I think I will take a couple of days off from my normal cycle of blogging.
It has been a rough couple of days for me.
On Saturday, I wrote a post in which I advocated giving away free food in order to combat the problem of Hunger in America, giving free Housing and Job Skill training and Education to all of America's Homeless, Revamping the tax code in order to spur the Economy and Create Jobs, and Closing the Borders in order to stop the artificial depression of Wages and Working Conditions.
I was called a Fascist, Told that I was filled with Hatred, and mercilessly attacked, because I dared to state the belief that America's achievers should be allowed to keep the money that they make, and that perhaps people should be responsible for their own well being.
Sunday, I voiced my opinion (on another blog) that the Second Ammendment was a good thing, and that the Gun Laws we already have on the books should be enforced, rather than enacting even more laws, designed to take guns for personal protection out of the hands of law abiding citizens.
I was then told that I was advocating the Murder of Police Officers.
Tonight, I logged onto a Friend's blog, and read a "Poor Pitiful Me" style post lamenting the fact that Wal - Mart was making money, but the author of the post could not, when he was working there. This was a mystery to him, even though, by his own admission, he wouldn't stick with the job for any length of time, and was constantly quiting, and starting back again at entry level wages.
On his comments page, I read comments lamenting the fact that Even though Wal-Mart provided Health Insurance, (they don't HAVE to, you know) that it was sub-standard, and that unskilled, hourly workers got low pay.
(I got news for you...If the kid next to you is still in high school, and makes the same money as you, you really need to re-evaluate your situation.)
Then I read a comment touting the benifits of inflation.
And then another slamming ALL big business, Mourning the death of the "Mom and Pop" mainstreet, (who didn't pay their workers anything, either...) and suggesting that we all go and burn our local Wal-Mart store down.
I left an unnessecarily harsh comment there, and for that I apologize.
I know that this post seems quite harsh as well, and again, I apologize. I am not trying to offend anyone, but rather to wake everyone up.
This kind of thinking is what will eventually ruin our Economy, on a National Scale.
Welcome to the People's Republic of the United States.
When people are tired of the Free Market Economy that built America into the strongest Nation in the History of the World in only 200 short years, then they are tired of Freedom.
With Freedom comes Responsibility for YOUR OWN ASS. It's a harsh fact, but it IS a fact.
Nobody should have to hold your hand. Nobody should have to feed you. Nobody else should have to bear the burden for YOUR mistakes.
If you are forty years old, and all you are qualified to do is take stuff out of a box, and put it on a shelf, or push a dust mop around your local Wal-Mart, then you should be glad that Wal-Mart was willing to hire you, and you should be grateful for whatever they provide, in connection with this type of job.
It isn't the fault of the American Taxpayer, it isn't the fault of Wal-Mart, nor President Bush, nor the Big Oil Companies, nor Bill Gates, nor Paris Hilton, nor Brittany Spears, nor the Olsen Twins.
It's Yours.
Figure out how to fix it.
What bugs me about all of this is that I know that ALL of these people are smarter than this.
It drives me crazy, and being driven crazy is not why I started a blog.
So have fun slamming the creator of so many jobs, and the supplier of so many things to so many people, at low, affordable prices.
Figure out how to help the poor on your own. (But keep your measley hands off my wallet while you do it.)
I'll see you all in a couple of days.
I'm going to go look for someone to talk to who actually is willing to think.
Monday, October 31, 2005
Scooter Libby
Are you sick of the Karl Rove story YET??
Five different indictments were handed down against Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, "Scooter"Libby on friday.
These indictments were the result of a two year long, seventy Million dollar investigation into who, if anyone, leaked the name of a covert (?) CIA agent, Valerie Plame, to the press.
During this investigation, it was never determined that a crime of any kind was committed in the first place, but it was determined that crimes may have been committed along the way, stemming from the investigation (into a non-crime.)
In any case, they were after Karl Rove.
The best they could do was "Scooter" Libby.
I remember the first time I ever heard of "Scooter"...
It was about thursday of week before last, when the MSM began to talk about him in conjunction with this case. Libby is by no means the "Big Fish" that the Grand Jury, or the Main Stream Media were angling for.
But he is a Bush Whitehouse person, so you can bet that they will make as much political hay with it as they can.
Rove still has not been indicted for anything.
I think this is a good idea.
We should investigate everyone in Washington, from the President, to all of our Congressmen, Senators, their Aides, Advisors, friends and family. All the way down to the Whitehouse Custodial staff.
And do a very thorough investigation on them all.
Don't just try to find out if they have committed crime, but try to determine whether they can be tricked, or coerced into committing any kind of crime, either by comission or omission over the course of a two year investigation.
Leave no stone unturned.
If there is crime or corruption in Washington, I want it exposed. Dealt with.
Punished.
With the same intensity that has been directed at Karl Rove.
How many of our elected officials do you think could stand up to this kind of scrutiny?
Who do you think would be the first to fall?
Who do you believe would be the last one standing?
Five different indictments were handed down against Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, "Scooter"Libby on friday.
These indictments were the result of a two year long, seventy Million dollar investigation into who, if anyone, leaked the name of a covert (?) CIA agent, Valerie Plame, to the press.
During this investigation, it was never determined that a crime of any kind was committed in the first place, but it was determined that crimes may have been committed along the way, stemming from the investigation (into a non-crime.)
In any case, they were after Karl Rove.
The best they could do was "Scooter" Libby.
I remember the first time I ever heard of "Scooter"...
It was about thursday of week before last, when the MSM began to talk about him in conjunction with this case. Libby is by no means the "Big Fish" that the Grand Jury, or the Main Stream Media were angling for.
But he is a Bush Whitehouse person, so you can bet that they will make as much political hay with it as they can.
Rove still has not been indicted for anything.
I think this is a good idea.
We should investigate everyone in Washington, from the President, to all of our Congressmen, Senators, their Aides, Advisors, friends and family. All the way down to the Whitehouse Custodial staff.
And do a very thorough investigation on them all.
Don't just try to find out if they have committed crime, but try to determine whether they can be tricked, or coerced into committing any kind of crime, either by comission or omission over the course of a two year investigation.
Leave no stone unturned.
If there is crime or corruption in Washington, I want it exposed. Dealt with.
Punished.
With the same intensity that has been directed at Karl Rove.
How many of our elected officials do you think could stand up to this kind of scrutiny?
Who do you think would be the first to fall?
Who do you believe would be the last one standing?
Sunday, October 30, 2005
Change Is Good...
I have switched to Haloscan Commenting on this blog.
While it may be a little more of a hassle to post a comment here from now on, I do not want that to discourage anyone from leaving their thoughts about my posts.
The reason that I did it is so that I can control the tone of my comments page, and ultimately this will be a more friendly place.
Dissenting opinions have always been welcome, and they still are.
If you believe that I am wrong about anything, then tell me so.
Tell me why.
If you agree with me, tell me that as well.
If you can expand on one of my ideas, then feel free.
If I am full of crap, then point it out. I will consider your opinion, and respond accordingly. Whether you agree, or disagree.
My only request is, Keep it civil.
Hateful, unreasonable comments will be removed. Personal attacks against me, or any of my guests here will be removed, or I might even manipulate your comment to make you a flaming Right Wing Conservative. If this happens to you, it will be your own fault.
If you become a repeat offender, you will be banned.
This is MY blog.
I love honest debate, and the friendly exchange of ideas.
I don't have to put up with ignorance, hatespeech, or personal attacks, nor should anyone else who visits my blog.
This just makes it a little easier for me to protect myself, and my readers and commentors from these instances of unnessecary ugliness.
I would like to think that we are all friends here, just having a discussion.
I have said before, Neither I, nor anyone who visits here (that I know of) sets National Policy.
This is a video game.
Let's have fun with it.
While it may be a little more of a hassle to post a comment here from now on, I do not want that to discourage anyone from leaving their thoughts about my posts.
The reason that I did it is so that I can control the tone of my comments page, and ultimately this will be a more friendly place.
Dissenting opinions have always been welcome, and they still are.
If you believe that I am wrong about anything, then tell me so.
Tell me why.
If you agree with me, tell me that as well.
If you can expand on one of my ideas, then feel free.
If I am full of crap, then point it out. I will consider your opinion, and respond accordingly. Whether you agree, or disagree.
My only request is, Keep it civil.
Hateful, unreasonable comments will be removed. Personal attacks against me, or any of my guests here will be removed, or I might even manipulate your comment to make you a flaming Right Wing Conservative. If this happens to you, it will be your own fault.
If you become a repeat offender, you will be banned.
This is MY blog.
I love honest debate, and the friendly exchange of ideas.
I don't have to put up with ignorance, hatespeech, or personal attacks, nor should anyone else who visits my blog.
This just makes it a little easier for me to protect myself, and my readers and commentors from these instances of unnessecary ugliness.
I would like to think that we are all friends here, just having a discussion.
I have said before, Neither I, nor anyone who visits here (that I know of) sets National Policy.
This is a video game.
Let's have fun with it.
Friday, October 28, 2005
Tug's Plan For Helping The Poor.
There are a few things that I believe.
I believe that America is the land of opportunity.
I believe that Capitalism is the reason that America is the land of opportunity. I also believe that Socialism undermines the economic system which makes America strong by punishing achievers who take advantage of the opportunities that America offers, and rewarding behavior which creates dependency.
We in America are free. (At least for a little while longer, anyway.) We can decide where we want to live, how we want to live, how and whom we want to worship, or not. We can own property, we can choose our leaders, and we can make up our own minds about what we want to do for a living.
Our chances for wealth and prosperity in America are limited only by our individual ability to think, and our willingness to work hard enough to achieve our personal goals. (And in part, by the number of mistakes we, individually, have made in the past.)
What this means is that, ultimately, we are responsible for our own circumstances.
That being said, I will say that I do realize that some people are born with advantages that others do not have. That does not mean that these people should be punished, or that the disadvantaged people should be rewarded. Life is not fair. Never has been, never will be. To try to make life fair for everyone is an unrealistic goal, and a waste of time. It sounds good, and working toward that goal may make us feel good, for a while, but to set that as a goal means ultimate failure.
However, no one in America should be allowed to starve, no matter what situation they were born into. No child should be made to suffer because of bad decisions made by their parents.
I also realize that there are people in America who are handicapped to the point that they cannot provide for themselves, and provisions must be made for these people.
So here are a few suggestions for helping the poor and disadvantaged, without resorting to Socialist wealth redistribution programs, (Which I consider to be morally wrong.)
1. Food.
Do away completely with Food Stamp programs, and make one aisle in every grocery store completely free. Put generic items on this aisle like dry beans, rice, milk, generic breakfast cereals, canned vegatables, Spam, fatback, generic toiletries, and other household needs. Make all of these items totally free, to anyone who wants them.
This would do three things. One, it would eliminate fraud by eliminating any conversion of any of this stuff into cash, because anyone who wanted this kind of stuff could get all they wanted for free, and Two, eventually the people who could do better would get tired of living off that crap, and make an attempt to better their situation.
And Three, No one would go hungry. Anywhere, ever.
2. Clothing.
Make all clothing donations to organizations like the Salvation army, or Goodwill, completely tax deductible, at full, new, retail value, for everyone who donates anything, regardless of their income.
Make all clothing purchases from organizations like these completely tax deductible, at full purchase price, for everyone, regardless of their income.
This would encourage the "Rich" to donate unused clothing to these organizations, and the "Working Poor" to buy clothing from them. Win, win. And the Government neither made money, nor lost money on the process.
3. Housing.
This one was a little tougher. After much thought, I came to the conclusion that people who are unwilling to provide for themselves are not really entitled to the same choices as people who are, and people who are unable to provide for themselves should be grateful for whatever help they get from society.
First of all, I would put anyone who is too mentally ill to look after themselves into mental health care facilities. We used to do this, but the Democrats did away with this practice during the Carter Administration. (I don't know why.)
I would place anyone who is too physically handicapped to look after themselves into private assisted living facilities, if they had no family who were willing and able to look after them, and I would supplement these families, and facilities, with enough taxpayer money to make a job there profitable for qualified individuals who feel the calling to work there.
Anyone else who is homeless, I would relocate to closed military bases around the country. These facilities have provisions for schools, single family housing for homeless families, and dormitory style, and barracks housing for single homeless people. There are schools, and a multitude of buildings that can be converted into educational facilities for job training for homeless or disadvantaged adults.
I would even let the military oversee the education of these disadvantaged people, both children and adults, and use the power of the military to help place these people in jobs when they are trained. I would train them to be Civilian Military Contractors, and give them preferential treatment when bidding on military contracts.
There is already a "Troops to Teachers" program, and I would use this program to help poor and disadvantaged Americans.
4. Jobs.
We need to eliminate all corporate taxes, and go to a consumption based tax system, or a flat individual tax system, by which every individual American pays, say, 10 percent of their income in taxes.
No more than 10 percent, though. I have to live on the income that I get, and I believe that the Government should make do with 10 percent of all of the money that the whole working population can generate.
10 percent is enough for Jesus Christ. It should be enough for the Federal Government.
You have no idea how jobs would bloom if the drag of confiscatory taxes were to be removed from American industry. Rich people are in the business of making money. Not providing jobs, not manufacturing products, MAKING MONEY.
That's all.
All other things are peripheral. Job creation, product production, innovation, invention, marketing...all peripheral to the process of making money.
Rich people are the creators of jobs.
The more money they are allowed to keep, the more they will expand markets, the more new, innovative products they will produce, and the more new industries they will promote.
The more jobs they will create.
The better off everyone will be.
I'll say it again, in case you missed it. The more money the "Rich" are permitted to keep, THE BETTER OFF EVERYONE WILL BE.
Due to the Bush tax cuts, unemployment is already very low in America, and would be at the lowest point in history, if it weren't for the recent hurricanes which devastated large areas of our country, closing many businesses which employed a large number of people.
These businesses WILL reopen in time, because the people who own them are not tired of making money.
These lost jobs WILL be back.
I will tell you something else. The reason that I live in Florida right now is that the job market in North Carolina was very slow, and I AM PORTABLE. I can live anywhere. If I cannot find a job where I live, I will move to where the jobs are.
I've done it before, and I would do it again.
Anyone can. You just have to make up your mind as to what is important to you.
You have to decide whether you would rather be poor where you have always lived, or successful somewhere else.
There is one other factor at work here.
The job market is exactly that. A MARKET.
If you don't have anything to sell, you aren't going to make any money.
Get a skill. Get an education. Get something that belongs to you, besides time by the hour, that employers will pay you money for.
Invest in yourself. Time, effort, money.
If you do this, you will not be poor.
5. Retirement.
Let everyone who is interested, opt completely out of Socialist Security, and invest the same amount of money that would have gone to the Socialist Security system into Money Market accounts, or put it into 401k programs, or even into the Stock Market, or Real Estate Investments.
Mandate that every worker put at least some money away for their retirement, but put the individual in charge of their own account, and where the money goes.
Stop using the livelihood of our Senior Citizens as a tool to grow a voting block, and let Americans figure out what is best for them, themselves.
Put the PEOPLE back in control.
It's the American way.
6. Healthcare.
Hospital Emergency Rooms already provide stabilizing treatment for anyone who shows up, regardless of their ability to pay. I think that this is a good policy, however, it is extremely taxing to these facilities.
If all homeless people were already relocated to closed military bases, and being educated by military people, and trained for jobs by the military, then their healthcare could be provided by the military as well.
The "Working Poor" should already be offered health insurance by their employers. That is where my health insurance comes from. I have never been offered a job which came with absolutely no benefits, and health insurance is the first benefit that businesses provide for their employees.
7. CLOSE THE BORDERS.
The vast majority of disadvantaged people in America today, the vast majority of people working their lives away for minimum wage, the vast majority of people working jobs with no benifits, shouldn't even be here in the first place.
If it were not for illegal immigrants who are willing to work for sub-minimum wages, and in sub-standard working conditions, these conditions would not exist, and Americans who might be willing to do the work that illegals do, might be able to negotiate a better wage, and better conditions for these jobs.
Everyone in America who accepts any job, negotiates their own deal for that job, at the time of hire. Benefits, pay, the whole bit. Most people do not realize the power that they have during the negotiation process. Push for a better deal for yourself up front. Chances are, you will get it. (If you have anything to offer a potential employer. If you don't, then you are at the mercy of everyone. I can't help you, if that is your situation.)
Except for this. Illegals undermine this process. They will work for nothing, and because of this fact, they artificially depress wages, and benefits for all low skilled, or unskilled American workers.
They need to be eliminated from the equasion.
The last factor of my plan is, we, as a society, HAVE to leave a few people behind. This is the cold-hearted and cruel part of our system.
Examples must be made, so that we can provide motivation for the rest of us.
There are some who, no matter how easy or effective the system, in a free country, will choose not to participate. These people MUST, for the good of society, be left alone to fall by the wayside. As per their own choice.
It's a free country.
At least for a little while longer, anyway.
I believe that America is the land of opportunity.
I believe that Capitalism is the reason that America is the land of opportunity. I also believe that Socialism undermines the economic system which makes America strong by punishing achievers who take advantage of the opportunities that America offers, and rewarding behavior which creates dependency.
We in America are free. (At least for a little while longer, anyway.) We can decide where we want to live, how we want to live, how and whom we want to worship, or not. We can own property, we can choose our leaders, and we can make up our own minds about what we want to do for a living.
Our chances for wealth and prosperity in America are limited only by our individual ability to think, and our willingness to work hard enough to achieve our personal goals. (And in part, by the number of mistakes we, individually, have made in the past.)
What this means is that, ultimately, we are responsible for our own circumstances.
That being said, I will say that I do realize that some people are born with advantages that others do not have. That does not mean that these people should be punished, or that the disadvantaged people should be rewarded. Life is not fair. Never has been, never will be. To try to make life fair for everyone is an unrealistic goal, and a waste of time. It sounds good, and working toward that goal may make us feel good, for a while, but to set that as a goal means ultimate failure.
However, no one in America should be allowed to starve, no matter what situation they were born into. No child should be made to suffer because of bad decisions made by their parents.
I also realize that there are people in America who are handicapped to the point that they cannot provide for themselves, and provisions must be made for these people.
So here are a few suggestions for helping the poor and disadvantaged, without resorting to Socialist wealth redistribution programs, (Which I consider to be morally wrong.)
1. Food.
Do away completely with Food Stamp programs, and make one aisle in every grocery store completely free. Put generic items on this aisle like dry beans, rice, milk, generic breakfast cereals, canned vegatables, Spam, fatback, generic toiletries, and other household needs. Make all of these items totally free, to anyone who wants them.
This would do three things. One, it would eliminate fraud by eliminating any conversion of any of this stuff into cash, because anyone who wanted this kind of stuff could get all they wanted for free, and Two, eventually the people who could do better would get tired of living off that crap, and make an attempt to better their situation.
And Three, No one would go hungry. Anywhere, ever.
2. Clothing.
Make all clothing donations to organizations like the Salvation army, or Goodwill, completely tax deductible, at full, new, retail value, for everyone who donates anything, regardless of their income.
Make all clothing purchases from organizations like these completely tax deductible, at full purchase price, for everyone, regardless of their income.
This would encourage the "Rich" to donate unused clothing to these organizations, and the "Working Poor" to buy clothing from them. Win, win. And the Government neither made money, nor lost money on the process.
3. Housing.
This one was a little tougher. After much thought, I came to the conclusion that people who are unwilling to provide for themselves are not really entitled to the same choices as people who are, and people who are unable to provide for themselves should be grateful for whatever help they get from society.
First of all, I would put anyone who is too mentally ill to look after themselves into mental health care facilities. We used to do this, but the Democrats did away with this practice during the Carter Administration. (I don't know why.)
I would place anyone who is too physically handicapped to look after themselves into private assisted living facilities, if they had no family who were willing and able to look after them, and I would supplement these families, and facilities, with enough taxpayer money to make a job there profitable for qualified individuals who feel the calling to work there.
Anyone else who is homeless, I would relocate to closed military bases around the country. These facilities have provisions for schools, single family housing for homeless families, and dormitory style, and barracks housing for single homeless people. There are schools, and a multitude of buildings that can be converted into educational facilities for job training for homeless or disadvantaged adults.
I would even let the military oversee the education of these disadvantaged people, both children and adults, and use the power of the military to help place these people in jobs when they are trained. I would train them to be Civilian Military Contractors, and give them preferential treatment when bidding on military contracts.
There is already a "Troops to Teachers" program, and I would use this program to help poor and disadvantaged Americans.
4. Jobs.
We need to eliminate all corporate taxes, and go to a consumption based tax system, or a flat individual tax system, by which every individual American pays, say, 10 percent of their income in taxes.
No more than 10 percent, though. I have to live on the income that I get, and I believe that the Government should make do with 10 percent of all of the money that the whole working population can generate.
10 percent is enough for Jesus Christ. It should be enough for the Federal Government.
You have no idea how jobs would bloom if the drag of confiscatory taxes were to be removed from American industry. Rich people are in the business of making money. Not providing jobs, not manufacturing products, MAKING MONEY.
That's all.
All other things are peripheral. Job creation, product production, innovation, invention, marketing...all peripheral to the process of making money.
Rich people are the creators of jobs.
The more money they are allowed to keep, the more they will expand markets, the more new, innovative products they will produce, and the more new industries they will promote.
The more jobs they will create.
The better off everyone will be.
I'll say it again, in case you missed it. The more money the "Rich" are permitted to keep, THE BETTER OFF EVERYONE WILL BE.
Due to the Bush tax cuts, unemployment is already very low in America, and would be at the lowest point in history, if it weren't for the recent hurricanes which devastated large areas of our country, closing many businesses which employed a large number of people.
These businesses WILL reopen in time, because the people who own them are not tired of making money.
These lost jobs WILL be back.
I will tell you something else. The reason that I live in Florida right now is that the job market in North Carolina was very slow, and I AM PORTABLE. I can live anywhere. If I cannot find a job where I live, I will move to where the jobs are.
I've done it before, and I would do it again.
Anyone can. You just have to make up your mind as to what is important to you.
You have to decide whether you would rather be poor where you have always lived, or successful somewhere else.
There is one other factor at work here.
The job market is exactly that. A MARKET.
If you don't have anything to sell, you aren't going to make any money.
Get a skill. Get an education. Get something that belongs to you, besides time by the hour, that employers will pay you money for.
Invest in yourself. Time, effort, money.
If you do this, you will not be poor.
5. Retirement.
Let everyone who is interested, opt completely out of Socialist Security, and invest the same amount of money that would have gone to the Socialist Security system into Money Market accounts, or put it into 401k programs, or even into the Stock Market, or Real Estate Investments.
Mandate that every worker put at least some money away for their retirement, but put the individual in charge of their own account, and where the money goes.
Stop using the livelihood of our Senior Citizens as a tool to grow a voting block, and let Americans figure out what is best for them, themselves.
Put the PEOPLE back in control.
It's the American way.
6. Healthcare.
Hospital Emergency Rooms already provide stabilizing treatment for anyone who shows up, regardless of their ability to pay. I think that this is a good policy, however, it is extremely taxing to these facilities.
If all homeless people were already relocated to closed military bases, and being educated by military people, and trained for jobs by the military, then their healthcare could be provided by the military as well.
The "Working Poor" should already be offered health insurance by their employers. That is where my health insurance comes from. I have never been offered a job which came with absolutely no benefits, and health insurance is the first benefit that businesses provide for their employees.
7. CLOSE THE BORDERS.
The vast majority of disadvantaged people in America today, the vast majority of people working their lives away for minimum wage, the vast majority of people working jobs with no benifits, shouldn't even be here in the first place.
If it were not for illegal immigrants who are willing to work for sub-minimum wages, and in sub-standard working conditions, these conditions would not exist, and Americans who might be willing to do the work that illegals do, might be able to negotiate a better wage, and better conditions for these jobs.
Everyone in America who accepts any job, negotiates their own deal for that job, at the time of hire. Benefits, pay, the whole bit. Most people do not realize the power that they have during the negotiation process. Push for a better deal for yourself up front. Chances are, you will get it. (If you have anything to offer a potential employer. If you don't, then you are at the mercy of everyone. I can't help you, if that is your situation.)
Except for this. Illegals undermine this process. They will work for nothing, and because of this fact, they artificially depress wages, and benefits for all low skilled, or unskilled American workers.
They need to be eliminated from the equasion.
The last factor of my plan is, we, as a society, HAVE to leave a few people behind. This is the cold-hearted and cruel part of our system.
Examples must be made, so that we can provide motivation for the rest of us.
There are some who, no matter how easy or effective the system, in a free country, will choose not to participate. These people MUST, for the good of society, be left alone to fall by the wayside. As per their own choice.
It's a free country.
At least for a little while longer, anyway.
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
The Party Of Political Correctness
An interesting thing happened to me tonight.
I was invited by a commentor on another blog to visit his site because he wanted my perspective on his post about whether or not Condoleeza Rice was electable as a Republican.
(I will not identify him here.)
He seemed to be of the opinion that she is not electable on a Republican ticket, because she is black, and a woman. (Because republicans are racists and sexists, dont'cha know...)
In his post, he used the word "Crackers", referred to the Republican base as "Redneck Neocons", and basically asserted that a black woman would have absolutely no chance of winning any kind of election on a Republican ticket, because of our rampant racism.
He then concluded that Condi SHOULD run, because it would open the door for the Democrats to sweep the election, because WE are all racists.
I personally think that he is wrong about that. I think that Condi would have an excellent chance at winning a national office, no matter what color she is. I would have no problem whatsoever with the idea of voting for her, even if she was purple.
(I take that back. I HATE purple people!!)
But this is not what bothered me about his post.
What bothered me is his presumption that all Conservatives are basically racist, sexist, biggotted, knuckle-dragging, redneck crackers.
In the same breath, he called ME a racist, and then referred to me as a "redneck cracker".
This same person has disparaged Christians before, and could not understand why I got upset and called him on that prejudiced attitude as well.
Now, I assume that this is a white guy. (I don't know for sure...)
But even if he is, I find these terms, when used in this context, to be extremely offensive.
These are the terms of racists, and biggotts. These are the opinions of prejudiced people.
There is no excuse for it.
And he wants to sit over there on the left, and believe that HIS party is the party of political correctness, and tollerance.
Well they are not. They have become so self righteous (some of them) that they do not even recognize their own biggotry.
I will never say that I do not hate anybody.
I do.
I hate all idiots equally, regardless of race, color, creed, or political affilliation.
I was invited by a commentor on another blog to visit his site because he wanted my perspective on his post about whether or not Condoleeza Rice was electable as a Republican.
(I will not identify him here.)
He seemed to be of the opinion that she is not electable on a Republican ticket, because she is black, and a woman. (Because republicans are racists and sexists, dont'cha know...)
In his post, he used the word "Crackers", referred to the Republican base as "Redneck Neocons", and basically asserted that a black woman would have absolutely no chance of winning any kind of election on a Republican ticket, because of our rampant racism.
He then concluded that Condi SHOULD run, because it would open the door for the Democrats to sweep the election, because WE are all racists.
I personally think that he is wrong about that. I think that Condi would have an excellent chance at winning a national office, no matter what color she is. I would have no problem whatsoever with the idea of voting for her, even if she was purple.
(I take that back. I HATE purple people!!)
But this is not what bothered me about his post.
What bothered me is his presumption that all Conservatives are basically racist, sexist, biggotted, knuckle-dragging, redneck crackers.
In the same breath, he called ME a racist, and then referred to me as a "redneck cracker".
This same person has disparaged Christians before, and could not understand why I got upset and called him on that prejudiced attitude as well.
Now, I assume that this is a white guy. (I don't know for sure...)
But even if he is, I find these terms, when used in this context, to be extremely offensive.
These are the terms of racists, and biggotts. These are the opinions of prejudiced people.
There is no excuse for it.
And he wants to sit over there on the left, and believe that HIS party is the party of political correctness, and tollerance.
Well they are not. They have become so self righteous (some of them) that they do not even recognize their own biggotry.
I will never say that I do not hate anybody.
I do.
I hate all idiots equally, regardless of race, color, creed, or political affilliation.
Saturday, October 22, 2005
Here It Comes...
Well, as Lorena Bobbitt said, it won't be long now...
I am going to make a prediction, based on the way that Harriett Miers filled out her questionare, the fact that her "Courtesy Calls" to several Senators have reportedly not gone well, and based upon other top secret evidence that only I have access to...
Harriett Miers will withdraw her own name from consideration for the Supreme Court vacancy sometime next week.
And I don't blame her if she does.
She showed up to work one morning, and the President dumped this situation on her. I don't know if she ever asked him to consider her or not. She and the President have been friends and associates for a long time, so if she wanted the job, she has had a lot of chances to let him know, but the fact of the matter is, it is up to the President to nominate who he wants for this spot on the Court.
Suddenly, Ms. Miers was thrust into this National debate, with the Libs (Who have no problem, by the way, with other Presidents putting people like their wives in charge of restructuring one SEVENTH of the U.S. economy) screaming about "Croney-ism", and demanding her to state beforehand how she will rule on specific issues, while Conservatives are running around questioning the brightness of her bulb, her lifetime achievements, her sexual orientation, her qualifications to even be in a Courtroom, even her personal financial situation.
Does anyone out there think that Harriett Miers was the first person that the President asked to fill this spot?
I don't.
Let me tell you why we wound up with Harriet Miers as a nominee in the first place.
This has all been brewing for a while. Back when the Democrats were threatening to filibuster John Bolton as Ambassador to the U.N., (Note: "Threatening." The Dems don't actually HAVE to filibuster anyone, they can hold up the vote with a THREAT...) The President finally got tired of all of the shenanigans in the Senate, and installed Bolton with a recess appointment, showing the Senate that he would actually go around them if he had to.
So the next time the filibuster issue came up, we got the "Nuclear Option" debate, and the "Gang of Fourteen" nonsense, effectively derailing the "Nuclear (Constitutional) Option", and keeping the filibuster issue alive to smack the President with later.
Why seven Senate Republicans thought that this was a good idea is totally beyond me. (To make sure that the "minority" still had a voice? You can believe that if the rolls were reversed, Democrats would show Republicans no such consideration...)
(But then again, Republicans like to believe that THEY take the high road in matters like this...)
So the President, faced with this controversial appointment, (The "Swing Seat," whatever that is on a body that is presumed to be objective and apolitical...) knew that he could not count on his Republican Senators to support him if things got tough.
So he nominated someone who NOBODY wanted.
Someone who the Democrats probably would not filibuster, but who would leave a bad taste in the mouth of the Conservative base.
If she made it through the confirmation process, and was installed on the Court, she would do a good job, rule fairly, and not engage in activism from the Bench.
If not, then he could use her to wake the Republicans in the Senate up, galvanize his troops, and maybe get someone a little more demonstrably Conservative through and onto the Court to counter some of the activism from the other side.
Win, win.
So, Republicans don't want Miers, and it looks (to me, anyway) like she will go away.
Let's just hope that we are ready for the REAL fight, when the NEXT nominee (the one we SAY we really want) comes along.
It won't be pretty, but it will be worth it.
I am going to make a prediction, based on the way that Harriett Miers filled out her questionare, the fact that her "Courtesy Calls" to several Senators have reportedly not gone well, and based upon other top secret evidence that only I have access to...
Harriett Miers will withdraw her own name from consideration for the Supreme Court vacancy sometime next week.
And I don't blame her if she does.
She showed up to work one morning, and the President dumped this situation on her. I don't know if she ever asked him to consider her or not. She and the President have been friends and associates for a long time, so if she wanted the job, she has had a lot of chances to let him know, but the fact of the matter is, it is up to the President to nominate who he wants for this spot on the Court.
Suddenly, Ms. Miers was thrust into this National debate, with the Libs (Who have no problem, by the way, with other Presidents putting people like their wives in charge of restructuring one SEVENTH of the U.S. economy) screaming about "Croney-ism", and demanding her to state beforehand how she will rule on specific issues, while Conservatives are running around questioning the brightness of her bulb, her lifetime achievements, her sexual orientation, her qualifications to even be in a Courtroom, even her personal financial situation.
Does anyone out there think that Harriett Miers was the first person that the President asked to fill this spot?
I don't.
Let me tell you why we wound up with Harriet Miers as a nominee in the first place.
This has all been brewing for a while. Back when the Democrats were threatening to filibuster John Bolton as Ambassador to the U.N., (Note: "Threatening." The Dems don't actually HAVE to filibuster anyone, they can hold up the vote with a THREAT...) The President finally got tired of all of the shenanigans in the Senate, and installed Bolton with a recess appointment, showing the Senate that he would actually go around them if he had to.
So the next time the filibuster issue came up, we got the "Nuclear Option" debate, and the "Gang of Fourteen" nonsense, effectively derailing the "Nuclear (Constitutional) Option", and keeping the filibuster issue alive to smack the President with later.
Why seven Senate Republicans thought that this was a good idea is totally beyond me. (To make sure that the "minority" still had a voice? You can believe that if the rolls were reversed, Democrats would show Republicans no such consideration...)
(But then again, Republicans like to believe that THEY take the high road in matters like this...)
So the President, faced with this controversial appointment, (The "Swing Seat," whatever that is on a body that is presumed to be objective and apolitical...) knew that he could not count on his Republican Senators to support him if things got tough.
So he nominated someone who NOBODY wanted.
Someone who the Democrats probably would not filibuster, but who would leave a bad taste in the mouth of the Conservative base.
If she made it through the confirmation process, and was installed on the Court, she would do a good job, rule fairly, and not engage in activism from the Bench.
If not, then he could use her to wake the Republicans in the Senate up, galvanize his troops, and maybe get someone a little more demonstrably Conservative through and onto the Court to counter some of the activism from the other side.
Win, win.
So, Republicans don't want Miers, and it looks (to me, anyway) like she will go away.
Let's just hope that we are ready for the REAL fight, when the NEXT nominee (the one we SAY we really want) comes along.
It won't be pretty, but it will be worth it.
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
Puppy Love
Hey! This is Mrs. Tug...in response to a request from ER, Tug said he needed some pictures of Sydney. Here are some of my favorites:
If you wondered what Tug looks like, he's the one wearing a baseball cap. Sydney is as spoiled as they come, he even gets to open our Christmas presents...
Memes, Memes, All Over The Place!
Sometimes it sucks to be popular...
My blogger buddies Mark, and ER, have both tagged me in the last couple of days, so I decided to answer them both in one post.
Mark's meme caused me to have to do the most actual work. (If this keeps up, I am going to just start numbering my posts, instead of naming them.)
Here it is.
1. Delve into your blog archive.
2. Find your 23rd post (or closest to).
3. Find the fifth sentence (or closest to).
4. Post the text of the sentence in your blog along with these instructions. Ponder it for meaning, subtext or hidden agendas.
5. Tag five people to do the same.
Sounds easy enough...
Okay, Here y'go.
My twenty-third post (if I counted correctly...) was entitled "Side-Stepping The Real Issues."
The fifth sentence was:
"But then I realized that I had bought in to the slant (though not the way they wanted me to) that my local Media wanted to put onto this story."
Try as I might, I cannot for the life of me find any meaning, subtext, or hidden agenda in this sentence. (I am not in the habit of including any of these things in any of my sentences anyway, so this does not surprise me.)
My five victims are:
1.Rich Bachelor. (I'll teach you to comment on my blog...Tee hee hee...)
2.Daffy76. (I'll teach you to be my sister...)
3.Carrier1. (I'll teach you to be Rich Bachelor's brother...)
4.ER. (I'll teach you to meme me...)
5.Pastor Timothy. (I'll teach you to...to... Well, I'll think of something.)
ER's meme was a little bit easier.
And here it is:
"THE SEARCH FOR JOY
Search your blog for the word "joy" used in the context of "happiness." If you cannot find the word in your weblog, you may use any of the select list of synonyms below.
"Joy, amusement, bliss, cheer, comfort, delectation, delight, ecstasy, elation, exaltation, exultation, exulting, felicity, gaiety, gladness, glee, good humor, gratification, happiness, hilarity, humor, jubilance, liveliness, merriment, mirth, pleasure, rapture, regalement, rejoicing, revelry, satisfaction, wonder."
Okay then.
My September 28th post was entitled "Oh Joy!"
It was about Tom Delay being endicted, and while you might think that I meant it sarcastically, I really am glad when real corruption is uncovered and dealt with in our Government. I don't think that it happens nearly enough.
I am basically a very happy person. I work very hard, and I have my share of problems, but God has been very good to me. I have a wonderful wife, and a spoiled rotten dog. (No children yet, but nature will eventually take it's course...) I have a big TV, a DVR, a yard full of cars, some junked, some not, depending on what day of the week it is... basically everything that a redneck could ever want.
Enough of this.
My five victims for this one are:
1. RebelAngel. (I'll teach you to...Nah. It was cute the first time...)
2. TC.
3. AJ.
4. Toad.
5. Xena.
So there you have it.
I have fulfilled my meme responsibilities for now.
My blogger buddies Mark, and ER, have both tagged me in the last couple of days, so I decided to answer them both in one post.
Mark's meme caused me to have to do the most actual work. (If this keeps up, I am going to just start numbering my posts, instead of naming them.)
Here it is.
1. Delve into your blog archive.
2. Find your 23rd post (or closest to).
3. Find the fifth sentence (or closest to).
4. Post the text of the sentence in your blog along with these instructions. Ponder it for meaning, subtext or hidden agendas.
5. Tag five people to do the same.
Sounds easy enough...
Okay, Here y'go.
My twenty-third post (if I counted correctly...) was entitled "Side-Stepping The Real Issues."
The fifth sentence was:
"But then I realized that I had bought in to the slant (though not the way they wanted me to) that my local Media wanted to put onto this story."
Try as I might, I cannot for the life of me find any meaning, subtext, or hidden agenda in this sentence. (I am not in the habit of including any of these things in any of my sentences anyway, so this does not surprise me.)
My five victims are:
1.Rich Bachelor. (I'll teach you to comment on my blog...Tee hee hee...)
2.Daffy76. (I'll teach you to be my sister...)
3.Carrier1. (I'll teach you to be Rich Bachelor's brother...)
4.ER. (I'll teach you to meme me...)
5.Pastor Timothy. (I'll teach you to...to... Well, I'll think of something.)
ER's meme was a little bit easier.
And here it is:
"THE SEARCH FOR JOY
Search your blog for the word "joy" used in the context of "happiness." If you cannot find the word in your weblog, you may use any of the select list of synonyms below.
"Joy, amusement, bliss, cheer, comfort, delectation, delight, ecstasy, elation, exaltation, exultation, exulting, felicity, gaiety, gladness, glee, good humor, gratification, happiness, hilarity, humor, jubilance, liveliness, merriment, mirth, pleasure, rapture, regalement, rejoicing, revelry, satisfaction, wonder."
Okay then.
My September 28th post was entitled "Oh Joy!"
It was about Tom Delay being endicted, and while you might think that I meant it sarcastically, I really am glad when real corruption is uncovered and dealt with in our Government. I don't think that it happens nearly enough.
I am basically a very happy person. I work very hard, and I have my share of problems, but God has been very good to me. I have a wonderful wife, and a spoiled rotten dog. (No children yet, but nature will eventually take it's course...) I have a big TV, a DVR, a yard full of cars, some junked, some not, depending on what day of the week it is... basically everything that a redneck could ever want.
Enough of this.
My five victims for this one are:
1. RebelAngel. (I'll teach you to...Nah. It was cute the first time...)
2. TC.
3. AJ.
4. Toad.
5. Xena.
So there you have it.
I have fulfilled my meme responsibilities for now.
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Illegal Immigrants, Go Home!
Hey, Check this out...
From Breitbart.com today:
"Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said his department aims without exception to expel all those who enter the United States illegally.
Our goal at DHS (Homeland Security) is to completely eliminate the 'catch and release' enforcement problem, and return every single illegal entrant, no exceptions.
It should be possible to achieve significant and measurable progress to this end in less than a year," Chertoff told a Senate hearing."
I have said before that this is THE hot button issue for the upcoming election cycle...
I just hope that he is serious...
It's about time.
From Breitbart.com today:
"Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said his department aims without exception to expel all those who enter the United States illegally.
Our goal at DHS (Homeland Security) is to completely eliminate the 'catch and release' enforcement problem, and return every single illegal entrant, no exceptions.
It should be possible to achieve significant and measurable progress to this end in less than a year," Chertoff told a Senate hearing."
I have said before that this is THE hot button issue for the upcoming election cycle...
I just hope that he is serious...
It's about time.
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Fair and Balanced...
I will admit that I enthusiastcally ran down to the polls and voted for President Bush, both times. (Suprise, suprise...)
I have not always agreed with everything that he has done, but I will say that he promised to do everything that he has done before I voted for him, so, if I was paying attention, I already knew what he was going to do.
Until the Miers nomination.
One of the main reasons that I voted for President Bush was that I knew that he was going to have the opportunity to nominate at least two Supreme Court Justices, and I did not want a Democrat President to get to nominate them.
Now, don't get me wrong. I personally have no problem whatsoever with Harriet Miers being placed on the Supreme Court. The only litmus test that matters to me is, Can she read and understand a document written in English, and can she understand the oath she will take, and will she adhere to it?
I don't care that she never has been a Judge before. I don't care if she never went to Law school. All I want is for her to apply the Constitution (The U.S. Constitution...) to whatever case she is presented with, use common sense when making her decisions, and do not institute her own personal policy preferences into National Law through the Court.
That's it.
If she can do these things, then in my opinion, she is qualified to sit on the Supreme Court.
And I believe that she can. The President believes that she will.
Good enough for me.
Here is the problem.
A whole lot of conservatives have worked extremely hard to get President Bush elected for this exact reason. They want him to select nominees to the Court who represent their viewpoint.
They (We...) expect him to.
And have every right to.
Or DO they?
Isn't that the very problem that we say we have with the Supreme Court already? That there are Justices on the Supreme Court who have a particular viewpoint, and interpret the Constitution according to their particular political leanings?
Is it a little hypocritical to want to put a flaming right winger on the Court to counter Ghinsburg?
If Ghinsburg gets to serve, then isn't it fair that the Conservatives get a Justice just as radical the other way?
In this case, do two wrongs make a right?
I have not always agreed with everything that he has done, but I will say that he promised to do everything that he has done before I voted for him, so, if I was paying attention, I already knew what he was going to do.
Until the Miers nomination.
One of the main reasons that I voted for President Bush was that I knew that he was going to have the opportunity to nominate at least two Supreme Court Justices, and I did not want a Democrat President to get to nominate them.
Now, don't get me wrong. I personally have no problem whatsoever with Harriet Miers being placed on the Supreme Court. The only litmus test that matters to me is, Can she read and understand a document written in English, and can she understand the oath she will take, and will she adhere to it?
I don't care that she never has been a Judge before. I don't care if she never went to Law school. All I want is for her to apply the Constitution (The U.S. Constitution...) to whatever case she is presented with, use common sense when making her decisions, and do not institute her own personal policy preferences into National Law through the Court.
That's it.
If she can do these things, then in my opinion, she is qualified to sit on the Supreme Court.
And I believe that she can. The President believes that she will.
Good enough for me.
Here is the problem.
A whole lot of conservatives have worked extremely hard to get President Bush elected for this exact reason. They want him to select nominees to the Court who represent their viewpoint.
They (We...) expect him to.
And have every right to.
Or DO they?
Isn't that the very problem that we say we have with the Supreme Court already? That there are Justices on the Supreme Court who have a particular viewpoint, and interpret the Constitution according to their particular political leanings?
Is it a little hypocritical to want to put a flaming right winger on the Court to counter Ghinsburg?
If Ghinsburg gets to serve, then isn't it fair that the Conservatives get a Justice just as radical the other way?
In this case, do two wrongs make a right?
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Happy Holidays!!
From the St. Petersburg Times:
"TAMPA - There may be no day off next school year for the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur. Also on the chopping block are vacation days for the Christian faith's Good Friday and the Monday after Easter.
After considering a request to recognize a Muslim school holiday, the Hillsborough County School Board next week will discuss ending student days off on all religious holidays, whether they be Christian, Jewish or Muslim.
The only religious holiday not affected will be Christmas, which occurs during the school district's winter break."
Now.
I hope that all of you who are laboring tirelessly for the cause of complete seperation of Church and State are happy.
This is the logical conclusion of a policy of complete seperation of Church and State within a culture of such diversity as the United States, when the public Schools are controlled and administered by the Government.
And if you think that Christmas will not be affected, just wait a few years. They'll get around to that.
Think about the Holidays that are important to you and your family.
Christmas?
Thanksgiving?
Easter?
Yom Kippur?
Ramadan?
These are Religious holidays. If we completely seperate Religion from Government, then we cannot recognize ANY of these Holidays in the Government Schools.
Is this what we really want?
Is this what the framers of our Constitution really wanted?
I still contend that the First Ammendment to the Constitution was inserted in order to prevent the Government from requiring all citizens to observe one specific form of religion, not to prevent religious people from affecting public policy, nor to restrict the practice of religion from public view.
This Country was founded upon Christian principals, and the Founding Fathers (with a few exceptions) had a very strong belief in God, and wanted to follow the teachings of the Bible, and the leadership of God in their decisions and policies.
Aproximately 77% of the American People believe in God, in one form or another. To ignore this fact would be a colossal mistake.
The phrase "Seperation of Church and State" never appears in our Constitution.
Please, People, let's think about the road we are starting to go down here...
Let's not destroy all traces of American culture in the name of diversity and fairness...
Let's not lose all of our National Holidays for the sake of this argument...
"TAMPA - There may be no day off next school year for the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur. Also on the chopping block are vacation days for the Christian faith's Good Friday and the Monday after Easter.
After considering a request to recognize a Muslim school holiday, the Hillsborough County School Board next week will discuss ending student days off on all religious holidays, whether they be Christian, Jewish or Muslim.
The only religious holiday not affected will be Christmas, which occurs during the school district's winter break."
Now.
I hope that all of you who are laboring tirelessly for the cause of complete seperation of Church and State are happy.
This is the logical conclusion of a policy of complete seperation of Church and State within a culture of such diversity as the United States, when the public Schools are controlled and administered by the Government.
And if you think that Christmas will not be affected, just wait a few years. They'll get around to that.
Think about the Holidays that are important to you and your family.
Christmas?
Thanksgiving?
Easter?
Yom Kippur?
Ramadan?
These are Religious holidays. If we completely seperate Religion from Government, then we cannot recognize ANY of these Holidays in the Government Schools.
Is this what we really want?
Is this what the framers of our Constitution really wanted?
I still contend that the First Ammendment to the Constitution was inserted in order to prevent the Government from requiring all citizens to observe one specific form of religion, not to prevent religious people from affecting public policy, nor to restrict the practice of religion from public view.
This Country was founded upon Christian principals, and the Founding Fathers (with a few exceptions) had a very strong belief in God, and wanted to follow the teachings of the Bible, and the leadership of God in their decisions and policies.
Aproximately 77% of the American People believe in God, in one form or another. To ignore this fact would be a colossal mistake.
The phrase "Seperation of Church and State" never appears in our Constitution.
Please, People, let's think about the road we are starting to go down here...
Let's not destroy all traces of American culture in the name of diversity and fairness...
Let's not lose all of our National Holidays for the sake of this argument...
Wednesday, October 05, 2005
The U.N.ternet...
How would you like it if you logged on to Blogger.com to write a post about some political subject, only to find out ( the hard way...) that writing about the subject that you chose was illegal?
How about if you logged onto the Internet to learn about a particular subject, and discovered that not only was access to that particular piece of information restricted, but that interest in it was against the law, and was a punishable offense?
Is this an impossible scenario?
The U.N. and the E.U. has begun to challenge the U.S. for our right to administer the Internet.
The U.S. does not really administer the internet.
"The origins of the Internet lie largely within the U.S. government, with concepts of network communication emerging in the 1970s from research at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA,) an arm of the Defense Department, along with a handful of other institutions and researchers.
Sometimes called an Internetting project - it was intended to create links among computer networks - the result became known as the Internet. For the system to function, a master list was needed to direct data to the correct destination.
Until now, the task of maintaining this master list has been overseen by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, known as Icann, a nonprofit organization based in Marina del Rey, California, that was founded on a contract from the U.S. Commerce Department."
(International Herald Tribune / Technology.)
The Internet was created by the U.S. Department of Defense, (not Al Gore...) and is now maintained by a non profit corporation called ICANN, which is supported by the U.S. Commerce Department.
Not controlled, supported.
From howstuffworks.com: (One of my personal favorite websites...)
"One of the greatest things about the Internet is that nobody really owns it. It is a global collection of networks, both big and small. These networks connect together in many different ways to form the single entity that we know as the Internet. In fact, the very name comes from this idea of interconnected networks."
Nobody owns the Internet. Nobody controls the Internet.
Not yet.
This would be a new situation, should it come to pass. The Internet works the way it works because it is a system of computers and servers that routes information to the proper destinations, without political bias.
Until this point in time, anybody, anywhere (except China...), can log onto the Internet, and learn about any subject, or say anything that they want.
One of the first things that despotic, repressive regimes do when they come to power is, they take over the Newspapers and the Television Stations. They try to control public opinion through propaganda, and restricted access to truth.
The U.N. and the E.U. want to CONTROL the Internet.
I hope that our Government will have the intestinal fortitude to tell the U.N. and the E.U. to go jump.
But if they don't, I will keep on blogging until the Goons come to take me off to the plastic shredder.
See you guys there...
How about if you logged onto the Internet to learn about a particular subject, and discovered that not only was access to that particular piece of information restricted, but that interest in it was against the law, and was a punishable offense?
Is this an impossible scenario?
The U.N. and the E.U. has begun to challenge the U.S. for our right to administer the Internet.
The U.S. does not really administer the internet.
"The origins of the Internet lie largely within the U.S. government, with concepts of network communication emerging in the 1970s from research at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA,) an arm of the Defense Department, along with a handful of other institutions and researchers.
Sometimes called an Internetting project - it was intended to create links among computer networks - the result became known as the Internet. For the system to function, a master list was needed to direct data to the correct destination.
Until now, the task of maintaining this master list has been overseen by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, known as Icann, a nonprofit organization based in Marina del Rey, California, that was founded on a contract from the U.S. Commerce Department."
(International Herald Tribune / Technology.)
The Internet was created by the U.S. Department of Defense, (not Al Gore...) and is now maintained by a non profit corporation called ICANN, which is supported by the U.S. Commerce Department.
Not controlled, supported.
From howstuffworks.com: (One of my personal favorite websites...)
"One of the greatest things about the Internet is that nobody really owns it. It is a global collection of networks, both big and small. These networks connect together in many different ways to form the single entity that we know as the Internet. In fact, the very name comes from this idea of interconnected networks."
Nobody owns the Internet. Nobody controls the Internet.
Not yet.
This would be a new situation, should it come to pass. The Internet works the way it works because it is a system of computers and servers that routes information to the proper destinations, without political bias.
Until this point in time, anybody, anywhere (except China...), can log onto the Internet, and learn about any subject, or say anything that they want.
One of the first things that despotic, repressive regimes do when they come to power is, they take over the Newspapers and the Television Stations. They try to control public opinion through propaganda, and restricted access to truth.
The U.N. and the E.U. want to CONTROL the Internet.
I hope that our Government will have the intestinal fortitude to tell the U.N. and the E.U. to go jump.
But if they don't, I will keep on blogging until the Goons come to take me off to the plastic shredder.
See you guys there...
Sunday, October 02, 2005
Culture of Corruption...
Now, THERE'S a slogan for ya...
I am really amazed it took them this long to come up with it.
I guess it took a long time to put all the pieces into place for it to be even a little bit believable, but after enough time and enough consistant hammering in the MSM, enough unfounded and unproven allegations against enough different Republican elected officials and right wing national spokesmen and figureheads, with this week's indictment of Tom Delay, they think that now they may be able to get the lable to stick.
Culture of Corruption...
Here is something that I found at the Progressive Review website. (It's kinda long, but worth the read, unless you are more interested in partisanship, than truth.)
It is a list of records set during the Clinton administration. (Interestingly, the way I found this was, I typed in the words "Clinton Legacy" on Google, and this was the first link that came up. For those of you interested in white-washing the former President's reputation and repairing his "Legacy"... you still have a LOT of work to do.)
- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance.
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates.*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation.
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify.
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly.
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation.
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case.
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court.
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions.
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad.
And now the REPUBLICANS are the "Culture of Corruption", because Tom Delay has been indicted for one count of "Conspiracy" (to do what??) and Karl Rove is mean and nasty, and Republicans believe in GOD (!), and they want to take away ALL of our RIGHTS (!!), and... and...
Okay, All of you Democrats out there...
All of you Clinton supporters...
All of you Bush-Haters...
Maybe the President and everyone in his entire administration is as dirty as...as...
As Clinton was.
But you guys don't get to be the ones to point that out to me.
You blew your chance to make a stand against "Corruption" when it was YOUR corrupt guy in office.
So now I am going to take a page from the Democrat Playbook, and support my party, just like you guys did, and continue to do.
I don't want to hear it. Not from you...Not Now.
I am really amazed it took them this long to come up with it.
I guess it took a long time to put all the pieces into place for it to be even a little bit believable, but after enough time and enough consistant hammering in the MSM, enough unfounded and unproven allegations against enough different Republican elected officials and right wing national spokesmen and figureheads, with this week's indictment of Tom Delay, they think that now they may be able to get the lable to stick.
Culture of Corruption...
Here is something that I found at the Progressive Review website. (It's kinda long, but worth the read, unless you are more interested in partisanship, than truth.)
It is a list of records set during the Clinton administration. (Interestingly, the way I found this was, I typed in the words "Clinton Legacy" on Google, and this was the first link that came up. For those of you interested in white-washing the former President's reputation and repairing his "Legacy"... you still have a LOT of work to do.)
- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance.
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates.*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation.
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify.
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly.
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation.
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case.
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court.
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions.
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad.
And now the REPUBLICANS are the "Culture of Corruption", because Tom Delay has been indicted for one count of "Conspiracy" (to do what??) and Karl Rove is mean and nasty, and Republicans believe in GOD (!), and they want to take away ALL of our RIGHTS (!!), and... and...
Okay, All of you Democrats out there...
All of you Clinton supporters...
All of you Bush-Haters...
Maybe the President and everyone in his entire administration is as dirty as...as...
As Clinton was.
But you guys don't get to be the ones to point that out to me.
You blew your chance to make a stand against "Corruption" when it was YOUR corrupt guy in office.
So now I am going to take a page from the Democrat Playbook, and support my party, just like you guys did, and continue to do.
I don't want to hear it. Not from you...Not Now.
Thursday, September 29, 2005
Oh Joy!!
I am so happy I could almost cry!!
Today, Republican Majority Leader Tom Delay was indicted on charges of suspicion of intent to commit consiracy to violate the McCain-Finegold attack on the free expression of free political speech, and association with conservatives, and (perhaps the most serious of the charges against him,) being an effective conservative leader.
I personally am all for investigating him, and if he is found guilty, I want him punished every bit as severly as congressman Bill Janklow was.
But here is something else that I hope that this leads to.
I want every single congressman and senator investigated just as intensly as Tom Delay has been investigated. If there is corruption in our Government, I want it uncovered, and dealt with.
And I am hoping against hope, that if Tom Delay is found guilty, he will appeal it all the way to the Supreme court, (with all of our new, Bush appointed, Conservative Justices...) and the stupid McCain-Finegold act can be struck down, and the stupid Texas District Attourney, Ronnie Earl can be disbarred, and removed from office.
This is gonna be GREAT!!
Today, Republican Majority Leader Tom Delay was indicted on charges of suspicion of intent to commit consiracy to violate the McCain-Finegold attack on the free expression of free political speech, and association with conservatives, and (perhaps the most serious of the charges against him,) being an effective conservative leader.
I personally am all for investigating him, and if he is found guilty, I want him punished every bit as severly as congressman Bill Janklow was.
But here is something else that I hope that this leads to.
I want every single congressman and senator investigated just as intensly as Tom Delay has been investigated. If there is corruption in our Government, I want it uncovered, and dealt with.
And I am hoping against hope, that if Tom Delay is found guilty, he will appeal it all the way to the Supreme court, (with all of our new, Bush appointed, Conservative Justices...) and the stupid McCain-Finegold act can be struck down, and the stupid Texas District Attourney, Ronnie Earl can be disbarred, and removed from office.
This is gonna be GREAT!!
Monday, September 26, 2005
The National Wage...
I want all of you to imagine this for a moment.
What if tommorrow morning, at 10:00 AM, the President called a press conference, and announced that in the interest of economic fairness, the Congress and Senate have passed the "National Wage" bill, and he is now going to sign it into law.
From now on, everyone from the CEO of GM, to the janitor at Burger King will make $75,000 per year. No one will make more, no one will make less. And all fortunes amassed by people like the Walton family, and the Hiltons, and even the Kennedys or Heinz-Kerrys will be confiscated, and applied to the national deficit.
What a wonderful world it would be, right?
I mean, there would be no more "Rich", or "Poor"...Only Americans. No more class envy. We would all be able to afford the same house, the same car, the same boat, land, TV, lifestyle.
Money would no longer be an issue, right?
Complete economic equality for all Americans.
Right??
WRONG.
I can think of no more horrible scenario for our country than that.
The first thing that would happen is that no school teacher, doctor, dentist, nurse, lawyer, bus driver, truck driver, newspaper reporter, secretary, company executive, garbage collector, septic tank pumper, tire changer, cashier, dog groomer, policeman, fireman, shoe salesman, construction worker, mechanic, personal assistant, housekeeper, fast food worker, ditch digger, etc, etc, etc...would show up to work tomorrow.
I know I wouldn't.
I would become a professional musician. (I mean, if I was guaranteed the same income as if I were still driving a truck, Whether there was a market for my music or not, this is a no-brainer.)
There would be no need for anyone to go to college anymore.
If you could make just as much money slinging a mop, then why become a brain surgeon?
For that matter, why even finish high School?
And God help you if you, for whatever reason, needed to see a doctor. There wouldn't be any.
There wouldn't be any lawyers, either.
By the same token, you wouldn't be able to get a job as a janitor, either. Businesses would no longer hire people who did not generate $75,000 per year. They just wouldn't do it.
And if they wanted a janitor, there would be 800,000 applicants to choose from.
They wouldn't hire truck drivers either.
They might hire one or two, and force them to do the work of eight or ten, until they quit to go look for a job as a video store clerk or something.
I mean, the money would be the same.
Why do the extra work?
And what would housing cost if every worker on a jobsite had to be paid $75,000 per year?
What would a car cost?
What would a hamburger cost?
Okay, now.
Consider this point. If it makes no sense to set a National Wage, or a Maximum Wage, then why does it make sense to set a Minimum Wage?
You are not helping the poor by raising the minimum wage, or even by HAVING a minimum wage, you are only depressing the buying power of whatever money they DO have.
Economic equality is an myth. It is an unattainable concept.
To pursue the goal of absolute economic equality in America would destroy our whole economy, and lower the standard of living to poverty levels nation wide, for everyone.
The only economic system that has ever been devised that leads to prosperity is Capitalism.
And for Capitalism to work, you must have rich, and poor, and everything in between.
It is the only way.
Like it or not.
What if tommorrow morning, at 10:00 AM, the President called a press conference, and announced that in the interest of economic fairness, the Congress and Senate have passed the "National Wage" bill, and he is now going to sign it into law.
From now on, everyone from the CEO of GM, to the janitor at Burger King will make $75,000 per year. No one will make more, no one will make less. And all fortunes amassed by people like the Walton family, and the Hiltons, and even the Kennedys or Heinz-Kerrys will be confiscated, and applied to the national deficit.
What a wonderful world it would be, right?
I mean, there would be no more "Rich", or "Poor"...Only Americans. No more class envy. We would all be able to afford the same house, the same car, the same boat, land, TV, lifestyle.
Money would no longer be an issue, right?
Complete economic equality for all Americans.
Right??
WRONG.
I can think of no more horrible scenario for our country than that.
The first thing that would happen is that no school teacher, doctor, dentist, nurse, lawyer, bus driver, truck driver, newspaper reporter, secretary, company executive, garbage collector, septic tank pumper, tire changer, cashier, dog groomer, policeman, fireman, shoe salesman, construction worker, mechanic, personal assistant, housekeeper, fast food worker, ditch digger, etc, etc, etc...would show up to work tomorrow.
I know I wouldn't.
I would become a professional musician. (I mean, if I was guaranteed the same income as if I were still driving a truck, Whether there was a market for my music or not, this is a no-brainer.)
There would be no need for anyone to go to college anymore.
If you could make just as much money slinging a mop, then why become a brain surgeon?
For that matter, why even finish high School?
And God help you if you, for whatever reason, needed to see a doctor. There wouldn't be any.
There wouldn't be any lawyers, either.
By the same token, you wouldn't be able to get a job as a janitor, either. Businesses would no longer hire people who did not generate $75,000 per year. They just wouldn't do it.
And if they wanted a janitor, there would be 800,000 applicants to choose from.
They wouldn't hire truck drivers either.
They might hire one or two, and force them to do the work of eight or ten, until they quit to go look for a job as a video store clerk or something.
I mean, the money would be the same.
Why do the extra work?
And what would housing cost if every worker on a jobsite had to be paid $75,000 per year?
What would a car cost?
What would a hamburger cost?
Okay, now.
Consider this point. If it makes no sense to set a National Wage, or a Maximum Wage, then why does it make sense to set a Minimum Wage?
You are not helping the poor by raising the minimum wage, or even by HAVING a minimum wage, you are only depressing the buying power of whatever money they DO have.
Economic equality is an myth. It is an unattainable concept.
To pursue the goal of absolute economic equality in America would destroy our whole economy, and lower the standard of living to poverty levels nation wide, for everyone.
The only economic system that has ever been devised that leads to prosperity is Capitalism.
And for Capitalism to work, you must have rich, and poor, and everything in between.
It is the only way.
Like it or not.
Saturday, September 24, 2005
I See Dead People...
The wife and I just got home from Tampa, where we visited the Museum of Science and Industry. They are currently displaying the "Bodies" exhibit.
You may have heard about this exhibit. It is a collection of actual human cadavers that have been specially treated with a "cellular polymerization process", in various stages of dissection and in poses that portray real life activities, and arranged to display the various major systems of the human body.
There was some controversy surrounding this exhibit shortly before it opened in Tampa. The Florida Anatomical Board held hearings as to whether the exhibit was appropriate. The Florida Anatomical Board regulates the disposition and treatment of cadavers in the state of Florida, regardless of their origin.
These cadavers came from China, and there was some concern about whether the cadavers were obtained legally, and whether the creators of the display actually had obtained permission from the families of the deceased for the cadavers to be used in this way.
The Florida Anatomical Board decided not to allow the Exhibit to be displayed.
MOSI ignored the ruling and opened it anyway.
I enjoyed it, and the wife was absolutely riveted. It was truly amazing, and I learned a lot, but I must admit that it left me with a somewhat uneasy feeling.
I could not shake the thought that, as interesting as this exhibit was, these were actual human beings. They were people. They were born, were cute babies, were loved by their parents, grew up and most likely had children of their own. They got hungry, got thirsty, got their hearts broken by someone when they were sixteen. They hated their jobs, they loved their jobs.
And now, they are standing naked in an exhibition hall in the Tampa Museum of Science and Industry, with their skin peeled off, and the muscles which used to move their arm when they brushed their teeth cut loose from their arm bone, and plasticized so that it sticks up in the air for hundreds of people a day to look at.
"Ooooh!...Aaaah!..."
Another thing that bothered me about it was that the cadavers, in addition to being naked, were, for lack of a better description, anatomically correct. The most crowded portion of the whole exhibit was the section on the Reproductive System, and they left nothing to the imagination. (Which was absolutely the right way to do that, given the context of the display. I understand that this exhibit was created in the interest of education, and anatomy is what was on display.)
I just couldn't help but think about how the former occupants of those bodies would feel about having their business out there on display in front of God and everybody like that.
This is an extremely popular exhibit. It was very crowded (to the point of being annoying,) and there were a lot of very young children there. I heard, (and admittedly MADE) several inapropriate comments, which would have horrified me, had someone made a comment like that about MY private anatomical details, however pitiful or impressive they may be.
I am sure that they would have had an opinion about that as well.
The most disturbing portion was the "Fetal Development" section. They displayed human fetuses, each in their own little glass case, at various stages of development. At twelve weeks, the human fetus is a tiny little person, with little fingers and toes, eyes, nose, and mouth, and the fetus that was on display was sucking it's thumb. I can't imagine that anyone who has seen this exhibit could support the practice of interrupting the development of that little person, for any reason.
Overall, it was a very interesting and enjoyable event, and if the "Bodies" exhibit comes to a town near you, I heartily recomend that you check it out.
Just consider yourself warned, up front, by Tug.
It will make you think, and some of the thoughts it inspires will make you uncomfortable.
You may have heard about this exhibit. It is a collection of actual human cadavers that have been specially treated with a "cellular polymerization process", in various stages of dissection and in poses that portray real life activities, and arranged to display the various major systems of the human body.
There was some controversy surrounding this exhibit shortly before it opened in Tampa. The Florida Anatomical Board held hearings as to whether the exhibit was appropriate. The Florida Anatomical Board regulates the disposition and treatment of cadavers in the state of Florida, regardless of their origin.
These cadavers came from China, and there was some concern about whether the cadavers were obtained legally, and whether the creators of the display actually had obtained permission from the families of the deceased for the cadavers to be used in this way.
The Florida Anatomical Board decided not to allow the Exhibit to be displayed.
MOSI ignored the ruling and opened it anyway.
I enjoyed it, and the wife was absolutely riveted. It was truly amazing, and I learned a lot, but I must admit that it left me with a somewhat uneasy feeling.
I could not shake the thought that, as interesting as this exhibit was, these were actual human beings. They were people. They were born, were cute babies, were loved by their parents, grew up and most likely had children of their own. They got hungry, got thirsty, got their hearts broken by someone when they were sixteen. They hated their jobs, they loved their jobs.
And now, they are standing naked in an exhibition hall in the Tampa Museum of Science and Industry, with their skin peeled off, and the muscles which used to move their arm when they brushed their teeth cut loose from their arm bone, and plasticized so that it sticks up in the air for hundreds of people a day to look at.
"Ooooh!...Aaaah!..."
Another thing that bothered me about it was that the cadavers, in addition to being naked, were, for lack of a better description, anatomically correct. The most crowded portion of the whole exhibit was the section on the Reproductive System, and they left nothing to the imagination. (Which was absolutely the right way to do that, given the context of the display. I understand that this exhibit was created in the interest of education, and anatomy is what was on display.)
I just couldn't help but think about how the former occupants of those bodies would feel about having their business out there on display in front of God and everybody like that.
This is an extremely popular exhibit. It was very crowded (to the point of being annoying,) and there were a lot of very young children there. I heard, (and admittedly MADE) several inapropriate comments, which would have horrified me, had someone made a comment like that about MY private anatomical details, however pitiful or impressive they may be.
I am sure that they would have had an opinion about that as well.
The most disturbing portion was the "Fetal Development" section. They displayed human fetuses, each in their own little glass case, at various stages of development. At twelve weeks, the human fetus is a tiny little person, with little fingers and toes, eyes, nose, and mouth, and the fetus that was on display was sucking it's thumb. I can't imagine that anyone who has seen this exhibit could support the practice of interrupting the development of that little person, for any reason.
Overall, it was a very interesting and enjoyable event, and if the "Bodies" exhibit comes to a town near you, I heartily recomend that you check it out.
Just consider yourself warned, up front, by Tug.
It will make you think, and some of the thoughts it inspires will make you uncomfortable.
Friday, September 23, 2005
May Justice Be Served.
The trial is over and soon the sentence will be handed down.
One news article that has largely been lost in the ad-nauseum news coverage of the "Perfect Storm", (The one that it was hoped would blow the President away...) was the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings regarding the fate of the desperate and heinous criminal, John Roberts.
He was accused of being a Conservative, of not talking about his skills as a husband and father, of withholding documents which could be spun so that they might seem incriminating, of believing in the U.S. Constitution as written, of being unwilling to use a position on the Supreme Court to right social wrongs or impose his personal policy beliefs into law, of thinking that Abortion might possibly be wrong, and (perhaps the most serious of all of the charges against him,) of being nominated to the position of Cheif Justice of the Supreme Court by George W. Bush.
The Judiciary Committee found him guilty as charged, by a vote of 12 to 5.
His fate is now in the hands of the full Senate.
If found guilty of these charges by the full Senate, he could be sentenced to serve time on the Supreme Court of the United States for the remainder of his natural life.
And may God have mercy on his soul.
One news article that has largely been lost in the ad-nauseum news coverage of the "Perfect Storm", (The one that it was hoped would blow the President away...) was the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings regarding the fate of the desperate and heinous criminal, John Roberts.
He was accused of being a Conservative, of not talking about his skills as a husband and father, of withholding documents which could be spun so that they might seem incriminating, of believing in the U.S. Constitution as written, of being unwilling to use a position on the Supreme Court to right social wrongs or impose his personal policy beliefs into law, of thinking that Abortion might possibly be wrong, and (perhaps the most serious of all of the charges against him,) of being nominated to the position of Cheif Justice of the Supreme Court by George W. Bush.
The Judiciary Committee found him guilty as charged, by a vote of 12 to 5.
His fate is now in the hands of the full Senate.
If found guilty of these charges by the full Senate, he could be sentenced to serve time on the Supreme Court of the United States for the remainder of his natural life.
And may God have mercy on his soul.
Thursday, September 22, 2005
This Can't Be Good...
There is a scandal brewing.
A BIG one.
Not a Democrat or Republican scandal, but an American one.
If the corruption that will be exposed when this scandal comes to light goes as high as the President, it will not only hurt President Bush, But Clinton as well, and possibly even Bush 41.
It could shake our basic faith in our very system of Government, not just our faith in our elected leaders.
The main stream media is not covering it in very much detail as of yet, they are actively trying to ignore it. If you look hard enough, though, you can get little snippetts and scattered details of it here and there.
But the time will come, and soon, when the media will have to pay attention to it.
We, as Americans, should be paying very close attention to it now.
I am going to call it "Able-Danger-Gate", so in a few weeks when you hear that term, you will know that Tug said it first.
The story, according to Fox news is that the Army's special intel project known as Able-Danger identified four of the nineteen hijackers, as well as Mohammad Atta more than a year before 9/11, and when they tried to report their findings, they were not only ignored, but threatened and told to stand down by their superiors.
They reported to the 9/11 Commission, and they were ignored there as well, and subsequently punished for trying to go public.
The Senate is currently holding hearings on this matter, and the Pentagon is issuing gag orders to stop the witnesses from telling their stories.
I want the facts, All of them, if for no other reason but to keep my imagination from running away with me.
The way I see it is like this. Either this is someone high up in the Pentagon, just trying to save his job, and save face, or the whole Pentagon and Department of Defense are covering for someone further up the food chain. (How much farther up does the food chain GO from there?)
The information that I have seen and heard so far would suggest at the very least complicity between branches of our Government, our media, and the Terrorists of 9/11, and worst case, cooperation.
That's a concept that really, really worries me.
Or it could just be a collossal misunderstanding. It could be nothing.
I don't know what to think.
If any of you can tell me something to ease my mind, I would really appreciate your thoughts...
One thing that I do know is, until all of this is cleared up, we all should put aside our partisan bickering, and idealogical disagreements, and cry out with one voice to our elected officials:
"GIVE US THE TRUTH!!"
A BIG one.
Not a Democrat or Republican scandal, but an American one.
If the corruption that will be exposed when this scandal comes to light goes as high as the President, it will not only hurt President Bush, But Clinton as well, and possibly even Bush 41.
It could shake our basic faith in our very system of Government, not just our faith in our elected leaders.
The main stream media is not covering it in very much detail as of yet, they are actively trying to ignore it. If you look hard enough, though, you can get little snippetts and scattered details of it here and there.
But the time will come, and soon, when the media will have to pay attention to it.
We, as Americans, should be paying very close attention to it now.
I am going to call it "Able-Danger-Gate", so in a few weeks when you hear that term, you will know that Tug said it first.
The story, according to Fox news is that the Army's special intel project known as Able-Danger identified four of the nineteen hijackers, as well as Mohammad Atta more than a year before 9/11, and when they tried to report their findings, they were not only ignored, but threatened and told to stand down by their superiors.
They reported to the 9/11 Commission, and they were ignored there as well, and subsequently punished for trying to go public.
The Senate is currently holding hearings on this matter, and the Pentagon is issuing gag orders to stop the witnesses from telling their stories.
I want the facts, All of them, if for no other reason but to keep my imagination from running away with me.
The way I see it is like this. Either this is someone high up in the Pentagon, just trying to save his job, and save face, or the whole Pentagon and Department of Defense are covering for someone further up the food chain. (How much farther up does the food chain GO from there?)
The information that I have seen and heard so far would suggest at the very least complicity between branches of our Government, our media, and the Terrorists of 9/11, and worst case, cooperation.
That's a concept that really, really worries me.
Or it could just be a collossal misunderstanding. It could be nothing.
I don't know what to think.
If any of you can tell me something to ease my mind, I would really appreciate your thoughts...
One thing that I do know is, until all of this is cleared up, we all should put aside our partisan bickering, and idealogical disagreements, and cry out with one voice to our elected officials:
"GIVE US THE TRUTH!!"
Monday, September 19, 2005
Who REALLY Cares?
Well, the city of New Orleans is well on it's way to being fully functional. There is running water in much of the city, (although it has to be boiled if anyone plans to drink it,) and electricity and sewer service are being restored at record pace.
Mayor Ray Nagin is encouraging the citizens of his city to return as soon as they can. And they are.
Bourbon Street has several bars open, and even a couple of strip clubs are up and running, and they are even taking the FEMA $2000 debit cards.
There is one problem, though...
There is another hurricane coming.
Hurricane Rita, which, even as I write this post, is bearing down upon the Florida Keys, is projected to roar up the middle of the Gulf of Mexico later this week, and if it follows the yellow line in the middle of the "Cone of Destruction" from the National Weather Service's website, it will come ashore at Houston, Texas, as a category three storm.
(What do Houston, Texas, and New Orleans, Louisiana have in common?)
But a slight northward turn would bring Rita ashore exactly where Katrina wreaked havoc a couple of weeks ago.
Even if Rita goes to Houston, she will still bring storm surges, damaging winds and possible flooding to the New Orleans area. There is even speculation that the damaged levees may break again, causing another round of flooding.
That's the BEST case scenario.
Worst case is that another Category three or higher storm could possibly plow right into the same area that was just devastated by Katrina.
The President is urging Katrina evacuees to stay put until more is known about the path of this new storm. New Orleans is a compromised area. It is not a good idea to try to ride out a storm of ANY magnitude in New Orleans right now.
But Mayor Nagin says, "Come On Down!!"
From this I can only reach one conclusion...
Mayor Ray Nagin Does Not Care About Black People.
Update:
My Blogger buddy Mark has informed me that Mayor Nagin has changed his mind, and started telling the people to stay away for a few more days.
So I guess that maybe he DOES care about Black People after all.
Mayor Ray Nagin is encouraging the citizens of his city to return as soon as they can. And they are.
Bourbon Street has several bars open, and even a couple of strip clubs are up and running, and they are even taking the FEMA $2000 debit cards.
There is one problem, though...
There is another hurricane coming.
Hurricane Rita, which, even as I write this post, is bearing down upon the Florida Keys, is projected to roar up the middle of the Gulf of Mexico later this week, and if it follows the yellow line in the middle of the "Cone of Destruction" from the National Weather Service's website, it will come ashore at Houston, Texas, as a category three storm.
(What do Houston, Texas, and New Orleans, Louisiana have in common?)
But a slight northward turn would bring Rita ashore exactly where Katrina wreaked havoc a couple of weeks ago.
Even if Rita goes to Houston, she will still bring storm surges, damaging winds and possible flooding to the New Orleans area. There is even speculation that the damaged levees may break again, causing another round of flooding.
That's the BEST case scenario.
Worst case is that another Category three or higher storm could possibly plow right into the same area that was just devastated by Katrina.
The President is urging Katrina evacuees to stay put until more is known about the path of this new storm. New Orleans is a compromised area. It is not a good idea to try to ride out a storm of ANY magnitude in New Orleans right now.
But Mayor Nagin says, "Come On Down!!"
From this I can only reach one conclusion...
Mayor Ray Nagin Does Not Care About Black People.
Update:
My Blogger buddy Mark has informed me that Mayor Nagin has changed his mind, and started telling the people to stay away for a few more days.
So I guess that maybe he DOES care about Black People after all.
Friday, September 16, 2005
The Bill Of Non-Rights
My wife recieved this in an E-mail today. A friend of ours thought that I might want to use it on my blog.
He was right.
I did not write this, although I wish that I had.
There are a lot of things that our government does with our tax money, which have absolutely no provisions in the U.S. Constitution to support them.
I will post more on that subject later (after I have had time to research the subject).
For now, here is the E-mail, copied and pasted straight to my blog. I do not know who wrote it originally, but I have not modified it in any way from the way that I recieved it.
Presented for your consideration:
"We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other liberal bed-wetters. We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights."
"ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.
ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.
ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.
ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.
ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.
ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.
ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.
ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.
ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from! (lastly....) NOW..
ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!!!!
If you agree, share this with a friend. No, you don't have to, and nothing tragic will befall you if you don't. I just think it's about time common sense is allowed to flourish. Sensible people of the United States speak out because if you do not, who will?"
He was right.
I did not write this, although I wish that I had.
There are a lot of things that our government does with our tax money, which have absolutely no provisions in the U.S. Constitution to support them.
I will post more on that subject later (after I have had time to research the subject).
For now, here is the E-mail, copied and pasted straight to my blog. I do not know who wrote it originally, but I have not modified it in any way from the way that I recieved it.
Presented for your consideration:
"We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt ridden, delusional, and other liberal bed-wetters. We hold these truths to be self evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights."
"ARTICLE I: You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.
ARTICLE II: You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be.
ARTICLE III: You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful, do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.
ARTICLE IV: You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who achieve nothing more than the creation of another generation of professional couch potatoes.
ARTICLE V: You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.
ARTICLE VI: You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you fry in the electric chair.
ARTICLE VII: You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure.
ARTICLE VIII: You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.
ARTICLE IX: You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an over abundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.
ARTICLE X: This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you are from, English is our language. Learn it or go back to wherever you came from! (lastly....) NOW..
ARTICLE XI: You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, and if you are uncomfortable with it, TOUGH!!!!
If you agree, share this with a friend. No, you don't have to, and nothing tragic will befall you if you don't. I just think it's about time common sense is allowed to flourish. Sensible people of the United States speak out because if you do not, who will?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
