. This book is biased, and so much so that I am going to go through page by page and bring truth to the class.
For example, it mentions conservatives in the 1760s supporting the British control of the colonies. This is not possible because "conservative" thought and policy did not begin to form until the 1790s in France. While some ideas can be identified as conservative, remaining with the British Empire was not one of them.
In fact, it is the Founding Fathers, the ones who separated from Britain and formed this nation, which are looked to for the ideas of American conservatism. Wikipedia explains it as: Conservatism refers to various political and social philosophies that support tradition and the status quo.
This is a lie. In the context of a classroom many do not know the difference between worldwide conservatives and U.S. conservatives. In evidence, one person in the classroom said "they are people who want to conserve the environment right?" While conservatives may believe that depending on their stance on the issue, that is not the fundamental core of Conservative beliefs.
I have gone to GOP meetings for the past year regularly in various forms and never has maintaining the status quo come up as a goal. It has always made a focus on a reverse heirarchy, like our Founding Fathers believed in, which started from the bottom up, not top down. Conservatives will enable the individual, then the family, then the community, then the state, then the government to care for their needs. When you have a strong government and a weak populace you have a dictatorship. When you have a strong people and a "weak" government you have a successful Democracy. A government with a division of powers with elected representatives that make the top a gauranteed entity of force you have a Republic. We have a Republic where the Founding Fathers knew that government was a necessary evil, but as little as possible was desired to have a strong populace. Today, the government is growing in power while our population is being weakened by taxes, poor education (involving lies), and a government which takes our ability to work and removes it through various policies which make us reliant upon the government.
This book that also says "There was no definition of civil rights in America before the Civil War." Three things off the top of my head: Magna Carta, Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights. This book is biased, and so much so that I am going to go through page by page and bring truth to the class.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
This one is up to you...
Look up the latest data on Social Security. Find the info, its out there, just google it. We are yet again, maybe this time enough to wake some of you up, screwed.
My Response to The President at the United Nations
I am writing this as I read through President Obama's speech. I recommend you read the transcript or watch his speech before reading my response. I have sent the following to the White House, and prefaced it with a request that this be promoted by Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe. Here it is:
To use a global forum as a place in which to apologize for your predecessors is a terrible display of bias without recognition for our efforts of the past. To present your efforts as the first and only committed movement for global betterment since the times of FDR is selfish and detrimental to our image in the world.
I believe that the hopes of any child will always enrich our world, never impoverish it. There is only innocence in a child's hope that has ideals for betterment, and it is only removed when the reality of corruption takes hold. The hopes of a child never impoverish our world, the removal of those hopes does. To not make this distinction is a philosophical failure of you to present an understanding of the human peoples for whom you claim to speak of.
Again, to present the focus on your actions as the only effort for which our commitment to the global community can be judged is disrespectful to the efforts of maintaining peace in the world after our efforts in founding the U.N.
To claim that you prohibited torture by the United States is a lie. You signed a bill confirming the rights granted to prisoners within the Constitution, nothing more.
No war is responsibly started and thus can never be responsibly fought, controlled, or ended.
As a nation with immense wealth and various measurements of higher quality than the rest of the world our leadership role should never be diminished for the inclusion of all nations for solutions which could involve the very dictators which wish to see our nation's freedom crumble.
The alignment of nations rooted in the Cold War are various and involve NATO, the European Union, the WTO, and to say we should move away from these alliances is a betrayal of the cooperative and beneficial relationships we have with other nations of the world.
To demand that Israel surrender control of areas acquired in wars against Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, Morocco, and Algeria and abandon the territory of Israel to 1947 boundaries, including their capital, the Holy City of Jerusalem, amounts to a biased approach to resolving the conflict in the Middle East.
In placing the United States support of democracy worldwide as a negative influence is an insult to all the nations which have waved American flags with their own to honor the joy they have at our support of their freedom. From Japan to Kosovo, supporting Democracy has been the most effective foreign policy goal of the past seventy years. To present a negative for our support of Democracy in such a paradox on the global stage is perhaps one of the most dangerous mistakes you made in your speech.
Mr. President, I demand an honest discussion of the issues I raise, and expect you to hold yourself to my level as individuals in this global community and respond to my statements.
To use a global forum as a place in which to apologize for your predecessors is a terrible display of bias without recognition for our efforts of the past. To present your efforts as the first and only committed movement for global betterment since the times of FDR is selfish and detrimental to our image in the world.
I believe that the hopes of any child will always enrich our world, never impoverish it. There is only innocence in a child's hope that has ideals for betterment, and it is only removed when the reality of corruption takes hold. The hopes of a child never impoverish our world, the removal of those hopes does. To not make this distinction is a philosophical failure of you to present an understanding of the human peoples for whom you claim to speak of.
Again, to present the focus on your actions as the only effort for which our commitment to the global community can be judged is disrespectful to the efforts of maintaining peace in the world after our efforts in founding the U.N.
To claim that you prohibited torture by the United States is a lie. You signed a bill confirming the rights granted to prisoners within the Constitution, nothing more.
No war is responsibly started and thus can never be responsibly fought, controlled, or ended.
As a nation with immense wealth and various measurements of higher quality than the rest of the world our leadership role should never be diminished for the inclusion of all nations for solutions which could involve the very dictators which wish to see our nation's freedom crumble.
The alignment of nations rooted in the Cold War are various and involve NATO, the European Union, the WTO, and to say we should move away from these alliances is a betrayal of the cooperative and beneficial relationships we have with other nations of the world.
To demand that Israel surrender control of areas acquired in wars against Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, Morocco, and Algeria and abandon the territory of Israel to 1947 boundaries, including their capital, the Holy City of Jerusalem, amounts to a biased approach to resolving the conflict in the Middle East.
In placing the United States support of democracy worldwide as a negative influence is an insult to all the nations which have waved American flags with their own to honor the joy they have at our support of their freedom. From Japan to Kosovo, supporting Democracy has been the most effective foreign policy goal of the past seventy years. To present a negative for our support of Democracy in such a paradox on the global stage is perhaps one of the most dangerous mistakes you made in your speech.
Mr. President, I demand an honest discussion of the issues I raise, and expect you to hold yourself to my level as individuals in this global community and respond to my statements.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Freedom of Speech?
Keep in the back of your mind a very simple question: For who does freedom of speech apply?
Alright, Senator Baucus, according to the New York Times, has taken a Humana Inc. letter to their members, which stated that his bill's $123 billion cut to Medicare is going to hinder care for seniors, as a, well, here is the quote:
Mr. Baucus took it as a declaration of war. He complained to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal health-care agency, which on Friday duly ordered Humana to cease and desist. CMS claimed the mailer was "misleading and confusing" and told the company it has opened an official probe as to whether the mailer violated laws about how the insurers that manage Advantage plans are allowed to communicate with their customers, as well as other federal statutes.
Article quote over. If by now your common sense doesn't tell you why this has struck me as odd, I'll guide you a little further:
"it has opened an official probe as to whether the mailer violated laws about how the insurers are allowed to communicate with their customers"
So there are laws about how a company can communicate with its customers? Does this law LEGALIZE only certain forms of communication, like store front displays? Does it regulate those displays to be reasonable, fair, unoffensive? Where are these laws? Who passed the laws? Why has nobody asked these questions, found the answers, and made a Constitutional challenge?
Now, remember that question: For who does freedom of speech apply?
It is without doubt that it applies to us, citizens, people within the United States. We as citizens have the right to form companies, or join unions. However, does our freedom of speech extend to those companies and unions?
It does for unions. I can name at least four precedents off the top of my head where union speech was protected regardless of controversy. However, laws, according to Baucus, exist to dictate how a company may use its freedom of speech. Two possibilities come up: not only Baucus but CMS, a government agency, has lied about these laws or: unions are protected, companies are not. The first one is very likely, and the second one leads to yet another question: why are unions protected by freedom of speech but companies are not?
However lets look at the full scope: one company against the health care gets threats and investigated and the rule is expanded to all Advantage providers. What about those other companies supporting the plan and sending out messages? Will they be charged with the communication violations?
I will do something I have only done in regards to the international alliance so far and make a prediction: We will not see the news reports about the Humana investigation when it starts. If charged, Humana will be the primary example of government intimidation and you will see market opposition to the government's proposals disappear. When the "elite" they constantly claim is the only source of opposition is gone, we will see individuals, based on wealth and then by audience, become targets and be silenced.
When we allow companies to be given double standards to unions and other companies when it comes to freedom of speech, we also allow it to be applied to individuals. Companies are an economic art, a form of expression of skills in management, product creation. When art projects such as the infamous "Jesus in a jar of urine" display are funded by the government and protected by freedom of speech, we must allow the arts in business to be protected as well. A message sent by a company is a message sent by an individual or groups of individuals. If the message of a union represents its members, the message of a company must also be protected as it represents its owners.
We must challenge these "laws" which violate our Constitution, the highest law of the land.
Alright, Senator Baucus, according to the New York Times, has taken a Humana Inc. letter to their members, which stated that his bill's $123 billion cut to Medicare is going to hinder care for seniors, as a, well, here is the quote:
Mr. Baucus took it as a declaration of war. He complained to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the federal health-care agency, which on Friday duly ordered Humana to cease and desist. CMS claimed the mailer was "misleading and confusing" and told the company it has opened an official probe as to whether the mailer violated laws about how the insurers that manage Advantage plans are allowed to communicate with their customers, as well as other federal statutes.
Article quote over. If by now your common sense doesn't tell you why this has struck me as odd, I'll guide you a little further:
"it has opened an official probe as to whether the mailer violated laws about how the insurers are allowed to communicate with their customers"
So there are laws about how a company can communicate with its customers? Does this law LEGALIZE only certain forms of communication, like store front displays? Does it regulate those displays to be reasonable, fair, unoffensive? Where are these laws? Who passed the laws? Why has nobody asked these questions, found the answers, and made a Constitutional challenge?
Now, remember that question: For who does freedom of speech apply?
It is without doubt that it applies to us, citizens, people within the United States. We as citizens have the right to form companies, or join unions. However, does our freedom of speech extend to those companies and unions?
It does for unions. I can name at least four precedents off the top of my head where union speech was protected regardless of controversy. However, laws, according to Baucus, exist to dictate how a company may use its freedom of speech. Two possibilities come up: not only Baucus but CMS, a government agency, has lied about these laws or: unions are protected, companies are not. The first one is very likely, and the second one leads to yet another question: why are unions protected by freedom of speech but companies are not?
However lets look at the full scope: one company against the health care gets threats and investigated and the rule is expanded to all Advantage providers. What about those other companies supporting the plan and sending out messages? Will they be charged with the communication violations?
I will do something I have only done in regards to the international alliance so far and make a prediction: We will not see the news reports about the Humana investigation when it starts. If charged, Humana will be the primary example of government intimidation and you will see market opposition to the government's proposals disappear. When the "elite" they constantly claim is the only source of opposition is gone, we will see individuals, based on wealth and then by audience, become targets and be silenced.
When we allow companies to be given double standards to unions and other companies when it comes to freedom of speech, we also allow it to be applied to individuals. Companies are an economic art, a form of expression of skills in management, product creation. When art projects such as the infamous "Jesus in a jar of urine" display are funded by the government and protected by freedom of speech, we must allow the arts in business to be protected as well. A message sent by a company is a message sent by an individual or groups of individuals. If the message of a union represents its members, the message of a company must also be protected as it represents its owners.
We must challenge these "laws" which violate our Constitution, the highest law of the land.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Honduras Proven Legal
I have been saying it for months based on a very simple review of the Honduran Constitution. Our government which initially responded with declaring a coup, has now come to its senses. In a report found here:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204518504574423570828980800.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
The report states the following:
Now a report filed at the Library of Congress by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) provides what the administration has not offered, a serious legal review of the facts. "Available sources indicate that the judicial and legislative branches applied constitutional and statutory law in the case against President Zelaya in a manner that was judged by the Honduran authorities from both branches of the government to be in accordance with the Honduran legal system," writes CRS senior foreign law specialist Norma C. Gutierrez in her report.
Do the facts matter? Fat chance. The administration is standing by its "coup" charge and 10 days ago, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went so far as to sanction the country's independent judiciary. The U.S. won't say why, but its clear the court's sin is rejecting a U.S.-backed proposal to restore Mr. Zelaya to power.
Report over. You know why they won't change their stance? They have a stubborn need to appeal to Hugo Chavez; because after the "declaration of war" Hugo claims we have against him with our bases in Colombia we can't support the regime in Honduras because of some small realities as that too was a direct response to the Bolivarian process of Constitutional rewrites to empower dictators.
So why would we support a position just to be in line with Chavez and Castro when the facts directly contradict the thinking? I do not know.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204518504574423570828980800.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
The report states the following:
Now a report filed at the Library of Congress by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) provides what the administration has not offered, a serious legal review of the facts. "Available sources indicate that the judicial and legislative branches applied constitutional and statutory law in the case against President Zelaya in a manner that was judged by the Honduran authorities from both branches of the government to be in accordance with the Honduran legal system," writes CRS senior foreign law specialist Norma C. Gutierrez in her report.
Do the facts matter? Fat chance. The administration is standing by its "coup" charge and 10 days ago, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went so far as to sanction the country's independent judiciary. The U.S. won't say why, but its clear the court's sin is rejecting a U.S.-backed proposal to restore Mr. Zelaya to power.
Report over. You know why they won't change their stance? They have a stubborn need to appeal to Hugo Chavez; because after the "declaration of war" Hugo claims we have against him with our bases in Colombia we can't support the regime in Honduras because of some small realities as that too was a direct response to the Bolivarian process of Constitutional rewrites to empower dictators.
So why would we support a position just to be in line with Chavez and Castro when the facts directly contradict the thinking? I do not know.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Selling A Bill
If you are in the executive office, whether it be a mayor, governor, or even president, you can not sell a bill based on its specifics. Why? Because you are letting the legislature write the bill. Lets use an example.
You want to get health care passed, so how do you sell it to the American public? You can't sell the specifics because people will get bored and you also don't know the specifics, the bill isn't written by you. So what do you do? You sell its merits instead.
You connect the bill to a better America. Instead of going through subsection c of the fourth proposal for a bill from a fifth committee, you sell your vision of an America without high costs and exemptions for pre-existing conditions. Often you tell horror stories of the current system to connect the bad with the current, and the good with the future. Don't slip up and lie about the horror stories though, or you'll lose your support and never gain it back.
Sometimes when a bill seems certain to be the one coming to your desk, you can sell some general improvements that are very shiny, say, a health insurance exchange. Something bad in the specifics? You can try to sell the bad, but you'll lose more support. So what do you do? Connect it to the very shiny improvement and make the public connect the bad as an acceptable side effect of the good. Don't promote the bad too much, or you'll be lying again. And never, ever deny saying something when it is recorded on video tape or you'll lose more points.
You can slip up and correct yourself on any one of these, but never correct one and you won't sell the bill. If you have all but one making you lose support and never change that one thing, you'll never sell the bill.
This all of course only applies if your the standard generic politician. From the current health care issue, to the Iraq War, to the Mogadishu "Black Hawk Down" Incident when you are a standard politician you need to sell its merits and focus on the merits because the details are not going to sell. Sometimes you can sell it even with the bad, but you'll never have an easy time doing anything else ever again.
So what do you do to avoid this struggle of the standard politician? You could slow down and get something done right, such as the Reagan Tax Cuts, which took a year to write and pass. However, the careful monitoring of a bill to make sure it reaches that perfect blend of good details and good merits can take time. If you need something fast for an emergency or want to get things done quickly just to say you did it, what can you do? Break the cycle.
Allow the legislature to do the regular stuff, but take the time yourself to draft a bill on your own that is short, to the point, has the merits, and gets the job you need done quickly. Then, make the bill public, let the legislature look it over and see if they'll pass it. If you wrote a good bill, you'll have no trouble at all.
Now I know you're thinking that can't be done. However, anyone can write a bill, and any senator or representative can bring it to vote. As evidence, it already has.
Now you know the slow and steady approach by Reagan, but the fast and quick approach was taken by FDR. The bill that gave the government massive powers to remove us from the Great Depression? Eight pages written by the Roosevelt administration. Imagine, eight pages. We have thousand page bills for TARP, health care, the budget and on and on and on and we still have massive problems.
So if you want to break the Washington cycle, either take it slow and let the legislature make baby steps to get something done right, or do it yourself and let them run with it.
You want to get health care passed, so how do you sell it to the American public? You can't sell the specifics because people will get bored and you also don't know the specifics, the bill isn't written by you. So what do you do? You sell its merits instead.
You connect the bill to a better America. Instead of going through subsection c of the fourth proposal for a bill from a fifth committee, you sell your vision of an America without high costs and exemptions for pre-existing conditions. Often you tell horror stories of the current system to connect the bad with the current, and the good with the future. Don't slip up and lie about the horror stories though, or you'll lose your support and never gain it back.
Sometimes when a bill seems certain to be the one coming to your desk, you can sell some general improvements that are very shiny, say, a health insurance exchange. Something bad in the specifics? You can try to sell the bad, but you'll lose more support. So what do you do? Connect it to the very shiny improvement and make the public connect the bad as an acceptable side effect of the good. Don't promote the bad too much, or you'll be lying again. And never, ever deny saying something when it is recorded on video tape or you'll lose more points.
You can slip up and correct yourself on any one of these, but never correct one and you won't sell the bill. If you have all but one making you lose support and never change that one thing, you'll never sell the bill.
This all of course only applies if your the standard generic politician. From the current health care issue, to the Iraq War, to the Mogadishu "Black Hawk Down" Incident when you are a standard politician you need to sell its merits and focus on the merits because the details are not going to sell. Sometimes you can sell it even with the bad, but you'll never have an easy time doing anything else ever again.
So what do you do to avoid this struggle of the standard politician? You could slow down and get something done right, such as the Reagan Tax Cuts, which took a year to write and pass. However, the careful monitoring of a bill to make sure it reaches that perfect blend of good details and good merits can take time. If you need something fast for an emergency or want to get things done quickly just to say you did it, what can you do? Break the cycle.
Allow the legislature to do the regular stuff, but take the time yourself to draft a bill on your own that is short, to the point, has the merits, and gets the job you need done quickly. Then, make the bill public, let the legislature look it over and see if they'll pass it. If you wrote a good bill, you'll have no trouble at all.
Now I know you're thinking that can't be done. However, anyone can write a bill, and any senator or representative can bring it to vote. As evidence, it already has.
Now you know the slow and steady approach by Reagan, but the fast and quick approach was taken by FDR. The bill that gave the government massive powers to remove us from the Great Depression? Eight pages written by the Roosevelt administration. Imagine, eight pages. We have thousand page bills for TARP, health care, the budget and on and on and on and we still have massive problems.
So if you want to break the Washington cycle, either take it slow and let the legislature make baby steps to get something done right, or do it yourself and let them run with it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
