June 18, 2005
Flushing of the flag at Gitmo!
No, this is not an example of lack of discipline in the ranks. This is an example of lack of common sense in the United States. Let's start with the Qu'ran desecrations.
There have been five instances where a U.S. service member has accidentally desecrated a Qu'ran at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. All five of those times the individual in question was severely punished and either reassigned or kicked out of the military. Just getting the boot from the military doesn't seem like that big of a deal until you realize that any company with a contract to be on a base has to sign an agreement that states they will hire no one that was granted a less than honorable discharge. (It's about the same thing as the "gas with oily discharge" you get from Olestra.) Those that have been terminated from Gitmo have severely limited their careers. But I digress, that's not really what this whole thing is about. It's about treating a material item as something greater than itself. For many it's about respecting a culture. The Qu'ran is supposed to be the icon of that culture.
Lets take a look at this picture:
This is an image of Hindus protesting the destruction of those two giant Buddhas in Afghanistan. The book they're turning to confetti is none other than the Qu'ran. No one went to war over it.
How about this one from Korea:
I can't find the image of the Qu'ran burning in South Korea after they had a guy beheaded. If anybody out there still has a copy I'd be much obliged.
Okay, the point here is that the Qu'ran gets desecrated daily. It's no big deal, especially when it's unintentional. Just ask the Wahabists when they burn down a stack of Qu'rans:
Sepahi Sahaba and Wahabis attack the holy Mousque. This is how they claim to be Muslim, to attack children, female people's properties and even the place Islamic prayers.
As far as I can see the Qu'ran is a symbol of the Islamic peoples. They are also a symbol of terrorists. When I heard about the Qu'ran flushing truth stretch and what occurred I was tempted to flush a Qu'ran myself. Then I came to my senses and realized I would be paying a pretty hefty plumbing bill if it did this.
So why am I ranting about this now? Well, it seems that congress is trying to pass that flag burning law again. It appears they want to make it illegal to burn the flag. I say we should only make it illegal to flush them. C'mon, can't you see what happens when we try to flush an item of importance? People riot in the streets and kill people. No one dies when you burn a flag, only when you flush something to people seem to die.
No, I am not serious about this. I don't believe any of these items should be burned but I respect one's right to burn an item of extreme importance in effigy. In my eyes it's protected under the same category as other forms of art. Do we arrest the painter for painting Bush like a monkey? Did we fine political comics for all of those truly tasteless "blue-dress" jabs? No, they're protected as free speech.
My father once asked me whether burning a flag was speech or action. If you burn a random article you are doing nothing more than making an action. If you burn something of importance you have just made a statement. That is speech.
Let me give you a few more examples of this "active speech". Someone doesn't like the way congress is raping the constitution so they buy a copy of the constitution and burn it in protest. That is speech. Someone urinates in a jar and dumps a crucifix in it, then calls it "Piss Christ". As repulsive as it may be it is protected as speech. (Just for the record, I know that this little piece was paid for by the government and that would cause me to enact the Constitution burning if I was one of those people that burned things.) Bible burnings, Qu'ran burnings and even Torah burnings are free speech because you are trying to send the message of disdain and/or anger, rage, disappointment, disgust, etc.
Sure I could do something a little less drastic to try and make my point. Would it put me on national news to hold a bake sale against Judaism? (No offense to Jews. I'm just giving this as an example.) I might get a five second blurb on Good Morning America if I raised over $10,000. Someone would roll their eyes and we'd be on the next segment. If you burned a symbol of importance you have just given yourself national and sometimes international coverage. If you were an American you'd get interviews, the blogosphere would talk about you for weeks. People would devote whole sites both for and against you. It might even net you a book deal for your cause.
To end this I'd like to quote a poem I heard today so we can all have a little perspective:
IT IS THE SOLDIER
It is the Soldier, not the minister
Who has given us freedom of religion.
It is the Soldier, not the reporter
Who has given us freedom of the press.
It is the Soldier, not the poet
Who has given us freedom of speech.
It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer
Who has given us freedom to protest.
It is the Soldier, not the lawyer
Who has given us the right to a fair trial.
It is the Soldier, not the politician
Who has given us the right to vote.
It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag,
Who allows the protester to burn the flag.
(© Charles M. Province)
Taken From: Babalu Blog
Ken from The Squamata Report was kind enough to find Zell Miller's 2004 speech where he uses a piece of the above poem. LINK
June 17, 2005
Dick Durbin - Bad For America
I'm sure you have heard the accusations by Senator Dick Durbin (D) that Guantanamo Bay is like a Soviet Gulag or Nazi Germany. He even likened the situation to Pol Pot's regime in Vitnam. He stated today, after several military support groups went into action, that:
...the comments were intended to compare "torture" at Guantanamo to torture during the Nazi regime, not to equate Americans at the base to the Nazis and similar groups...
Excuse me? You're comparing the actions of marines to the actions of Nazis...but not comparing the people. Is anyone else having a hard time wrapping their brain around this one? They act like Nazis but aren't being compared to Nazis? Am I the only one that spots the inconsistencies here? Lets go to the original quote, maybe it will explain things better:
...those actions could have been done "by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime – Pol Pol or others – that had no concern for human beings."Nope, just as disturbing as when I first heard it. Just as pointed against our troops. Just as destructive towards America in general. It's his right to spout off nonsense like this, but we sure as hell don't have to like it. In fact, this act coupled with a few others borders on the treasonous. No, it's not outright treason, but when you put everything together and see the pattern it starts to get close.
Dick Durbin, it turns out, has a history of attacking just about everything Bush puts on the table and some things he has absolutely no bearing on. From Gitmo, to appointments, to even missile defense, Durbin has been riding the president's backside with no regard for who it hurts, as long as it goes against the president. Don't believe me? Well then, let me plead my case...like you could stop me...HA!
This post is also available at Blogger News Network.
This post is also available at Blogcritics.
Linking to this open post at Mudville Gazette.
Since it's an open post about "A toast to our soldiers" here's a Durbin related toast:
May Durbin and his ilk learn what real torture is about.
In 2001 Bush spoke about ramping up missile defense. Well, Durbin didn't like Bush back then. Here's Durbin's take on Bush' plan for missile defense:
The President's position is an invitation to an arms race. It would violate existing arms control treaties and ask us to defend our nation with a technology that some of our nation's best scientists do not believe is reliable.Maybe it's just me bu it sounds like he's likening the plan to the cold war with the USSR. I guess there's a history with making accusations of grandiose proportions, particularly if they attack Bush.
If you remember, Durbin was one of the Democrats that initially questioned Gonzales before the senate voted him in. Basically, he didn't really give him a question but more of a scolding. He didn't really like his answer about the Abu Ghraib scandal:
I respectfully disagree. Blaming Abu Ghraib completely on renegade night-shift soldiers ignores critical decisions on torture policies made at the highest levels of our government – decisions that Mr. Gonzales played a major role in making. If we are going to hold those at the lowest levels accountable, it is only fair to hold those at the highest levels accountable.He then went on to attack half of the administration for alleged abuses of Geneva Conventions that had absolutely nothing to do with Gonzales. He was grandstanding and trying to give the administration a black eye. He was taking a dig at Bush while causing Gonzales harm. Rather unfortunate too, considering he had called Gonzales "an impressive individual with a record of achievement and an inspiring personal story" not moments before.
Of course, Gonzales isn't the only Bush appointee he has problems with. Bolton caught his ire just as bad, if not worse than Gonzales got it. Just because Bolton is a roughneck doesn't make him a bad candidate for the U.N. It definitely doesn't make him milquetoast, that's for sure. Anyway, Durbin has a problem with his hard charging style:
“John Bolton has repeatedly demeaned the United Nations; he boasts that he has worked against non-proliferation; he has brow-beaten intelligence analysts who would not doctor their findings to suit his political preferences; and he dangerously inflated assessments of weapons of mass destruction.
...
What a contrast to suggest John Bolton should succeed John Danforth as our man at the U.N. Danforth, a statesman and a well-spoken public figure, cleared the Senate unanimously. John Bolton is embroiled in a controversy of his own making over his suspect qualifications.
Funny, I thought it was the liberal senators that brought up some improvable accusations that made his reputation suspect. Silly me, I guess it's the fact that he's a mean guy. Does that mean we should ban mean guys from working in Washington now?
Stem cell research is something I disagree with the president on. I think they should be readily available. I also understand that he has religious convictions about using embryos. I can respect that even though I don't agree with it. What does Durbin think:
The current policy, which limits federal funding only to embryonic stem cells that were derived by August 9, 2001 when Bush first announced his policy, is severely limiting America’s ability to find the treatments and cures for the deadly and disabling diseases, such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, multiple sclerosis and spinal cord injury, that affect more than 100 million Americans
Pop quiz!
Name me one of the above diseases that stem cells have actually helped? Anybody? Anybody? You in the back. Yeah, you! The guy laughing. What's that? None? Is that your final answer? Need to phone a friend? Okay, good. You're right! Congratulations!
To date, there has been absolutely no breakthrough, major stride or even a baby step made with embryonic stem cells. I am not discounting that the can potentially be used to assist in these diseases. I am discounting the myth that stem cells will be a miracle cure just as long as Bush gives the scientists free reign over what many people consider life.
We've all seen the gas prices lately. They suck, pure and simple. The Democrats are mad that Bush won't release some of our oil reserves for this emergency. Is it an emergency? Are we going bankrupt as a nation because our gas is over two dollars a gallon? Well, it turns out that even though we'd like to see lower gas prices we're still surviving. It doesn't appear to have slowed anybody down in the least. If anything it has helped us remove ourselves from the burden of oil. Today there is a back order for ALL hybrid electric cars on the market and last year's car of the year was the Toyota Prius, hands down. Of course, that's not good enough for Durbin. We must release our oil reserves:
“President Bush is looking the other way while consumers in Illinois are paying the price for the Administration’s inaction. Opening the Strategic Reserve now can bring about price relief to hard working families in Illinois and across the country.”
The rest of the article points out this little factoid:
In the fall of 2000, the Clinton Administration announced a swap of 30 million barrels over 30 days, causing crude oil prices to quickly fall by over $6 per barrel and wholesale gasoline prices to fall $0.14 per gallon.
So what does a release really home to gain? 14 cents a gallon? The marked fluctuates more than that in a WEEK! If releasing 30 million barrels of oil will only give us 14 measly cents and drop the price of sweet, light crude a meager six bucks no thank you Mr. Durbin. I'd veto that bill any day of the week.
Medicaid is something many people take seriously. Many people depend on it to survive. Bush decided on Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt to take full control of the issue. That wasn't good enough for Senator Durbin. He wanted assurance from Bush that he would force the 15 person committee to be fully bipartisan:
Medicaid is in need of independent and bipartisan review to ensure the long-term viability of this critical health care program, and the American people deserve more from the Bush Administration than a stacked commission that will lock out important voices in this debate.
Good show Dick. Way to tell Bush where to stick it. I'm sure appointing the Health and Human Services Secretary to select a panel for the issue isreally stacking the deck. Does Durbin ever look at this stuff before he says it?
Something I don't fully agree with is increasing the minimum wage. It seems to me that very few people are effected by it and most places, unless you're fast food, pay you more than minimum anyway. Many people believe other than me and that's completely fine. It's a matter of opinion. Durbin is one of those people and that's fine too. He believes it's time to increase the minimum wage. Maybe he's right. Let's see what he has to say about the minimum wage:
“It is a matter of priorities. Republicans are breaking the rules of the Senate to confirm extremist judges instead of using the rules of the Senate to help hard working families.”
Um...Senator Durbin...that argument is over and done with. We've moved on to the minimum wage now. Maybe you could obsess a little be less.
Another bill the good Senator Durbin was hard at work on would allow for reservists in the federal government to get paid by the government to cover what they weren't getting paid when they went active. This is basically a bill that would make government service employees eligible to receive a stipend to cover costs in the case of being recalled to active duty. It was voted on and passed bipartisanly in the senate but didn't make it past the conference committee. You have to face facts, some things just don't make it into a budget; You have to pay for other things. Durbin was peaved:
“That’s why it is so troubling to me that, for the third time, a bipartisan measure to correct this inequity was stripped from the final legislation behind closed doors in conference committee.”“The Bush Administration opposed the inclusion of the Reservist Pay Security in the supplemental appropriations bill, saying it would ‘have a negative impact on morale and unit cohesion.’ If that is the case, why would the Defense Department’s own website praise employers that make up the pay difference for their workers?”
Can someone explain to me how Bush is in charge of a conference committee? Is there some strange loophole in the checks and balances that allows the president to go into a closed-door session and tweak a few things he doesn't like? I guess I missed that one. It really sounds like Senator Durbin doesn't like Bush to me. He blames him for nearly everything. I'd be willing to bet that if he stubbed his toe he'd say it was Bush's fault..
This is just a culmination of precursors to the big one that happened this Tuesday. This Tuesday he made the statement that put him over the top. Before Tuesday all he was doing was disliking the president. Tuesday was the day he hurt America. He compared the minds of our troops to the minds of true torturers. In his eyes they had become Pol Pots and controllers of an evil American Gulag. Tuesday they became Nazis acting on the policies of the evil General Bushitler:
If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.
Fantastic Senator Durbin. Our American troops are no better than some mad regime, no better than Nazis, no better than Soviets in their Gulags. Your words bring be to tears senator. It truly pains me to see a man so consumed with hatred for one man would condemn his military bretheren. So what do you claim was as ruthless as the ovens? What could be as evil as the experiments? What could be as damning as the slave labor found in Soviet Gulags?
On a couple of occasions, I entered interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a fetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most times they urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been left there for 18-24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold....On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees. The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night. On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before, with the detainee chained hand and foot in the fetal position on the tile floor.
God forbid we subject them to extremely loud rap music. Oops, sorry, Allah forbids. Lets see, Rap music, a cold room, chained in the fetal position for a day (not bad if you're laying down, no circulation is lost) and extremely hot conditions over 100 degrees (isn't that a normal day in Iraq? aren't our soldiers wearing Kevlar in 120+). Sure, that's absolute torture of the worst degree. Maybe we should show the good Senator some videos of what real torture is? Maybe he's just lost his mind?
This should be plenty to validate my concerns about Senator Dick Durbin's motives against the Bush administration. It gives me the impression that he as either lost his mind or become consumed with hate and rage for the president. It's to the point that he may be effecting his own beneficial causes in the process.
You see, Durbin is not completely a bad guy. I could have combed his record and come up with just as many statements about how he's trying to help the troops. There are at least three separate acts (Veteran's Disability Benefits and the Welcome Home G.I. Bill) just this year that he has been one of the major influences on. This has to be understood to really feel the full impact of what he said about the troops at Gitmo.
It is my opinion that Dick Durbin really does love the troops. It is also my opinion that Durbin hates Bush and the Republicans every bit as much as Howard Dean does. Maybe he's just trying to oust Dean as the head of the DNC? I really think what has happened is that Durbin hates conservatives to such a point as to effect his cause for the troops.
Have you ever seen someone so blinded with hate and rage that they would hurt their own family members just for a shot at hurting the person that made them mad? For me this is what is taking place with Senator Durbin. He has lost his focus and is now destroying his own cause.
PETA - Bad For Animals!
Yes, that's right. PETA is bad for animals. There is much documentation on this and another piece has just come to the surface:
Two on PETA staff charged with cruelty to animals
So here's the rules. Write something factual about what PETA has done to undermine the very cause they are working for. Maybe it's their huge meatlockers you want to rant about. Maybe it's the baby seals they painted the big red X on so the polar bears could spot them better. Maybe it's that they euthanize more animals than any other group. Whatever your bone to pick please link it here. If I get more than 10 bursters I'll start a blogroll that everyone can use at their discretion.
To date There are 8 people who have written on this blogburst. Trackback, leave a comment or e-mail me to be included.
PETA Is Bad For Animals Blogbursters:
Mat Tech - Included in WTF Friday Rant
Editors In Pajamas
The MaryHunter at The Wide Awakes
Have YOU posted on this yet?
June 16, 2005
An Absolutely Unbiased, Balanced Story of the Creation
This was sent to me from my cousin in Washington State. I think you're gonna love it, left OR right.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Once upon a time, God was missing for six days. Eventually, Michael the archangel found him, resting on the seventh day.
He inquired of God, "Where have you been?"
God sighed a deep sigh of satisfaction, and proudly pointed downwards through the clouds. "Look, Michael. Look what I've made."
Archangel Michael looked puzzled, and said, "What is it?"
"It's a planet," replied God, "and I've put Life on it. I'm going to
call it Earth and it's going to be a great place of balance."
"Balance?" Inquired Michael, still confused.
God explained, pointing to different parts of earth . . .
"For example, northern Europe will be a place of great opportunity and wealth, while southern Europe is going to be poor -
Over there I've placed a continent of white people, and over there is a Continent of black people," God continued pointing to different
countries.
"This one will be extremely hot, while this one will be very cold and covered in ice."
The Archangel, impressed by God's work, then pointed to a land mass And said, "What's that one?"
"Ah," said God.. "That's Washington State, the most glorious place on earth. There are beautiful streams, hills, and forests. The people from Washington State are going to be handsome, modest, intelligent and humorous, and
they are going to be found traveling the world. They will be extremely sociable, hardworking, and high-achieving, and they will be known throughout the world as diplomats, and carriers of peace."
Michael gasped in wonder and admiration, but then proclaimed, "What
about balance, God? You said there would be balance!"
God smiled, "Wait until you see the idiots I put in the other
Washington."
June 15, 2005
Boobies from the technical standpoint
Earlier today the subject was broached among my friends why technical guys, like myself, usually end up on the subject of boobies. It was argued that the boobie was not a technical thing, just two anatomical pieces for flesh that bring men to stupidity. Well, I must wholeheartedly disagree. Boobies are much more than something to keep your bra from sagging. They are quite possibly the most intricate part of the universe.
Women don't seem to understand this. Well, maybe lesbians do, but that's a different matter all together. Women tend to think of them more like a hassle than a blessing. It bothers them to have these two hunks of fat hanging off their chest. Well ladies, you have totally misunderstood you bodies. You boobies are quite possibly the most technical thing us guys could possibly talk about.
Let me explain:
Okay ladies. Boobies ARE technical. Allow me to explain.
A set of boobies is not just a pair of tits that hang off your chest. To say they come in all shapes and sizes does no justice to these treats of womanhood either. Yes, size and shape are sights to behold; a small perky "Hershey’s Kiss" is just as beautiful as the full, voluptuous "ripe pear". But as I said, that is just one aspect of the boobie.
There are smells in the area of the chest and particularly with the areola and nipple that exist nowhere else on a woman's body. It has that sweet and fragrant smell that a woman's freshly cleaned hair can only HINT at. (Which explains hair a bit.) Even the underside of the boobie has a unique smell unto itself. It's usually a bit more pungent and hints of the smells you will encounter below the waistline if you're fortunate.
Next we delve into texture and color. I put these two together because they deal with one another in a large part. For example, an Asian or Black woman can have extremely firm boobies and it feels right. They're pliable, not rock hard. They will bounce as if to say, "I am supple and ripe like a firm grape". A full figured white woman's boobie, more like the pear in shape generally but not required, has a lighter, milky colour (Yes, I used the English word.) and a texture that welcomes you in with it's soft and milky tissue. It cries "mother's milk". (but not in the incestuous way.) It says that this person is a mother and needs to be made love to with that in mind.
Last, we explore taste. I really saved the best for last. With taste you get not only the flavours that coincide with the aroma, you get a level of texture you never knew about. It's a texture of interaction. The soft caress of a boobie is simple and plain to see. The boobie gets slightly firmer, and the nipple and areola tighten and get those little goose bumps. To taste that happening is like tasting the boobie ripen to full succulence. It is really quite exquisite.
The flavor is not just a culmination of the aroma and texture. It is more than that. It's like exploring the many different varieties of a rare, to medium rare steak. (And that explains why men like steak so much.) The boobie has the same fleshy, slightly salty but well seasoned taste that comes from the best steak you have ever eaten. To lick, suck and yes, even bite the boobie, but never chew. Chewing destroys the taste of the boobie as well as the taste of the steak, don't do it. (Have you ever noticed the only bite of a steak that really matters is the very first one? It's like taking a soft bite of a boobie.)
So, to answer the question, the boobie is a VERY technical thing to behold. You should be proud of them, not shun them. Let your boyfreinds or husbands dwell on them with the fervor and delight they gain. You will now know they're not just being pigs, but exploring your universe.
Michael Jackson - Guilty Until Proven Innocent
FLAME WARNING.
What the hell country is this? Should we just get rid of the court system and go back to public lynching? What is the standard for this crap now? Does it mean that if the MSM convicts you of a crime then the courts must make reality match what some pundit claims to be the truth? That's complete crap. You all have convicted people through mob justice before the truth or even a half-truth is known.
Lets start this off at the beginning and ain't a one of you going to like the whole thing.
Can anyone explain to me how Bush is guilty of war crimes? Can anyone show me a shred of realistic evidence that proves he is an evil Bushitler that put out an order to specifically torture prisoners? Better yet, just prove he engineered the evidence for war. You can't can you? You've had your head so far up the ass of what some guy told you was the truth that you followed along like a perfect little lemming. You don't get an opinion. You sold your opinion for some magic beans and no beanstalk ever came. Shut your cake eater and wait for the evidence, cause you ain't got it yet.
This post is also available at Blogger News Network.
Michael Schiavo is the most evil person on the planet for what he did to that poor, poor woman. He beat her up and put her in the hospice with the sole purpose of murdering her. Really? Did you ever cross correlate a few of your empirical facts of the case? Ever notice that the seven-year mark, the year Michael did the switch on euthanasia was the same year it was legalized down in Florida? To be fair I should also point out that Michael stated several times to several people, "I had no idea" what she would want in a situation like this. No one EVER got all the facts in that case and no one probably ever will. Call it an activist judge if you want. I'll call it a tough decision where NO ONE comes out ahead.
Lets go back a few years to O.J. Simpson. Did the glove fit? Did it matter? He was tried and convicted of murder by the media before he ever set foot inside his Bronco. Go ahead and explain how all of the evidence was mounted against him and how he's guilty as sin because you saw ALL the evidence on national television, direct to you from CNN. A court made a decision. They called him innocent. Was he? I don't know. You don't know either. You just THINK you know. You weren't one of the jurors in the case. Neither was I. All we have are the bits and pieces that Ted Coppell fed us. We ain't got jack.
Robert Blake's wife, to hear many people call it, was the biggest witch spelled with a B that the world has ever known. I guess that means Blake did it. He's a murderer because he didn't like his wife. He's a murderer because he was in the area. It’s funny that there was no witness that saw the shooting. Wouldn't it be sort of a gaping hole? All right, lets do the math here. Blake is at a restaurant. He steps out onto a sidewalk in broad daylight. He caps his wife. he then walks calmly over to a dumpster and drops off his gun. No one saw a damn thing. No witnesses at a popular restaurant in the middle of the day. Maybe there weren't? How would I know? Was I there? Were you there? You don't know for a fact one-way or the other. Shawn Hannity does though! He knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that Robert Blake is a cold-blooded murderer, and people believe him.
Now lets look at the most recent public lynching, Michael Jackson. Quite frankly, this guy has never had a normal life. He grew up with stardom and as a result never fully grew up in the head. He's had two wives. I'd be willing to bet he's even had sex with either one or both of them. He has two children that he loves and tries to keep out of the media spotlight. He has a pet chimp named bubbles. It's not a dog, but hey, there's a lot of people out there with snakes and tigers and all manner of animal. A chimp? That isn’t weird. That's just wealthy.
One of Michael Jackson's big charity deals is the time he spends with terminally ill children. He lets pre-teen children sleep in his bed...while he sleeps on the couch...or so he says. Doesn't his being a weirdo make him a pedophile? Because he's around young children he has to be diddling them, right? Well, maybe just to little boys. It doesn't matter that a jury found him not guilty of ten separate charges. They were just stupid people. What could they know? They didn't have the help of the media pundits to guide their minds. They had to rely on the facts of the case. They couldn't possibly make an educated decision by hearing the direct testimony without the media filter put on. Or could they?
It's the court's fault he got off. The system is corrupt. It's unconstitutional. It's a liberal/conservative activist judge. They jury was bought off. The prosecutor was a failure. Insert lame excuse for why the guy you thought was guilty went free here.
Is this sinking through for anybody? The media does not give you "the whole truth and nothing but the truth". They give you mob justice. They impress upon you their views and beliefs and many of you suck it up with a straw. Am I telling you that Michael Jackson isn't a pedophile? Am I saying that Robert Blake is innocent? Am I saying Bush didn't manipulate the truth? NO! I'm saying that you do not have enough information to cast your eternal judgment on any of these people, with or without the help of Chris Matthews.
June 13, 2005
Life, Liberty And The Persuit Of Happiness
Many years ago a little document called The Declaration of Independence was written. Inside of this document was a small passage:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.Life, Liberty and Happiness - doesn't sound too hard to maintain does it? In fact it looks pretty simple. Many years ago it was.
I'm not the first guy in the world to take notice of the happenings of these three words. In fact, several other bloggers have written at great length about it. N.Z. Bear, Common Dreams, Spare Change, Getting Elected Blogline, Dust in the Light, Meyerweb, MVRWC, RealFake, Democratic Wings, The Fat Guy, Laugh at Liberals, Freespace and others have all written about it. Heck, there's even a blog with the name LiLpoH (abbreviated out). For many it is a piece of history that should exact an effect in every life as an American.
This post is also available at Blogger News Network.
This post is also available at Grand Centrist Station.
This post is also available at BlogCritics.
(I'm a busy little propagator, aren't I?)
Over time this cornerstone on which the United States of America was founded on has slowly been eroded from the hearts and minds of Americans. Today there are just too many caveats to the statement. It appears that over time we have lost our way. Nothing is ever as simple as it seems when you subject it to the scrutiny of the law.
For words so impacting on our society you could imagine that these words are written in several documents that have guided this country. That's where you'd be wrong. Both the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, the documents that make up our laws make no mention of the phrase. The closest we can come is section one of the XIV amendment in the bill of rights:
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.Okay, that's close to what we're looking for; Life, Liberty and Property; but it's not the whole deal. Happiness doesn't seem to play into law.
That's exactly what has been happening though. Through the use of law these unalienable rights appear to be slipping away and eroding right before our very eyes. These words have become watered down versions of themselves with no more potency than a near beer. They still contain the flavor of content, but no ability to effect change or guide policy. Allow me to explain in detail:
LIFE
Everyone has the right to life. Everyone is "endowed by their Creator" with the unalienable right to life. This quandary is quite possibly the simplest to define if not for the two opposing sides in this battle.
Does a murderer have a right to life? Much data has been gathered about the death penalty and most of it indicates that it does nothing to rehabilitate or discourage any future crime. Many times it has proven to end the life of an innocent. The only function it serves faithfully is to end the life of someone that has been deemed unable to be rehabilitated, or at least that's what it's supposed to be for. Many courts have used if for "an eye for an eye" decisions that would make the grieving family of the victim(s) feel better but do nothing else. Is this really showing your right to life appropriately?
Does a fetus have a right to life? Where does one's blob of cytoplasm end and life begin? How long will we keep fooling ourselves into believing that it's okay to end this life, or potential life, so long as it hasn't taken its first breath? It has been proven that a fetus has nerve endings and can feel by the end of the first trimester. Is this considered life? Is this considered a living, feeling human being or still no better than a dog or other household pet as some would lead you to believe?
Many people will argue that it is choice and therefore protected by the next two words: Liberty and Happiness. There's a reason that the word LIFE was put first. It's the word we should most cherish. It's the one we should give the most consideration above all else. "Choice above all" infringes on others unalienable rights to all three.
LIBERTY
This is where things can get a little confusing. What is liberty? Is liberty the freedom to to whatever the heck you want or does it have to be within reason? Where do these rights come from? How can I protect my liberties?
Right now we have a good example of diminishing liberties. It's called the Patriot Act. Some say it is a necessity if we are to maintain security in the United States. Others believe it's a rehash of the McCarthy act. Although we haven't had the hysteria related to McCarthyism it has drawn national attention to what powers our government actually holds over us. How much control is too much? Where is our happy medium between security and liberty?
The other piece I'd like to put in here has to do with state's rights vs. federal rights. Again, this is a gray area that really should not be. This used to be clearly defined in the past as anything that crosses the border from one state to another gets covered under federal rights, while anything within a state is classified under state law. That all changed when some asshat judge decided it would be cool to give federal control over in-state issues. Now I sit wondering why we even have states anymore. Why not just give all of the power to the government and take it out of the hands of the individual states? Who needs the local government anyway? We should all have big brothers hand controlling every aspect of our lives. Can you see my cynicism in this?
There is a reason for states rights and for the maintenance thereof. By allowing the federal legislation to intermingle with that of a state's you have effectively taken away the liberties that each state enjoys. It's no better than centralized communism.
HAPPINESS
To be more correct, "The pursuit of happiness. This is one of those perception issues. This is also where I'm probably going to get into the most trouble. So, where does happiness come from? Does it come from intrinsic or extrinsic things? In other words, is happiness something you can buy and touch or is it something on the inside?
I would suggest that it is both of these. Happiness can be derived from both your physical pleasure sensors and how you feel about things. So, what can I make from this that might torque people?
Here's a list of controversial "feeling" pleasures:
Now here's a list of controversial "feel good" pleasures:
Yes, I know some of you may not be happy that I lumped holiness with the other controversial feelings but I shall explain. Many people have a problem with those that speak and feel of religious feeling. It makes them uncomfortable for some reason as as such people try to turn the tables by banning religion, just like people try to get of lust, vindictiveness and malice. They are all controversial items of Happiness.
To dig this pit a bit deeper, I have a hard time seeing how anything listed above should be disallowed. What? How could I say that we should let people shoot up on the streets? Should we have prostitutes on every corner now? What's up with that?
Okay, let me explain. As long as there is no infringement of anyone else's unalienable rights why should it be any of our businesses what you do in the privacy of your own home. That's the trick: in the privacy of your own home. Many of the things noted above are considered adult behavior. Subjecting minors, heck, anybody to questionable adult practices is an infringement upon someone else's rights.
That doesn't answer the question of sustainability though. I'm talking about those people that will become addicted to THC, barbiturates, uppers, downers, etc. If we are to open these facilities up to general population it should come at the cost of adequate facilities to rehabilitate those that gain problems. Most people call these sin taxes and they have frequently been funneled away from the programs they were intended for to pay for Congressman Bob's pet project. The money paid in by the tobacco giants never met the needs of a single smoker. Bob got it all.
I'm sure you can find many more examples of how these three little words have been tried and twisted to suit the needs of today. You can see it in most every piece of major law you find. It always breaks down to a bunch of rhetoric and doesn't really pay attention to why we founded this country: Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
MICHAEL JACKSON FOUND INNOCENT ON ALL COUNTS!
In a late verdict today Michael Jackson, the King of Pop has been found innocent of all charges in his case dealing with child molestation and providing alcohol to minors with the intention of molesting them. He has been found not guilty on all ten counts as well as their lesser crimes.
This marks the second time Jackson has been accused of child molestation but only the first time there has been a trial. The first case was settled out of court for an undisclosed sum of money.
The jury has stated that there was no one factor that swayed the case. It was an accumulation of everything that brought them to their decision. It was also noted that all of the jurors had come into the trial with their individual opinions as to guilt or innocence, but had come to look at the evidence and not their personal views of Jackson.
This post is also available at Blogger News Network.
June 12, 2005
new ad for mind and media
You too can get a specialized ad image such as this one for the low low price of seven dollars. Pumping Pixels does much more than ad images like this one, but we'll to small things like this as well. If you like what you see or you have a good referral we'd be happy to help.
You can see this ad going up and both BNN and LaShawn Barber's Corner.
I don't know how you spell it but...
Squamata. There I said it. Are you happy now? Honestly, I have no idea how you're supposed to say it. I say Squam(ah)ta, you say squam(ay)ta...
Okay, enough picking on the new guy. The graphics ain't the best...unless you like the green snake up at the top. The grammar is a bit better than the last highlight, but the content. It's all about the content.
Be there or be square.
Strictly Commercial
Okay, here's the first test of my new attempt to get money. Yes, I like money. Money is a good thing. Money is what keeps my wife off my back. Money is a really good thing. Anyway, instead of talking about money I should probably talk about something worthwhile. I guess I should talk about the product you should see to your left.
Yes, Harry Potter and the Halfblood Prince is coming out soon. I can't remember the exact day but I intend to buy myself one or two when its out. I guess this is supposed to be book six of seven in the whole HP series, but I get a sneaking suspicion that there will be more coming out. Call me crazy, but I believe that there will be a market for more Harry books after number seven. maybe they'll do a spinoff, I dunno. Maybe they'll go to Harry in his first year as one of those protector people or something.
Now that the time is coming near, I wonder when she'll put out the next book? Does anyone have a clue as to what it will be titled? For that matter, does anyone know when the next movie is coming? I saw a flyer, not a trailer, at the movies the other day. I'm guessing towards the end of summer, maybe even for christmas.
Anyway, this should be plenty of blathering in order to wrap the text. I hope everybody clicks through and buys 100 of them.