evolved colony

Cause and Effect... Pretty basic, right?

2011-10-25T21:12:00.000-07:00

The law of cause and effect is not known as “the suggestion” of cause and effect or “the myth” of cause and effect… It is commonly referred to as “the law of cause and effect” because the principal of cause and effect is universally agreed upon as being a basic truth about how things work.

So I will proceed here under the assumption that as the reader of this, you will not feel compelled to dispute the law of cause and effect.

In any given situation, when faced with any variety of challenges or problems to solve, in any area of anyone’s life, one must first observe the law of cause and effect. To solve a problem, you must determine what caused it, and then develop a solution which directly and explicitly addresses the cause of the problem.

The right-wing political sound-bite machine has been extraordinarily effective at myriad irrelevant distractions from reality. But none of their warped distractions have been more effectively and consistently arresting to progressive solutions than their distractions from the law of cause and effect. Specifically; where it concerns the global financial meltdown, the subsequent cascading joblessness, and ultimately what to do about it.

…How to solve it!

To distract us from how to actually solve it, they relentlessly bombarded us with mass hysteria about taxes. They have made taxation the new "evil threat to our way of life".

Oh sure... Obama got rid of Bin Ladin and some other really really bad people, but so what... Taxes are the real "axis of evil".

Taxes have become Dr. Frankenstein’s monster, and the Republicans have turned us all into a nation of villagers with torches and pitchforks. ...We are behaving as if taxes created the problem.

Here’s the thing… The global financial meltdown and the subsequent cascading joblessness were caused by an unprecedented reckless lack of oversight unleashed by rampant deregulation driven by republican policy. An unprecedented reckless lack of oversight unleashed by rampant deregulation driven by republican policy is the cause… The global financial meltdown and the subsequent cascading joblessness is the effect.

...Cause - Effect.

Taxes did not create the problem. The republican policy of pandering to corporations, with unbridled deregulation, is what caused the problem. And a problem caused by the republican policy of deregulation cannot be solved by the republican policy of hysterical anti-tax tunnel vision.

Cause and effect. Here's where we can choose to constructively observe or destructively ignore the LAW of Cause and Effect...

We can realistically endeavor to reverse the effect by developing strategies which hold potential to reverse the actual cause. Or we can pitifully continue to bury our heads in the sands of Fox News sound-bites and anti-tax hysteria; so that we remain hopelessly distracted from the real solutions.

Balls and Blame

2011-09-26T12:35:00.000-07:00

So here’s the thing… I’m in favor of the objectives of democrats in office, but I’m perpetually disappointed with their ineffective methods. I think that Bill Maher put it best when he said: “One party’s got no balls and the other party’s got no brains”. And yes, while it is interesting to observe what soulless, greedy corporate criminals wealthy republican are; and to laugh about what brainless, inbred, toothless hicks poor republicans are; and to ponder the telling implications of the extinction of the middle class, that’s not what I want to focus on right now. Yes, the republican as a species is the missing link, on the evolutionary scale, between ape and early man. But rather than further illustrating obvious attributes of republican brainlessness, I want to talk about the democrats’ lack of balls.

If every democrat in office had to line up, drop their pants and show us their balls, the whole lot of them would not be able to find two nuts to rub together. Under any circumstances, regardless of any size of majority they’ve held, the democrats always let the republicans bulldoze right over them. Even if there was only one republican in the House and only one republican in the Senate, all the democrats in office would line up and grab their ankles; eagerly awaiting the republican shaft. So, no matter what, the republicans are always in total control of the government.

Always! …No matter what, the republicans are always in total control of the government. The only thing that having any democrats in office accomplishes is that it provides the GOP with someone to blame for all the horrible results of republican policy.

So here’s what needs to happen. Get every single democrat out of office. All of them. Every single one. And keep them all out for two solid presidential terms. It’s got to be two because during the first term with no democrats, the republicans will still find a way to blame everything on democrats. After all, blaming democrats is what they do best, and even a total absence of democrats can't stop them from doing it.

But by the end of that second term, if the republicans haven’t sent the whole world back to the stone age, enough people will have seen the light to put a real progressive party in power. A new progressive party. A progressive party with enough balls to know that when the American voters hand you the ball, you need to fucking run with it!

I’m no genius…

2011-01-05T07:04:00.000-08:00

But Albert Einstein was.

And he defined insanity as: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

So here’s the thing. The global financial meltdown and all the subsequent mass unemployment was a direct result of the rampant deregulation driven by Republican policy. Republican fiscal principals (as well intended as they may have been) created the problem.

And now, a couple years of Fox News sound bites later, the American voters have been convinced to throw more Republican policy at a problem created by Republican policy. We’re trying to extinguish a fire by throwing buckets of gasoline on it.

I’m not saying that the other party has all the answers, or that they haven’t made any mistakes… But come on. After the airplane spent 8 years in a nosedive, you’re bound to scrape a few mountain tops no matter how hard you pull back on the controls.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them."

- Albert Einstein

“It’s not my problem”

2010-12-01T23:14:00.000-08:00

… The Grand Old Delusion

For years now I’ve been talking about the right wing rejection of reality. Here’s how my point on that applies to: the far right take on personal responsibility; the way in which they relegate all social programs as being wasteful acts pandering to the “lazy”; and basically the whole Tea Party mentality.

They actually start with some very valid points which they blindly proceed to warp into self-righteous overgeneralizations which completely lack any consideration of big picture realities.

Here’s the thing. We live in a capitalistic society. Yes. Those two words do go together. Capitalistic. Society. It’s okay to put them together. The idea that one is the evil antithesis of the other is partisan rhetoric, designed to produce divisive prejudice, mistrust, and hatred.

There is what you have been convinced… And then there what's real.
Just because people like Bill O’Reilly have convinced you that chocolate only exist to destroy your peanut butter, it doesn’t make it true. Simply because one does not choose to worship capitalism as a religion, does not mean that they wish to abolish capitalism in favor of some absolute form of “socialism” (or whatever the current buzz word is that conservative talk radio has demonized as the symbol of the liberal enemy).

Point being: that all of these extreme ABSOLUTES which get pounded into your head are nothing but divisive distractions from reality. Absolutes have very little place in reality - and no place in a society of people. This idea that we’re a bowl of jelly beans which must be divided into those which are absolutely capitalist and those which are absolutely socialistic is pure [to put it in technical terms] bullshit.

Here’s what’s real. We live in a capitalistic society. A society of people. We the people. Not we the bottom line. Capitalism is great. But it’s not perfect. And it’s really not sacrilegious to mention the fact that it’s not perfect. Don’t freak out. It’s okay. No system is perfect. Everything is a work in progress. Icebergs aren’t stationary. If you don’t make course corrections, you hit them and sink.

But it truly seems to me that all the galloping herds of Palinoids have arrived at a deep and absolute belief that capitalism is perfection - and that it is “Anti-American” to say otherwise. Like capitalism actually is our national religion. They genuinely seem to believe that the only adjustment which should ever be made to capitalism is to drive it to a more PURE form of capitalism. As if reaching the PUREST form of capitalism will transform our Country into some sort of nirvana.

Well… I know it’s an overdone cheap shot and completely cliché to compare your political opposition to anything Nazi… But the fact is that the last time a political movement got this deeply focused on things like: branding ABSOLUTE labels on various factions of society; DEMONIZING their opponents; and rallying there base around an idea PURIFYING their nation… It didn’t turn out to be such great idea.

And to draw a more contemporary comparison – all of these aspects of American right-wingers basically amount to a W.A.S.P. image of radical Islamic extremists. The American extreme right has gotten so lost in their obsession to identify us lefties as “the enemy” that they’ve failed to notice that their tactics have made them the Anglo Saxon versions of our Nation’s real enemy. And I’m not just talking about the tone of their rhetoric. It’s their actions as well. Have you noticed that every time a domestic terrorist gets caught in America, it just happens to be an anti government right wing extremist?

Anyhow, returning to the point of “Not my problem”. Typically, when you engage a right wing devotee on subjects like: public school funding; or domestic poverty; or you challenge them on their kneejerk tendency to broadly categorize all misfortunates as being “too damn lazy to help themselves”; and when you talk to them about social programs designed to help those whom are disadvantaged by prohibitive mental or physical limitations. …Eventually you’ll get to the part where they whip out the phrase: “Not my problem”.

And that is the grand old delusion of the grand old party.
When you've buried your head in the sand, you have not eliminated the problem. You have only blinded yourself to its effect, and exposed your wallet to its fingers.

If you don’t pay now to improve public schools, you will pay exponentially later, coping with the inevitable results of undereducated masses. i.e. More cops – More courts – More prisons – etc. And while you’re (indirectly, with your head in the sand) paying for the criminal result of a poorly educated society, you can enjoy the additional expense of its effect on public health. Have you noticed that diseases like AIDS and H1N1 just happen to be born in countries filled with poorly educated people and massive class separations? When the uninsured go to emergency rooms for free healthcare, do think that expense doesn’t get passed on to you?

So much truly efficient work has gone into demonizing the whole concept of taxation that it’s created a pandemic of delusion! A delusional belief that if you’ve eliminated the tax, you've eliminated the problem. An idealistic delusion implying that you can actually will away the expense by eliminating the social program.

It’s a mindless act of cutting off one’s nose to spite their face. If you refuse to spend two dollars cleaning your wound, just because the government told you to clean it, you’re going to spend two hundred dollars later coping with the infection.

The Golden Teapot calling the kettle “elitist”

2010-11-04T06:23:00.000-07:00

The day after Ronald Reagan’s former economic advisor went on 60 Minutes and soberly articulated on the subject of this micro-tunnel vision anti tax movement being a completely unrealistic delusion, I looked it up on the web and immediately came across a Tea partier’s comment on it.

This guy was carrying on about how the top 5% should not be punished for their achievements. And that anyone who wants to tax that top 5% should instead work harder to become part of that top 5%. And anyone who fails to do so is just too lazy. He went on to say things like if we don’t tax the top 5% we will be rewarded by those wealthiest of wealthy “showering us with charity”. I had to laugh out loud at that point.

Anyhow, here’s the thing. First of all never mind this guy’s asinine assertion that the uberwealthy are going to magically feel compelled to “shower” us “lazy” 95% with “charity”. I’ll forgive that comment because I have compassion for the mentally handicapped. Let’s just focus on, or rather (for the tunnel vision afflicted) broaden our perception to the reality of all us “lazy” folk in that 95%.

5% of about 310.6 million is always about 15.5 million. And 95% of 310.6 million is always about 295 million. You can’t argue with the math. No matter which people move into that top 5%, that 5% will always equal just 15.5 million compared to the 295 million of the rest of us.

This is a classic example of right wing hypocrisy. The right wing propaganda machine is constantly slapping the “Elitist” label on everyone left of center. While from the same pulpit, they proclaim that 95% of Americans are just too damn lazy for not working hard enough elevate themselves to that (elite) top 5%.

I get the basic argument. I believe in personal responsibility. While I observe the horror and sheer lunacy of the far right worshiping capitalism as a religion, I still don’t disagree with capitalism as a system of government. But you have to be realistic. Yes, a certain portion of truly lazy, no good bastards will always be out there, wrongfully taking advantage of social programs. But they only represent a small fraction of those benefiting from social programs. Proportionally, the no good bastards at the other end of the spectrum, those whom gained the most from events leading to the financial meltdown, took far more from all of us than any amount of fraudulent food stamps could ever add up to.

But my point is really about the unrealistic nature how extreme the right wing presents everything. All of these nonsensical absolutes:
If you’re not in favor of an absolutely pure form of capitalism, you must be a “socialist”
If you criticize the war effort you must be an “anti-American” flag burning “troop basher”

None of this type of rhetoric has any place in reality, because reality is a balance of all factors. No matter how deeply you bury your head in the sand, all factors still exist. No matter how far you lean off the starboard side of the ship, the port side never stops existing.

Like it or not, this facet of reality applies to the right wing approach to personal responsibility. Regarding the vast number of honest people who simply lack the mental or physical ability to just work out of their need for social services, I could very easily indulge in the tunnel vision attitude of “They’re not my problem”. But that’s not reality. If we were living in a Tea partier’s perfect world with zero taxes and zero social service, operating under an absolutely purified form of capitalism… Guess what? All of those “not my problem” people would still be out there. They would just be poorer, far more desperate, less educated, and spreading disease at an exponentially higher rate, while likely procreating in much greater numbers.

It’s the kind of extreme class division that results in societies that look like really bad parts of Africa, and countries like Mexico. Is that what we want to turn America into?

When in Rome

2010-05-02T21:51:00.000-07:00

Well, I've got some mixed feelings about this Arizona thing.

First off, I’m a realist. So I understand that racial profiling is a necessary evil, to a point. It’s just idiotically idealistic to be completely against racial profiling.

But again to a point... Or a point at a time, in thoughtful increments. In the case of Arizona’s new law, what I mean is: Let’s try out B and C, before jumping directly to D or E. You know? Before leaping to a place on the verge of World War II style internment camps for brown people (State wide), how about picking some low hanging fruit to see how that works first: Like perhaps limit this type of law to within 20 miles of the boarder; or Home Depot parking lots. Something! I don’t know. But as a full state wide position to take, it just seems like an excessively broad stroke, at this point.

Another thought I have on the matter is: Hey, you’re choosing to live in a politically conservative state, so by that choice, you’d better be prepared to be subject to a politically conservative rule of law. Just like when I say to hard core righties: If you don’t want to be a member of a society, move your little inbred family to a deserted island and sit on yurr porch with yurr shotgun and take care’a yurrs.

Seriously! I believe this strongly - and the door swings both ways. If Tea Party conservatives are so passionately against the basic mechanics of what makes a society function, then they should get the fuck out of our society. And if people who typically fall subject to racial profiling want to avoid the burden or humiliation of such encounters, then they should think twice about living in a goat fucking hillbilly state like Arizona.

Video game violence protected by the 1st amendment

2010-04-27T05:49:00.000-07:00

So um, just an observation here… Remember Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction”? …And all the public outrage and congressional hearings which ensued? I’m just wondering if some of the same people who were OUTRAGED!!! about their kids being subjected to Janet’s nipple are among those ushering the 1st amendment to the rescue of violence in video games.

Is this really our position as a society? Do we really believe that perpetually desensitizing our children to violence on a daily basis is less damaging to them than a glimpse of a bare breast?

Just checking.

I wonder…

2010-03-25T06:03:00.000-07:00

I wonder if I were a republican, eager to jump on the latest anti-democrat bandwagon, would I so blindly and deeply be choking down these hooks lines and sinkers.

Would I have stock piled firearms prior to Obama’s election, because Rush convinced me that the democratic agenda was to abolish the 2nd amendment? Now that I mentioned it… What happened with that? It’s been over a year. …And Barack still hasn’t exhumed Charlton Heston’s grave to sort out that “cold dead hand” business.

Hmmm… I wonder how many other Rushstradamus predictions simply aren’t happening. If I blindly hated all things to the left of 16th century social standards, perhaps I would be too consumed with the latest anti-progress campaign to notice that the last one turned out to be baseless.

And now the healthcare thing. I’ve been hearing the hysteria on the news, which has become more than a little bit dramatic. Now as we all know, republicans never denied that it was politically important to them for Obama to fail at bringing about health care reform. So it was no surprise to anyone when they stuck to their usual political strategy and chose an element of the healthcare plan to demonize in news and radio campaigns. …Turned out to be the mandate piece.

So I wonder how convinced I would be. If I were a right wing devotee, would I believe that a health insurance mandate would bring about the end days??? …That these evil commie congressmen on the left are agents of Satan, here to destroy my life with health insurance? Would I become so passionate in this belief that I would feel compelled to threaten a politician’s children?

Okay. I’m done wondering about it…

Now that I’ve given it some thought, I’m entirely certain that I lack the ability to cram my head that far up my ass.

Dos Equis Redux (AKA: "A Nice Merlot")

2009-12-27T07:48:00.000-08:00

Anytime a conversation turns to the subject of a TV show; she quickly calls attention to herself, and takes a quiet moment to look down her nose at everyone in the room, just before boldly boasting the intellectual elitist battle cry: “I don’t have a television!”

In a facebook comment she announced that rather than milk and cookies, Santa would be having stake and martinis at her house.

Where cinema is concerned, she only watches documentaries… but still cannot resist the impulse to say “The book was much better”

Regardless of the widely accepted convention of Capitalizing the First Letter of most Non-conjunctive Words which appear on a Posted Sign, she is suing Caltrans for gross grammatical violations.

She actually goes few places and does nothing which is beyond her very narrow zone of comfort. But don’t bore her with the details of anything, because in most cases she has somehow “been there” and “done that”.

She is… The most pretentious bitch in the world.

“I do not always drink wine… But when I do, I prefer a nice merlot.”

I’m amazed at what stupid shit people get up in arms about so that they can get on the news

2009-10-16T06:08:00.000-07:00

About that kid who got suspended for the Swiss army knife…
All the "wnaaa wnaaa wnaaa" about how the kid was so overly punished. And the school this and the kid that.

What about the parents! Yes, the “camping tool” had a fork and a spoon in it - and every Cub Scout in America has one. But guess what? I don’t care if that “camping tool” had a lolly pop and a bottle of sun tan lotion in it, the fact remains that it had a fucking knife in it.

The parents sent their kid to school with a knife. Regardless of how many harmless bells and whistles and confetti and balloons and condoms were wrapped around it, it’s still a knife. The parents sent their kid to school with a knife. And if the school had reacted any differently than they did, then they would no longer have a rule against bringing weapons to school, because they would have just created a gaping loop hole.

duh.

Oh my God

2009-10-01T20:45:00.000-07:00

Someone actually gets it.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112968197

Origins of "original" art

2009-09-26T21:57:00.000-07:00

So I was listening to the radio dj talk about a band getting sued by another band for the similarity of a melody used in a popular song… blah blah blah. Then he continues on the general subject of musicians ripping each other off. And it gets me thinking about all the other blah blah blah that I’ve heard people accusing various artists of all the way back to the Baroque era. And people who make these sorts of criticisms seem to be so proud of themselves for pointing these things out.

So here’s the deal. Everything is derivative! Art is an expression based upon inspiration. Inspiration comes in all forms. Limitlessness is the nature of art. Art's inspiration comes from all places: from personal experience to personal fantasies to God’s creations and yes to other artist’s creations. It’s okay. Art begets art. This is also the nature of art. Really, it’s okay. Everyone can settle the fuck down and just enjoy the show.

Are you completely fucking stupid?

2009-09-18T04:11:00.000-07:00

.
If you answer yes to any of these questions, you are at best, believing some misinformation.

If you answer yes to at least (2) of these questions, you may suffer from a chronic willingness to accept urban legend as fact, for the purpose of adding comfort or support to your related political preconceptions.

If you answer yes to (3) or more of these questions, it is likely that you are completely fucking stupid.

1. Do you believe that Al Gore ever actually claimed to have invented the internet?

2. Do you believe that most of the televised comments made by politicians are based in fact and presented in non-deceptive context?

3. Do you believe that at least 25% of the comments made by talk radio hosts are based in fact and presented in non-deceptive context?

4. Do you believe that any Democratic healthcare proposal includes anything about “Death Panels”?

5. Do you believe that the President’s birth certificate is a fake?

Thank you for participating in this survey. You have done your Country a great service.
.

Is your mind paralyzed by your brain?

2009-09-14T22:56:00.000-07:00

The difference between learning and assimilating information

There are those who are undoubtedly smart individuals by various definitions of the word smart but at the same time are actually less evolved than others and are the lesser equipped to understand certain things.

Important things: such as the fact that there exists a radical difference between the progressive achievement of learning something and the lateral act of assimilating information. While a person may have a tremendous capacity for assimilating information they may have an incredibly limited ability to actually learn things which are truly new to them or even slightly beyond the scope of their comfort zone.

Where I believe a large part of their handicap lies is in their tendency to arrive at predetermined conclusions about subjects, as if to justify their actions. Or as they otherwise attach their identity to preconceived ideas which they are simply trying to prove or disprove to themselves and others. So as they harvest data, very quickly and efficiently and in great masses, they are not exposing themselves to the information for the purpose of learning new things or exploring new ideas and possibilities – but rather they are selectively gathering testimony like a lawyer at a deposition.

…Cherry picking the parts which can be slipped in a context which supports their case; to prove their point – their predetermined conclusion about the subject.

Therefore, while this guy endlessly rattles off loads and loads of information on a subject in great detail, articulating in a manner in which he is clearly impressing himself and perhaps impressing others, he is only reciting data without any demonstration of actual knowledge. And he really would be of much greater benefit to himself and to those in his proximity if he would from time to time simply shut the fuck up.

.

A side bar...

2009-09-13T19:06:00.000-07:00

…on the right wing campaign for the de-evolution of society, addressed to those whom have not yet been convinced that the Earth is flat.

With each knuckle dragging step toward its most primitive base; as the Republican Party continues to more clearly define it’s self as a seething ball of hatred - armed with nothing but manipulation, hypocrisy and a viral ability to spin McCarthyistic paranoid hysteria into urban legends, I want to take a moment to remind everyone that it’s all going to be okay.

Nature is powerful. Just as the the early monkeys could not stop the evolution of primates;

these monkeys, despite all their poop throwing and cage rattling, will not stop the evolution of our society.

So keep trudging forward

and have a nice day.

Nazi Healthcare?

2009-08-14T21:38:00.000-07:00

It’s settled. The debate is over. There is not a shred of doubt left. The evidence is gargantuan, concrete and empirical. Now that so many conservatives so passionately believe that American healthcare reform is actually a gateway drug to the next Nazi holocaust, there is no argument left. Because with this latest campaign of uber-nonsense they have finally confessed! The Conservatives have officially, purely and unapologetically declared themselves completely, deeply, and fundamentally stupider than fuckin’ shit.
It has even been entered into the dictionary:

con·ser·va·tive \kən-ˈsər-və-tiv\ –adjective

1. lacking ordinary quickness and keenness of mind.
2. slow of mind; obtuse; given to unintelligent decisions or acts; acting in an unintelligent or careless manner; lacking intelligence or reason; brutish.
3. characterized by or proceeding from mental dullness; foolish; senseless
4. tediously dull, esp. due to lack of meaning or sense; inane; pointless
5. stupider than fuckin’ shit.

.

STAR TREK

2009-05-10T22:45:00.000-07:00

The Redemption

So... I reckon a whole lot of different trekkies set the bar of expectations in a bunch of different places. For me - I set a hopeful goal for this new Star Trek movie. The goal imposed by my hopes upon the makers of this film was for it to redeem the once great Star Trek legacy from the tragic wreckage of the television series Enterprise. Now just to make sure we’re all on the same page here - raise your hand if you believe that one of the biggest mistakes in television history was the failure to kill off Captain Archer in the middle of season one. I’m sure many would respond that Archer should have been killed off in the middle of the first episode or first scene even.

Anyhow, I don’t need to spiral into an epic rant about Archerprise. The point is that so much about the legacy of Star Trek is a uniquely beautiful thing, that it would have been a truly heartbreaking tragedy if no one were to lift it from the ashes which I need not describe further. Well… Thank the slain Klingon gods, the Bejoran profits and every deity in-between, this great redemption has been achieved.

With such a steady hand this film was soberly crafted with what seemed to be the deliberate objective of conquering its vast and formidable challenges without appearing to face challenges. Leonard Nimoy’s presence was written and presented as tastefully and powerfully as his influence was felt. The portrayal of the original bridge crew characters was contemporary and fresh - without pretending that the originals did not exist. And the measure of similarities and direct references which were included was perfect: Enough to satisfy our appetite for homage but tapping the breaks before plowing into fromage. And how awesome is the parallel reality/alternate timeline? It always bothered me when things were written into Star Trek episodes that conflicted with Star Trek history. But now this is no longer a problem… Clean slate. Cheating? Sure. But as this film reminds us, cheating is Captain Kirk’s style.

And for those of us in the “Captain Archer ruined Star Trek” camp… Nicely done on the Archer’s prize beagle transporter accident. A subtle, perfectly measured and executed jab – which for me was one of many fine jewels in this spectacular crown. To the same depth of conviction that I wish for those responsible for Archerprise to have their genitalia eaten by rabid Cardassian voles, I do sincerely wish for the makers of this film to live long and prosper.

Clip Wings or Cut Noses

2009-03-16T05:45:00.001-07:00

No one owns the anger. All tax payers and politicians of all political persuasions are furious about the AIG bonus pay outs. Unfortunately, too many years of too little regulation have tied our hands to a train that’s headed for a collapsed bridge. Sure, we all agree that it would feel good to say fuck AIG, and let it burn… But is running the business of our nation based on our feelings the best idea? Wasn’t it our blind fury about 9/11 that kept far too many of us out of touch with the fact that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11? We could keep making the mistake of navigating by anger. We could cut off the country’s nose to spite AIG’s face. Or we could do what is distasteful but necessary now, while we endure the “feeling” that we’re rewarding the culprits, and later we can responsibly punish the culprits by clipping their wings.

If these corporations want to spit in the face of the tax payer by taking bailout money and passing it out in bonuses, let’s just remember that. We’ll keep our cool. Do what needs to be done to get through this mess… And then we’ll remember that spit in our face - and clip their wings so deeply that they will wish for nothing more so than the ability to go back in time to un-do the mistake of rubbing salt in our wounds. We can punish them plenty, by regulating the living crap out of them later. But let’s have the sense to get the tumor out of our body before we toss a grenade at it.

Touchdown!

2009-03-01T05:19:00.000-08:00

Yeah, I know that sports analogies are done to death but I think I’m onto something here… The other day I was thinking about this inexplicable magnetism which persistently draws me toward the solution of any given situation. I was thinking about how this magnetism seems to be equal in strength to most peoples resistance to change. And as I shuffled through my general observations of strives toward solutions, something occurred to me in a powerful way.

I suddenly had a mental image of a guy running down a football field, carrying the football. And I imagined this guy weighing just one piece of evidence to determine whether or not he was actually running toward the goal. It was the singular fact that most of the people in his vicinity were trying to tackle him. And so the thought hit me – that one’s effort to arrive at the solution is very much like running for a touchdown. You know you’re headed for the solution because everyone’s trying to tackle you.

Either that or you're charging toward a cliff and your friends are trying to save you...
But hey, I guess you gotta take a chance!
.

California

2009-01-16T05:03:00.000-08:00

So, getting back to politics for a minute. I've been thinking about the Sacramento problem.

Now here's the thing. Our Governor gets it... Get to the fucking solution. Period. Unfortunately, he seems to be the only one there who gets it. We're at point A. The solution is at point B. And there are no partisan ideologies that lead to point B.

So here's what we've got to do. At our next opportunity, vote every incumbent out of the state congress. Seriously. I guarantee that if we just fired everyone in Sacramento, except for the Governor, we would see a radical improvement in the way our state is ran.

December

2008-12-29T22:14:00.000-08:00

Christmas Lights 08

2008-12-29T19:20:00.000-08:00

This is Halloween

2008-11-09T14:46:00.000-08:00

Well...
Now that I ran out of shit to gripe about - Here's some pictures of my house.

De-evolution of society

2008-11-02T19:52:00.000-08:00

What the world needs now is a good old fashion socialism paranoia witch hunt!

...and a lot less fags.

Well dag’um

2008-10-03T05:20:00.000-07:00

-
That was perdy cute, Sarah. The way you was droppin yer g’s ‘n’ gettin all folksy ‘n’ all. It just warmed the cockles of my cockles.

Now I get it. Logically it is sound strategy to do what has worked in the past. And dumbing down the White House has clearly resulted in a couple of Republican victories. But a couple of thoughts you may consider are that first of all, we’re at a time and in a situation where most Americans are going “Oh shit. Right now we need the smartest individuals among us to get together and fix this mess.” And secondly, just that — well, when it comes to the task of dumbing down the White House, you and John have a pretty tough act to follow.
-

A beer with The President…

2008-10-01T04:55:00.000-07:00

You remember that?
Remember… during the 2000 Presidential campaign? There were galloping herds of imbeciles coming out of the woodwork – testifying that their decision to vote for Bush was based on this idea of having a beer with him.

Now I’m not even going to get into what an ignorant hillbilly method of choosing a president that is. In fact let’s assume that it’s okay. Alright now, let’s follow up with those folks and ask them how they enjoyed that beer with the President. Oh, what happened? You voted for a guy who ran two corporations into the ground during his tenure in the private sector and then he ran our county into the ground – and what, he never showed up at your neighborhood bar to have that beer with you? Wow man, that’s a bummer. I wonder what happened.

Well its eight years later and many of those same discriminating voters are likely to be setting an equally dumbed down bar of scrutiny to this election. So if any of you can hear me I’m going to try to help you out. Now pay close attention…

Even if you were allowed to vote as many times as you wanted to, and you cast a thousand votes for the Republican ticket, you still would not get to fuck Sarah Palin.

Really. I'm sorry, but this is the truth. You really don't get to fuck her.

Wow

2008-09-30T22:03:00.000-07:00

So when the partisan finger pointing broke out about whose fault it was that the bailout bill failed a Republican Congressman took the floor and actually stated that 12 Republican votes which were poised to be cast in favor of bill flipped against it in a direct reaction to Nancy Pelosi’s little speech that scolded the Republican policies which contributed to this mess.

Wow. Every breathing American politician has been climbing over each other to be heard declaring what a uniquely critical situation this is. But when it came down to the moment of doing something about it, the Republicans pulled out because Nancy hurt their feelings?

What happened to the tough cowboys with the battle cry: “Country First!” And again, it was not a Democrat telling us this. It was a Republican Congressman delivering the news — that at the zero hour, they scrap the only solution on the table because Nancy was mean to them.
Wow.

$700 billion bailout

2008-09-23T22:00:00.000-07:00

The quintessential flagship example of how truly reckless "Fiscal Conservatives" are.

Logic has a sort of polar magnetism. Eventually, whether you choose to run from it, charge at it, or plot a thoughtful course toward it, what is logical must be faced. You can act responsibly, taking control of carefully paced steps toward it – or you can ignore the sickness until it has done irreparable damage to vital organs. As this is the case with many things in all areas of our lives it is also the case with the fiscal policies of large governments.

There have always been realistic members of our government whom have been in favor of the clearly logical objective of properly tempering our free markets with adequate oversight and regulation. This is really a no-brainer. As with most things, much of what makes capitalism great is also what makes it dangerous. Specifically – the fact that the singular fundamental driving element of the free market is profit. Obviously, what is profitable is good for business. Unfortunately, it seems to be much less obvious to far too many people that what is profitable for the few can be harmful and at times disastrous for the many.

So here we are blindly leaping off the cliff of inevitability with an EMERGENCY government bailout of financial institutions – which probably would not have been needed if it were not for years of Republican resistance to the logical course of carefully planned, deliberate acts of regulation, which has for so long been called for by so many Democrats.

The next time you hear a Republican trying manipulate and mislead you with scary words like Socialism and Communism – remember that this is the text book Republican scare tactic that sold too many of us on all of the reckless deregulation that got us into this mess.

So here’s the reality:
Regulating the free market is not “anti-capitalism” or whatever other anti-American label you want to slap on it. It is simply an obvious measure of common sense that the right-wing McCarthyistic scare machine has steered this country so far away from – that the result has become yet another giant George W Bush leap toward making our government even more like the government of communist China. By successfully accusing the LOGICAL REALISTS of being Socialistic or otherwise "un-American", the Republicans have actually convinced us to run so far and fast in blind fear of the Pacific Ocean that we have drowned in the Atlantic.

The Conventions

2008-09-06T05:57:00.000-07:00

Political Conventions give us quite enough blah blah blah, so I’ll nut shell this comment.

Basically it brings me back to that Eleanor Roosevelt quote:

"Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people."

After the Democrats spent the majority of their convention on a positive message, discussing ideas about what can be done for this country, the Republicans spent the majority of their convention on a bitterly negative message discussing people (or to phase it more accurately, distorting people).

So if anything was made clear to me by the conventions it was where each party stands in Eleanor’s observation of Great minds, Average minds and Small minds.

Contrabortion?

2008-08-14T19:47:00.000-07:00

Recently in an email, to illustrate his disappointment in us lefties being unable to give credit where it is due, my friend Lloyd listed a pretty extensive pile of positive statistics which he attributed to George Bush. Included in this list was a stat pertaining to a decline in abortions. As with many of the other stats that he listed (and perhaps this validates his point that I’m too reluctant to give credit…) I wonder if this decline in abortions statistic was a result of something that Bush actually did, or was it something which simply happened to occur on his watch.

At any rate, I just heard about something that Mr. Bush is actually doing right now that is almost certain to increase the rate of abortions in this country. Apparently, in the standard conservative tradition of being a part of the problem rather than being a part of the solution, he is quietly trying to redefine abortion to include birth control. Now this has nothing to do with any sort of state funding or other “bigger government” issues that the righties are so paranoid about. In end of the day dollars and sense this is simply a big fat gift from George to the insurance industry. Because under this new rule no insurance company could be expected to cover any form of birth control.

Great idea, you fucking dope. Let’s see… Any time that there is a sweeping reduction of medical insurance coverage a certain percent of citizens simply stop receiving the affected medical service. So in this case it means that less women will use birth control – leading us to the probable result of far more unwanted pregnancies, a certain amount of which will result in the previous definition of ABORTION, you jack ass. Nice going George. You gunna set The White House on fire on your way out the door while you’re at it?

http://pol.moveon.org/contraception/?r_by=-9989962-yJhokQx&rc=mailto

Leadership

2008-08-07T05:34:00.000-07:00

Didn’t we invent the light bulb?

…and the telephone?

How ‘bout the computer? Wasn't that us too?

Were we not the first to put a man on the moon?

Remember when the United States of America was the great forward thinking innovative force of the world? It was a time when we truly were, on so many levels, the leaders of the civilized world, with all other countries looking to us for what great things were next to come.

Now a days, under REPUBLICAN “leadership” we have followed the lead of COMMUNIST China – and withdrawn from the Kyoto Protocol, using China’s non-participation as our excuse.

Under REPUBLICAN “leadership” the abolition of our basic American fundamental of habeas corpus has us following the lead of dictators and terrorist régimes – into our current policies of capture and detention.

Under REPUBLICAN “leadership” American automakers have remained dedicated to shackling us to our oil addiction, while Japan has developed (and is now importing to us) a zero emissions hydro fuel cell vehicle.

I could continue to catalogue our spirals into the heart of darkness, but my point is this...

Do we look beyond the smoke and mirrors which keep calling into question the Democratic nominee’s readiness to lead?

Or shall we continue to follow our Republican “leadership” back to the Stone Age?

Monica Binladinsky

2008-07-27T06:02:00.000-07:00

So here’s the thing about that old argument about that blow job distracting Bill from his real job.

After two terms of George Dubaya Dipshit at the helm, we’re all pretty well aware of the fact that American Presidents do make their share of errors in judgment. With the world’s greatest intelligence gathering agencies at their command they somehow perhaps suffer from intelligence overload – and make unintelligent choices.

As this was likely the case with Captain Decider on a number of occasions, the same probability affected Bill Clinton. He had intel about terrorist activities and from what average Joe Citizen like you and me can tell – his policy and military command choices failed to recognize the sophistication of the major terrorist organizations and the rapid degree to which their activities were ramping up. None of us really knows what decision Bill could have made at which moment that might have ultimately prevented 9/11. Nor do we really know if there was anything that he could have done to prevent it.

Those are the realities of the matter. The silliness of it is this intellectually primitive line of thought, suggesting that Bill got a BJ rather than make more affective decisions about the threats of terrorism. As if he’s standing in the produce department, choosing between a Gala and a Red Delicious. Hmmm, do I stick it to Binladin or do I stick it in this chubby little intern? So many people seem to truly believe that those particular choices were actually in such close proximity to each other.

Well… umm… actually no. We all know that all Presidents have many complex meetings with their top military and intel advisors who present the President with many difficult choices to make. And when the President makes a military or foreign policy decision, he’s choosing one course of military/foreign policy action over some other course of military/foreign policy action. Not only was Monica not one of the apples to choose from, she was not even and orange. She was not even in the produce department for that matter. She was an impulse item in the check-out line – tossed on the counter – long after all of the real decisions were made about what’s going in the basket.
...

the conversation

2008-07-20T05:53:00.000-07:00

I have an ongoing political conversation via email with a good friend of mine who leans to the right. These emails are sometimes driven by what’s on the news or other “information” sources. They are sometimes sparked by comments in this blog. And occasionally entries in this blog are partially derived from those conversations.

Today, editing out personal identifications, I will paste in a bit of recent conversation with – oh, let’s call him Lloyd. No special reason for doing this. I just like the point that made, which was a point that I’ve been meaning to make to a lot of people. So now I will have at least made that point to both of the people who read this blog.

So here it is:

Lloyd said:
LOL fair enough. but i will put this tiny bit of more apples and oranges out there. I'm not saying the investigations are wrong, but 150-300, seems a little much. "i want my phone call...i do...i want it-ta" But one could argue that Bill philandering caused him to take the eye off the ball which was being a president and focusing on national security. Had he paid attention to that, he might have had the good sense to take osama when he openly admits he had the chance in 96 and 98 instead of hoping that foreign governments would do the right thing and capture him for us. You can’t put a price tag on a blow job but not focusing on his job you can put a price tag on, for example, like i do and partially blame him for all of this. "i'm not crazy....i'm not-ta"
"hehehe...hohoho...hahahaha...ooooohhhh......"

Montag said:
In addition to setting the all time presidential record for veto's and a number of other not necessarily good things, Bush has also set the record for presidential vacation time. All presidents have their distractions. Bush's was record breaking vacation time. Clinton’s was infidelity. One is obviously less palatable to the public than the other, but it doesn't mean that the guy getting head was doing his job less than the guy hanging out at a ranch for a good chunk of his presidency (In fact, from what I remember about receiving blow jobs, it's probably the most time efficient method of relieving stress). Hell, the travel time alone to Bush's vacations amounts to more time than Clinton could have spent wagging his thing at interns.

And come on man ("hoping that foreign governments would do the right thing and capture him for us"?), after 9/11 we had by all means the strongest reasons ever and no excuse not to hold onto the reigns and bring back Binladin's head on a pike - but it was Bush and company who handed those reigns to the Afghan army or whoever it was they passed the ball to so that they could hurry up and get us into Iraq while the whole country was still seeing red and didn't care who we struck as long as we were striking someone.

Having his head turned in the wrong direction at the wrong time is probably another presidential record that Bush set, but as I said, all presidents have their distractions. They have the hardest job in the world - they gotta do something to dial down the pressure from time to time. It's just popular to blame bad things on Bill's distraction because his distraction happened to be an act of infidelity, which of course is a socially unacceptable thing that had the whole nation shaking their finger at him - creating a malleable environment to get folks on board when you start pinning blame.

Dude, you're killing me with the joker talk. I can't remember the last time I was so chomping at the bit to see a fucking movie.
I just watched a blip on YouTube of movie goers being interviewed coming out of batman at citywalk. I was disappointed that none of them were you.

Again… Some reality please

2008-07-13T21:39:00.000-07:00

Ever since the Democrats took control of congress (narrowly and not so long ago) I keep hearing righties talking about how everything’s the Democrats’ fault…
The Democrats can’t get anything done – this
The Democrats are taking our country in the wrong direction – that
If it weren’t for the Democrats – the other thing
So getting back to that pesky matter of REALITY…

Let’s see:

In 2001 the Republican President Elect who claimed to be “a uniter not a divider” became an “I’m the decider” partisan dictator of a President. At that time I believe we had a mixed partisan balance in congress.

Then the Republicans took total control of congress — armed with Mr. “Decider” in The White House. So we truly got to see what the Republicans were interested in and capable of doing for this county.

Now there is a Democratic majority in congress, dealing with a radically partisan Republican President, who happens to hold the all time presidential Veto record for the history of the Oval Office (In case you're not clear on that point... The Veto tantrums are the main reason that congress can't get much done).

And somehow the Democrats are to blame for the national debt and the price of gas?

…hmm

Seriously!

2008-06-25T02:56:00.000-07:00

.
Doesn’t reality matter?

Anyone who observes the facts of matter knows that any newly licensed coastal shelf drilling projects won’t come on line for about a decade. And yet McCain and Bush are selling it as if it is the silver bullet fix for the gas price problem. And as far as I can tell, this no results for ten years off-shore drilling proposal appears to be the crown jewel of McCain’s economic plan. This guy has about a fifty percent chance of becoming the next leader of our nation – and that’s the best that he can come up with?

And they are actually phrasing it as “The relief at the pumps that Americans need now”. Well, yes. We do need relief at the pump now. But what about that 8 to 10 year wait for these new drilling contracts to start producing? Not to mention the fact that a few more drops in the bucket wont stop the oil companies from boning us. They know what they can get away with, so they're going to keep on doing it. The all mighty rule of supply and demand is actually much less mighty than the oil industry's proven ability to do whatever the fuck they want. Wake up folks!

This is just another total rejection of reality, that the right wing has saddled onto and won’t stop riding.
.

Flag Day

2008-06-14T09:04:00.000-07:00

What’s the first thing the wolf will do when you catch him dressed in sheep’s clothing?
…Call you a sheep hater.

I have a five year old son who will be starting Kindergarten soon. With that comes the daily morning tradition of reciting the pledge of allegiance. And that’s cool I suppose. In terms of him participating in it goes, I can take it or leave it. I recited the pledge in school and I really don’t think that the act of doing so harmed me in any way, nor do I believe for a second that reciting the pledge made me a better American than someone who may have opted out of that activity.

What does concern me though, in a general sense, is a young child’s limited ability to fully grasp the weight of the words. To put your hand over your heart and “pledge” your “allegiance” to something…
That’s pretty fuckin heavy. And to have a young child do something like that without at least trying to give them a deeper understanding of what that means and what they are pledging their allegiance to — seems to be a rather un-American conditioning of blind faith which is being thrust upon our children.

Again, I am not against the idea of my children participating in the pledge of allegiance. But I am by all means going to do my best to not only give them a clear understanding of what it means to “pledge” your “allegiance” to something; but also make sure they know what they are pledging their allegiance to. And that it is their choice to make. That even as children, there exist certain things which are exclusively and wholly owned by them. Things like:

Your personal opinion

Your taste

Your feelings toward others

And by God your “allegiance” to something…

These are all things that are yours and only yours to determine for yourself, regardless of your age. To suggest otherwise would be un-American.

And that brings forward another point which I intend to make very clear to my children. Far too many gross misinterpretations of “Americanism” seem to get wrapped in the flag. There is no qualification required to get a flag. It can be attached to anything by anyone. So it’s pretty important for our children and all of us for that matter to remain aware of the fact that a person or thing does not necessarily represent true American values simply because they are dressed in the flag. This is a very important point to me personally, because as an American, I am genuinely offended and embarrassed by the right wing’s relative success at making patriotism synonymous with war mongering. Reasonable forward thinking realists whom have clear sight of the true and very positive meaning of patriotism need to take the flag back from extreme right wing fundamentalist before the stains of what those extremists represent blot out what it represents.

“When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.”

— Sinclair Lewis, The first American writer, to win the Nobel Prize for Literature

.

Assuming you’re right…

2008-06-03T23:49:00.000-07:00

I was recently having a casual chat with a guy when the subject of current gasoline prices came up in the conversation. This gentlemen went on to very clearly and sincerely express his opinion that it is the environmentalists who are to blame for the price of gas. If only they would stop preventing us from more offshore drilling - and drilling in Alaska…

This guy really thinks that this would be the solution. And it’s not the first time that I’ve heard talk like that. More than a couple of people actually do think that way. Perhaps even you. If so, let us assume that you are right.

Let’s say that everything in Al Gore’s little slide show is absolute fiction – an elaborate hoax on all of us.

Let’s say that there truly is no need to stop polluting the Earth’s atmosphere.

Let's say that nothing stood between the oil companies and every last drop of oil under American soil and territories.

Now, let’s say that we got all of that oil tomorrow – every last drop…

That’s gunna be great! Just like the way that Iraqi oil has paid for the war.…

Oh yeah, I guess it didn’t quite work out that way. Right... The war has actually cost us over a trillion dollars and that Iraqi oil which was supposed to pay for the occupation has well I’m not sure what happened to it, but I keep hearing about the oil companies having record profit quarters. In fact, somehow, regardless of up down forward or backward, every condition of the oil markets and geopolitical events seem to somehow result in higher gas prices for us and record profits for oil companies.

But I guess that’s all going to change now. Tapping all available U.S. oil resources must be the magic event that the oil corporations have been waiting for. This will be the thing which will make those CEOs, Chairmen and board members just stop in their tracks, look at each other and say “Okay fellas… The party’s over. Enough of all this raking in billions of dollars… Let’s dial back gas prices to about a buck eighty a gallon.”

Hmmm… Yeah…

Yep. I’m pretty sure that that’s pretty much how it’s going to go down.

Or reality could happen.
...

PROOF! “The Earth Is Flat!”

2008-05-17T04:10:00.000-07:00

The other day at work, a guy said something about the weather… Another guy responded with the phrase: “Global warming”… A third guy said: “Bullshit! ...Shifts in the climate are a natural occurrence that’s been going on for eons.”

I stayed out of it, but apparently I’m still thinking about it. When you’re of moderate wit, as I am, you tend to spend some of your time thinking about things that you might have interjected into conversations had you been someone of quicker wit.

In this case, I might have said something along the lines of this…

Yes! It is an empirical fact of science that shifts in the global climate have been occurring naturally for eons. It is also a fact that most people who have died of lung cancer have had a genetic predisposition to developing cancer. Hence the insurance company’s questions about your family history of diseases like cancer. But is this fact of genetic predisposition “proof” that the human body is impervious to cigarette smoke? Probably not.

In fact, smoking cigarettes is probably a trigger and definitely an extreme accelerant for one’s predisposition to developing lung cancer. To believe otherwise would be a thorough and absolute dedication to a level of closed minded denial which could only be equaled by the absurd suggestion that the facts about natural climate change can somehow act as proof that the balance of the Earth’s ecosystem is impervious to industrial pollution, mass deforestation and a myriad of other human activities which do in fact have a radical impact on various critical areas of the global ecosystem, driving a very real domino effect that is headed toward unstoppability.

Or perhaps the Earth is flat.

What’s the differencism?

2008-05-06T10:29:00.000-07:00

If you’re of the mindset that it is “anti-American” or simply un-American for someone to find imperfections in capitalism; I’d ask you if you have ever asked yourself why you feel that way. And if capitalism is indeed so absolutely synonymous with Americanism; are we so arrogant as to believe that our system is one of total flawlessness which can never be improved upon? Is it an act of patriotic treason to have a look at what elements of capitalism may be shooting us in the foot as a society? Is it national sin to blend in some solutions which may happen to be more socialistic than capitalistic? And if so, why? Why not ignore the labels just long enough to build a hybrid model of a new and better system?

The other day my wife told me that she saw a bumper sticker which read: Liberalism – Socialism – Communism – What’s the difference? Now, a statement/question like that is what it is. And these cases of imbeciles trying to pass off the debilitating degree of their ignorance as clever wit is not an exclusive trait of the right wing. I have little doubt that there is some small minded lefty out there sporting a sticker that reads: Conservatism – Fascism – Nazism – What’s the difference? Both the liberal jab and the conservative jab are simply two sides of the same coin of glorified ignorance.

All of these isms – snapshot generalized labels for caricatures of ideologies... So few of us can be accurately defined by any of these isms, yet we treat them as potential absolute definitions of our society. It’s this whole “gateway drug” mentality that keeps far too many people in senseless fear of a fantasized imminent arrival at the extreme end of the purest form of whichever ideology opposes one’s basic ideals.

To put it plainly, it’s just stupid to oppose a ban on elective late term abortions if your argument is wholly based on your fear that it’s going to open the flood gates and lead to the overturning of Roe v Wade. Come on. The slope is simply not that slippery. If Republicans wanted to overturn Roe v Wade they would have done it a few years ago when they had total control of the federal government. Since the issue it self is of more value to them than the end result, Row v Wade will be alive and well for as long as Republicans count on getting votes from the religious right. And honestly – in my opinion, barring some extreme circumstances, if you wait until your third trimester to decide to have an abortion, the law should at least mandate that your womb be extracted with the fetus. Because you are clearly so irresponsible – that for you to ever spawn a new member of our species would actually set back the course of evolution.

I will also point out that it is completely fucking retarded to oppose a ban on assault rifles based on your asinine fear that it would be the first step toward overturning the second amendment. When Charlton Hesston died no one pounced on his corpse to pry that riffle from his “cold dead hand”. This is because the gun control people are actually not at all interested in taking sports rifles from sportsmen. They really aren’t. It’s just a paranoid fantasy in your narrow mind. So shut the fuck up. Or at least pull that rifle out of your cold tight ass – just long enough to stop missing the point.

In case you’re not clear on what the point is – the point is the real “F” word. Fear. Fear is the root of all evil. Because fear is the most common, consistent and reliable motivator for most of the evil deeds done throughout history and to this day. The most persistent obstacle to reason, logic, progress and solutions has always been nothing but a blind and base reaction to various irrational fears.

If you can face your fear and rather than blindly reacting to it, see it for the illogical non-reality that it is, then you should be able to see far enough beyond the isms to become a part of the solution.

The only constructive ism is realism.

"Truth"

2008-04-25T05:17:00.000-07:00

The politifact.com truth-o-meter recently ruled FALSE on a quote by a religious right extremist organization called Focus on the Family Action, which read, "[Barack Obama] supports hate-crimes expansion ... potentially putting churches at risk if they preach the truth about homosexuality."

What interests me about this is that word truth. It brings up an important point about the arrogant self-righteousness of the religious right.

Everyone has seen the chrome painted plastic symbols attached to the backs of cars, which are shaped like a fish (as a symbol of Jesus). Some of them say Jesus. Some have feet and say Darwin. My wife once had one that was designed to look like a UFO and it said Alien. And then there is the one that has a little fish that says Darwin getting swallowed by a big fish that says Truth.

There’s that word again. Truth is a very powerful word that says a lot about someone who chooses to use it in reference to their opinion about something. The truth about the word truth is that it suggests rather strongly that the opposing opinion is not just inaccurate but actually a lie. By categorizing your belief as “the truth” you are claiming that those who openly oppose your belief actually share your belief but are attempting to mislead people about something which they know to be fact.

I just couldn’t imagine taking a position like that. I’m clearly an opinionated person. But the idea of actually branding my opinion as “the truth” and there by branding opposing opinions as lies…
It just strikes me as an exclusive characteristic of tragically closed minded self-righteous extremists. I mean, wow. It must be nice to be so right. At least it seems to be pretty convenient.

The truth about this matter is that it is just another frightening similarity between Christian extremists and Muslim extremists.

8 girls, 1 cup

2008-04-11T06:39:00.000-07:00

By now, if you have a computer and or a television, you’ve seen something about the 8 high school girls who trapped and brutally assaulted one of their classmates in Florida, while videotaping the event for the purpose of Myspace and YouTube broadcasts.

I actually hesitated to post comments about this because I don’t want to add to their glory. Whatever their punishment winds up being; it will inevitably vanish in the shadow of the fame which they’re enjoying. As a much lesser level of exposure/fame was the clear objective of this video – despite the trouble that they’re in, they have got to be feeling like they’ve hit the jack pot. The girl throwing most of the punches probably thinks that she has now become some sort of Squeaky Fromme version of Paris Hilton. Ok… assuming that she’s heard of the Manson family. I know it’s a stretch.

Anyhow, a lot of people are wondering what would cause such horrific behavior. Allow me to be the first to blame it on Florida. I’m not kidding. I believe that the society of that state impresses its children with a lower standard of human conduct. Florida is most widely known for its popularity as a destination for spring break kids and retiring adults. But it is also known for its distinctive popularity among those who are simply trying to escape from the burden of society’s expectations of ethical behavior.

Florida has long since been America’s favorite destination for those seeking amnesty from accountability for their actions. The Florida board of tourism might as well advertise that it’s the place to go if all the damn little people are still failing to realize that the rules just don’t apply to you.

If you have trouble finding the right loophole for your tax, criminal or political problem, Florida seems to be the place to go. It’s the place where you go to comfortably live out your life after being acquitted of a double murder that everyone on Earth knows that you’re guilty of. And it’s where a well connected incompetent narcissist can go to be handed the Presidency of the United States.

Now, I am not by any means saying that the behavior of those girls can be wholly attributed to any single factor. This sort of thing can be categorized by a number of factors which are common enough to have their own clichés:
Kids are cruel
Girls are mean
Violence in movies, TV, video games and the internet has desensitized this generation to violent behavior.
And the timeless classic… People in Florida are fucked up.

the American Dream

2008-03-31T07:37:00.000-07:00

The price of gas just reached another all time high. Where I live it’s hard to find octane 89 for less than $4.00 per gallon. In direct spending, the Iraq war has cost around $500 billion. Even the conservative projections see the long term cost exceeding a trillion dollars. We’ve lost the lives of over 4 thousand American soldiers. In a twisted effort to justify this immeasurable mistake, Bush is willing to sacrifice as many more soldiers as he can before leaving office. And the other day I saw a bumper sticker on a car (which was riddled with other right wing agenda stickers) which read Freedom isn’t free.

Now, I understand the point they’re trying to make with that. Never mind the fact that Iraq has NEVER been any kind of threat to our freedom — nor did they have anything to do with 9/11. But what the statement on that sticker really makes me wonder about is; does the person in that car think about that statement in a broader sense? Do they consider that overall it does in fact cost something to live in this country? And, logically so… It’s a gigantic country with what is likely the largest, most complex and efficient infrastructure of any country on earth. America quite literally is the land of opportunity and it’s a privilege to live here. Those of us who were born here tend to be the first to forget that fact. Far too many of us seem to have this completely unrealistic sense of entitlement. There’s no humility or gratitude left in the American Dream. — I want my milk and honey, on my street paved of gold! And God Damn You if you dare to TAX me for any of it!!!

You can see it on every level. In the office where I work I can overhear the phone calls of the customer service desk. The most consistent thing that I’ve observed about the complaint calls is that most people want to receive and use the product but they don’t want to pay for it.

I feel fortunate, grateful and privileged to live in America. But not so proud of it. Recent generations of Americans have done little to keep America living up to what it once was. As a nation, we find excuses to ignore environmental issues and we find excuses to condone torture. America used to have the moral fortitude to at least try to step up and set the higher standard. We've gone from being a truly respectable world leader to being an arrogant bully.

We have a long way to go, on a whole lot of levels. But as individual Americans, a nice start would be to see the American Dream rise above this arrogant belief that we’re entitled to something for nothing.

For the record

2008-03-31T04:50:00.000-07:00

I'm a big fan of Jesus Christ.

This is a fact which is held true by my ability to distinguish some quite distinctive differences between Christ and Christianity.

"If Christ were here
there is one thing he would not be — a Christian."

—Mark Twain

“Godless” coins?

2008-03-22T06:12:00.000-07:00

About this One Dollar piece
that lacks the phrase In God We Trust...

In a recent post I had my little Church and State rant, but I don’t mind touching on it again. Particularly in a case like this that is not so black and white. You could say that I have mixed feelings on the matter, but I’d categorize it as one of my "line item" evaluations of a not so simple issue.

Here’s the thing. The lack of separation of church and state is the principal cause of most of the conflict in the world, throughout history and to this day. Period. I am a very strong advocate of the enforcement of our constitutional separation of church and state. Yet, I am more passionate about the importance of not blaming God for religion. People make religions. Not God. That is why so many religions cause so many problems in the world.

So, I am neither offended by the idea of removing that phrase from our money, nor am I bothered by In God We Trust continuing to be printed on our money. I am truly indifferent to it, and think that anyone who is deeply invested in this issue on one side or the other is just being silly.

Currency is currency. It serves a practical purpose and is no more or less valid or valuable with or without a phrase about God printed on it. On the other hand, in terms of the concept of attaching any particular religion (church) to the state, the word God is actually ambiguous. All religions have a God or some Gods or some kind of deity that can in some way be legitimately referred to as their “God”. Hence, the use of the word God does not endorse one religion (church) or another; therefore it does not violate separation of church and state. So until they try to print In Jesus We Trust on American currency, this is a non-issue. In the mean time, I’d suggest diverting your energy to something that matters.

For the record

2008-03-22T05:23:00.000-07:00

Fuck Nader

keeping score

2008-03-09T08:00:00.000-07:00

Here’s a little snap shot — that sort of demonstrates how deeply out of touch the right-wing extremists are with the rest of America.

On that persistent right-wing gutter politics effort to convince voters that Obama has connections to Muslim extremists; the most right-wing politician serving in Congress just made himself the poster boy of that smear campaign.

John McCain keeps “waving the white flag” by telling the world that this great nation has been brought to it's knees and should be terrorized into voting for him.

Since George Bush lost his Republican Congress and found out that he is no longer Dictator Bush, he’s been like a child having a tantrum with his veto stamp. His latest cast of that stamp told the world that the United State of America condones torture.

Meanwhile, yesterday the Illinois congressional seat that was previously held by Dennis Hastert — the longest-serving Republican speaker in the history of the House — was won by a Democrat.

As some American politicians continue to tell the world that we are shallow, weak, and in shameless lack of a moral compass; the American voters have an entirely different message.
It would seem that "hope" is alive and well in America.

Reconstituted

2008-02-27T00:14:00.000-08:00

I am continually astonished by how the masses seem to either turn a blind eye to or buy into such blatantly hypocritical deceptions. It seriously just blows my mind. These things seem to be so clear and simple — and yet, so many are oblivious to it. This government was in fact created “of the people and for the people”, with a constitution designed to protect the rights of the American citizens: meaning individuals. In other words, the constitution is for the people! Somehow, it seems that far too many ‘people’ are thoughtlessly willing to surrender this protection. Not only to yield, but to go so far as to transfer these rights from the body of individual citizens to the lawyers of corporate giants. It is as if David were to humbly surrender his slingshot and stone at the feet of Goliath.

Corporate lawyers, executives and a variety of other greed blinded people seem to suffer from such tunnel vision on the “what do I get out of it” aspect of everything, that they chronically fail to recognise that many things are designed for the benefit of the general public; not just the ruling class or your special interest group. For example let’s look at the original purpose of Separation of Church and State, and how it is so grossly twisted and misinterpreted.

It’s very simple. Freedom of religion. Freedom from religious persecution. The right to practice a religion of your choice: even if your religion is perceived to be outside of the mainstream. It is a law of the people, by the people to protect the people from being told by their government that any particular religious doctrines are the official doctrine of the state; and thus isolating other religions from acceptance. No one should be persecuted, ostracised or otherwise shunned for having a less than conventional spiritual path. That is the reason for separation of church and state.

But the conservatives have warped this. They paint advocates of the Constitutional Separation of Church and State as being “anti-God”. It seems that they would have that part of the constitution abolished, provided that the Christian Judea flavors of Church were the only ones allowed to commingle with State. But what is most troubling about this to me is that part where they portray separation of church and state as an attack on God. Here’s the news flash, Righty… The whole point of separation of church and state is the fact that there are many religions and spiritual philosophies. They all involve belief in some sort of Deity – just not necessarily your God. But just as you arrogant conservatives seem to believe that you own patriotism, you also think you own the word God. I’m pleased to be the one to tell you — The word God is rightfully used in reference to the “supreme beings” believed in by people of many other spiritual mindsets. You see, that wrathful God that you worship/fear… the one that supposedly hates fags… well, it may be the meanest God on the block, but in this country it does not own the block. Because our Constitutional Separation of Church and State says that my God has an equal place at the table. That’s the reality of it. That's what separates us from places like Iraq and Iran. The reality is that separation of church and state is very pro-God.
It's pro-everyone’s-God.

And while we’re on the subject, please stop imposing characters from your religion onto other people’s religions. In the self-righteous glory of your narcissistic ignorance, you righties seem determined to characterize all Pagans as “Satan Worshipers”. Well here’s some more information which I will turn sideways in hopes that I might squeeze it into your narrow mind; now focus: Satan is a character from YOUR book. Most Pagans don’t even believe in the existence of any such character, therefore it is not likely that they are worshiping it. Really. To most pagans, Satan is nothing more than a cartoon character. The Satan that you believe in is all yours. So do the rest of us a favor and keep him to yourself.

Now, to finally get to the point of this rant. On the news this morning, I heard a report about a legal case, in which a corporate restaurant chain is fighting compliance with ingredients disclosure regulations. Regulations which are designed to protect the health of you, me and our children. The lawyers representing this corporation are calling it a violation of their client’s constitutional freedom of speech rights. They argue that by being forced to post a list of ingredients, their client (a corporation, not an individual) is being forced to speak, thereby having their rights violated.

So here is an other classic example of a constitutional amendment, which was created to protect people, being hijacked by a corporate lawyer to empower a corporation to potentially harm people. Can’t you see it? They are not only rubbing salt in your wounds – but it’s your fucking salt!

I will stop flogging that horse when it is actually dead

2008-02-05T16:00:00.000-08:00

Again, reality matters.

Regarding the 9-11 attacks. All of the empirical data that most sane people who don’t live in caves agree upon tells us that we were attacked by a (non-national) independent terrorist group based in Afghanistan.

In the real world realm of reality, the real evidence supports the FACT that we were NOT attacked by Iraq. No evidence has ever existed to support the idea that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with the 9-11 attacks.

Contrary to what so many right-wing lunatics would have us believe, Bin Ladin and Hussein are not the same person. This has got to be the most wide spread case of mass delusion in the history of our species. I can’t remember the number but I remember my horrifying feeling of astonishment when I heard the statistic of how many Americans actually believe that on 9/11 we were attacked by Iraq.

This is perhaps the most relentless, full blown, nation wide rejection of reality in American history. Hundreds of thousands of Fox News fans looking at the moon and insisting that it is the sun. And this disdain for what is factual is by no means limited to ignorant hicks. Very well educated presidential candidates also seem to be afflicted with this inability to accept what is real.

During the last republican debate, Mitt Romney’s remarks about President Bush’s Iraq policy started with comments about the 9-11 attacks. He very blatantly and directly related 9-11 to the Iraq war, referring to our invasion of Iraq as a message to terrorists that if you attack us we will respond.

Hey Mitt! Got a little secret for you… Since you’re running for president and all – and you should like, know stuff… Iraq has never attacked the US. I know that you’re a republican. So you have fun making your little wise cracks against democrats by deliberately confusing Barak Obama's name with Osama Bin Ladin's… Yeah, that was pretty cute Mitt. Come up with that one all by your self? Anyhow, that’s all fun and games. But you really should know the difference between Osama Bin Ladin and Saddam Hussein. Bin Ladin is the one who was actually responsible for 9-11… Husain is the one who had nothing to do with it. Nor did he have WMD. Don’t get me wrong. Saddam Hussein was a serious fucking asshole. And he did need to go. But not at the cost of the lives of THOUSANDS of American soldiers and nearly a TRILLION DOLLARS of debt, which may contribute to the devastation of the American and global economy.

Really! Let’s put these matters on the scale.

Like many tyrants around the world, Saddam Hussein was guilty of human rights atrocities and other really bad stuff.

Now look at the cost of going after him.

We let Osama Bin Ladin get away

We annihilated every infrastructure of Iraq

We turned Iraq into the official global mecca for anti-American terror groups

We had the power and support of the free world totally behind us after 9-11. It was a massive world-wide spike in pro-Americanism. Until with our unilateral determination to invade Iraq we told the rest of the world to fuck off.

We sacrificed THOUSANDS of American soldiers.

We’ve created a national debt that is devastating our economy, while it turns China into the next superpower.

And did I mention that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11

And Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11

And the list goes on.

So, when comparing the horrible deeds of Saddam Hussein to the horrible deeds of George W. Bush – I can say with absolute certainty, that despite the fact that Saddam Hussein was one of the most sadistic mother fuckers running a country, if bringing that piece of shit back from the grave would be the price to pay for erasing George W. Bush from ever existing, the world would be a much better place.

Some Republicans ARE capable of embracing logic

2008-01-29T13:00:00.000-08:00

...if only for a moment

Last night when Anderson Cooper asked Mitt Romney to respond to John McCain’s comments about Romney’s tendency to change positions on certain issues, Mitt gave the answer that I’ve been waiting so long to hear from any politician. He said (I paraphrase) that someone who can’t learn from their experience should be fired. That if you can’t assimilate new information and reevaluate your position on important matters that you are not qualified to lead.

Thank God, someone has finally said it. Too bad no one said it when everyone was calling John Kerry a “flip flopper”. And I hope that while Mitt Romney made that profound statement that at least a few Dubbaya fans out there realized the tragedy of the FULL STEAM AHEAD!!! NO MATTER WHAT!!! Bush arrogance.

For a number of reasons, I certainly do not endorse Romney. But I hope that whoever does get in the White House next will have the sense of logic to understand this very basic concept. The concept being that early assessments of complex situations are often proved to be the wrong course of action. And by failing to understand this and react to it is arrogant, reckless and incompetent.

Though it is redundant to mention, I'll say it: Those are the three words which best describe our sitting President.

Now, let’s talk about abortion.

2008-01-26T01:10:00.000-08:00

I don’t think that there is any subject in which the conservatives are more egregiously missing and misrepresenting the point of their opposition. And it’s not just the “Pro-Life” crowd who’s missing the point. The media is equally guilty of drawing an inaccurate picture of what the argument actually is.

The argument is not whether or not abortion is a good thing to do. Whether or not it’s acceptable in extreme cases is a separate matter of varying opinions. But generally speaking, no one who isn’t mentally and morally sick thinks that abortion is an acceptable means of casual birth control. As no one in their right mind thinks that abortion is in any way a casual matter — or feels that its generally okay to do. An equal amount of people on the left and the right basically believe that abortion is a tragic thing.

So the first thing we need to clear up is: what are we’re debating? It’s not a battle of people in favor of abortion vs. people against abortion. The reality is that on some level, we are all against abortion. That’s not the argument.

This argument is the flagship example of the conservatives' disconnection from reality. Again and again; up and down so many issues; their relentless denial of reality is only equaled by what appears to be the high level of personal offence that they take when faced with reality. This truly and simply is the argument against the right-wing's relentless rejections of reality — and the fact that their renunciation of reality is largely the original cause of so many of the problems we debate . The reality of prohibition was that it just created illegal activity and violence. People were going to get their booze, regardless of the law. So we had to face the fact that the subject of alcoholic beverages in America was a matter of realistic regulation, not prohibition.

Without regard to your impervious rejection of reality, it is possible, perhaps likely that your child will become sexually active during their high school years, if not earlier. And if by the recklessness of your will, your child has been convinced that abstinence is the only form of birth control, you very well may be the cause of an unwanted pregnancy.

I know you righties hate science, but here's an interesting fact of science for you. The physical development of a person's brain has not completed until the age of 22. This may in part explain the fact that young scared girls make decisions based on their fear — driven by their mental and emotional immaturity. It’s a reality of youth that you can't preach out of them. This is a large part of the reason that a law against abortion did not prevent abortion from happening during the time that it was outlawed in this country. Despite the law, abortions continued to happen — but without the presence of any sort of medial professional or proper equipment. Everyone has heard the coat hanger horrors — that would so often result not only in the death of the fetus but also in the death of the young pregnant woman.

Now it may be your position that if a girl chooses to perform a “bathroom or back alley abortion” that she deserves whatever physical complication may befall her. Okay. But that’s a different argument, isn’t it? This is my point. Let’s be clear and honest about what we are debating. It’s not “baby killers” vs. “baby savers”, as the conservatives would like everyone to believe. If you’re against abortion, that’s great. So am I. Borrow my ladder and shout it from the roof tops. Get active. Promote more education and positive realistic guidance. Choose from many things that can be done that accomplish so much more than creating a law that is sure to be tragically ignored. Do something. But please think thoroughly about the real life effect of laws in our society before you bring your conviction into the argument of whether or not to outlaw something that so many young women and girls will find a way to do regardless of the law.

This is the real debate:

Practical and fearless education, Realistic prevention, and Responsible safe regulation

vs.

An ideology that rejects the reality of the fact that preaching abstinence is not teaching birth control. An ideology which also rejects the reality; that under a law against abortion many young women would perform hazardous and lethal home abortions. It may also be the position of this ideology that any girl or woman willing to perform a home abortion deserves to die.

And if that final point is their position, I’m not judging them for it. I’m simply trying to present a more accurate picture of this argument. It’s an argument about a potential LAW and what the real life effect of that law would be. Everyone is to some degree against abortion. So the argument is not one of for or against abortion. The argument is for or against a law that would cause more pain and suffering than it would prevent.

Let’s talk about “Small Government”

2008-01-23T01:57:00.000-08:00

and "Big Government" for that matter.

When politicians talk about big government and small government, what are they really referring to? Think about this deeply. In the practical cause and effect sense of the matter, what is the negative impact of large government or the advantage of smaller government?

Money must be at the top of the list. New bureaus and larger more complex government agencies cost money to support, right? So that must be a big part of it.

And then there’s the matter of living in the land of the free, we don’t want the government telling us what to do. We’re grown-ups in a free society. We can make our own decisions.

There are probably a few more but I’m guessing that Money and Freedom are the two main points of the Size of the Government Issue.

Okay, so first let’s look at the matter of government spending. The Democrats believe that as the wealthiest most powerful nation on Earth, we have a moral obligation to do something about our national poverty rate and things of that nature. This means social programs.

The Republicans believe that corporate and military might are the answers to all our problems so they say “privatize”. They say “we want smaller government. Replace government agencies with private companies.” Here’s where the republican delusion comes in. First, they put this idea in your head that Democrats want to “Socialize” everything. It’s like McCarthyism all over again. It truly is textbook Right-Wing Rule by Fear tactics. It hasn’t changed since the dark ages. Obviously because it still works (in favor of the rulers). Meanwhile, back in reality, the Democrats actually don’t want to “Socialize” everything. They are simply realistic about the facts of business. The purpose of business is profit. Business answers to profit first – morals later – much later and only if it is very convenient. This is not a judgment about business. It is simply a reality. Now the republicans say privatize everything. Well, the thing is that many very important issues in our society need services that are not necessarily so profitable. The organizations providing such services would need to have a mission based priority rather than a profit priority. So in a perfect republican world, these services would only exist if private businesses could afford to forgo profit. Therefore, they would simply not exist. Of course, rampant disease and a massive increase in crime would be the result of the republican’s perfect world – so we would have to spend billions more dollars on law enforcement, jails, prisons and hospitals. Wait a minute… turning our backs on nearly half of the nation was supposed to reduce the size of the government. Well, that’s the little hiccup in convenient republican plans. The positive effects only last long enough to get votes for republicans. And then reality happens. The fact is that investing in our nation is actually much cheaper than turning our backs on it.

Assuming that nightmare doesn’t happen, let’s look at things that the republicans spend money on now. Like the $8 Billion a month war. Even when that war ends – if republicans had their way they’d get us straight into another war. Ask yourself: How many democrat sponsored domestic social programs cost the American tax payers EIGHT BILLION DOLLARS A MONTH? And it’s not just war. All of the republican tax breaks for corporations and wealthy individuals… Who pays for that? Yeah, the vast majority of American tax payers.
You see, when it comes to government agency spending, the republicans want BIGGER government than the democrats. The main difference is that the republicans think the money needs to go to corporations and wealthy individuals, while democrats want money spent to help the majority of people in this nation. Which would make us a collectively stronger nation as a whole. It’s just a matter of convenient labeling. When republicans spend money they scare you into believing that it’s just “the price of freedom”. When democrats spend less money, republicans cry “Big Government”.

Speaking of hypocrisy, let’s move on to that issue of the government encroaching on our personal liberties. You’ll notice that there are all kinds of activists who publicly demonstrate. Some on the left and some on the right. And if you look at the objectives of these demonstrations, you will notice distinctive consistencies. When left wing activists engage in a public demonstration, their objective is usually to gain personal liberties, rights or fair treatment for themselves or a group of people. You will also notice that when right wing activists demonstrate publicly, they are usually organized with the objective to restrict or revoke the personal liberties, rights or fair treatment of some person or group of people.

So, Big Government… Righty’s afraid that Big Government is trying to tell him what to do. Trying to stomp out the 2nd amendment. Tryin’ to take my guns. Well, that is very far from any possible reality. I challenge anyone to find any proposed form of legislation that is intended to deny law abiding Americans the right to bear arms. Some folks just think that it makes sense to prevent criminals from having more powerful weapons than police. Call me crazy… But that seems to make sense. So no one is trying to take your rights from you. They are just trying to give the nice policeman a slight advantage when he’s trying to save your child from a schoolyard shooting.

Meanwhile Righty wants the government to tap our phone lines and tell us who we’re allowed to love.

Overall, it appears that in realm of practical cause and effect reality, it is the republicans who are far guiltier of bringing about a “Big Government” economic impact on our nation as well as a “Big Government / Big Brother” encroachment on our personal liberties. As usual, when you look beyond the smokescreen of the Republican catch phrase you find that they are actually the hypocritical perpetrators of what they accuse the Democrats of.

Democrats want to give tax breaks

2008-01-21T05:22:00.000-08:00

To the people! The majority of the people. As opposed to the republican philosophy that tax cuts are just for corporations and wealthy people.

Washington is largely in bipartisan agreement that some sort of tax relief should be a part of the solution to the current problems facing our economy. It’s great to see them mostly agree on something.

Of course, the devil’s in the details. So let’s look at the basics of the differences.The democrats propose plans that would provide tax relief for middle to lower income Americans. Meaning most Americans. Some republicans are in favor of this as well. But naturally, the more conservative republicans in congress (meaning a lot of them) believe that the economy would be better served by giving these tax breaks to corporations, rather than citizens.

Now, its one thing if that is simply their opinion based on sound advice from a diverse pool of independent expert economists. But I heard one of these congressmen on the radio the other day, and it sounds like it’s just another ill-advised republican maneuver that protects Corporate America at the expense of American Citizens.

You know how republicans like to wrap complex issues into little catch phrases that have nothing to do with the practical reality of the matter…

Well here’s how this congressman wrapped up this one. He said that he’d like to see that tax relief go into paychecks rather than welfare checks. Clever little catch phrase. Now let’s examine how disconnected from reality it is. First, he’s suggesting that out of the generosity of the corporate heart, tax breaks for corporations would result in more or larger paychecks for workers. That really is what he's suggesting. The second part of his handy little catch phrase labels tax relief for the non-wealthy as being nothing but welfare. His words… He actually called it welfare.

On the first point, let’s look at the history of corporate behavior during hard times. What is the first thing that corporations do when they get nervous? Do they examine the possibility that they may be top heavy at the executive level? Not so much. Do the highest paid executives bite the bullet and take a little pay cut for the greater good? Heavens no. Why get crazy, when you can just lay off a large part of the work force. Sure, all the families of the laid off workers suffer and middle management has to work a lot harder to keep the wheels turning, but they don’t need to see their families. Right? Not to mention the hits that local economies take when a bunch of people get laid off. And when you’re listening to financial news shows, and you hear about a big corporation having a profitable quarter — is it followed by news of how those profits were put into bigger or more paychecks for workers ? No. In fact news like that is often accompanied by reports about raises and massive bonuses for the top executive of the company. And that’s fine. The people making the big decisions should be compensated for good results.

But please! You republican congressmen really need to stop assuming that Americans are so stupid that they would actually believe that tax breaks for corporations will result in bigger or more paychecks for the working class. You're selling a fantasy to people who are not as delusional as you are. This idea that a company's surplus revenue will trickle down the corporate stream into the pockets of it's worker is quite unfortunately, a non-reality. It's simply not the nature of business. It's like the story of the fox and scorpion.

As for the point made in the second part of the congressman's cute little catch phrase — the part where he refers to tax breaks for working Americans as “welfare”… Well, that is such a flagrantly arrogant and condescending insult to the majority of Americans — that it really speaks for its self and I need not say more.

still optimistic... still wrong.

2008-01-16T18:06:00.000-08:00

I just heard President Bush throwing around the word “optimistic” again. The republicans love wearing the badge of “Optimism”. It’s been a very convenient and effective method of selling their multi-issue rejection of reality.

When a progressive promotes the acceptance or implementation of reality, he is swiftly labeled “Pessimist”.

When an unrealistic (aka: “optimistic”) republican plan fails, they blame it on the pessimistic resistance of uncooperative lefties. While the reality of the matter is that their unrealistic plan slammed into the brick wall of REALITY.

To make sure you righties believe me about the empirical concrete nature of REALITY, I’ve pasted in the first paragraph of reality’s definition from Conservapedia:

Reality is something that is really true. Reality is mind-independent, i.e. reality would continue to be the case whether or not anyone believed it, or indeed whether or not there were any minds to believe it in the first place.

So there you have it! Even the conservative web site that largely exists for the purpose of renouncing reality, admits that Reality is not a synonym for pessimism.

Think about that the next time that you’re about to cram your rejection of reality into the costume of “optimism”.

Real Lies vs Real Skeletons

2008-01-04T21:49:00.000-08:00

It seems that at least twice a week I hear someone make wise cracks about Barack Obama’s name. Yes very clever… Barack Osama. And it seems that just as often I hear news reports about the relentless fabrications about Obama’s supposed Muslim background. Every time someone tries to start one of these rumors, it is immediately revealed (by responsible members of the press) to be an absolute fabrication. But that doesn’t stop them. These people are in love with the idea of trying to get people to believe this lie. It's actually because of these people that everyone is now so aware of the fact that Barack Obama was baptized Protestant and never had any ties to radical Muslims. And despite the rampant global knowledge of the truth about Obama, these people remain relentless in there quest to spread the lie.

It would have been interesting if people had attacked George W in such a way, back when he was first running. At least they would have some legitimate ammunition. Considering the fact that the Grandfather of our sitting president was practically a member of the Nazi party. Not figuratively. Prescott Bush actually was an active partner and share holder in major companies that greatly aided and greatly profited from the Nazi war machine. It’s just one of the uglier skeletons in the Bush family closet. Dandy little gem in American history. I didn’t notice anyone use it against dubbaya during his campaign years. But if they had played that dirty, at least they would have been armed with truth.

Coincidence and Convenience

2008-01-03T16:42:00.000-08:00

“President” Pervez Musharraf is supposedly an ally to our nation against terrorism. That sounds nice but I wonder about what details of that relationship we’re not privy to. I wonder if the negative aspects of those details may radically outweigh this assumed Musharraf anti-terrorism prowess. It does seem to be an interesting coincidence that a couple of Presidents, whom have both achieved the office of Presidency by questionable means, have now become so chummy.

And then there is Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda is very real. They do really bad things. But it may have become just a bit too convenient for shady fuckers like Musharraf and Bush to blame Al-Qaeda for incidents which they’d prefer not to explain truthfully. You know… Things like the Bhutto Assassination. Or perhaps it was just a very convenient coincidence that Al-Qaeda came along to pull that Bhutto thorn out of Musharraf’s side. Not sure if Al-Qaeda likes him enough to do him that favor...Hmm. At any rate, Musharraf appears to have the resources to handle tasks like that for himself. But if he did need the favor, he’d probably go to someone he was more chummy with.

Today's Light Note

2007-12-24T00:42:00.000-08:00

“Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.”
-Eleanor Roosevelt

This is probably my all time favorite quote by anyone. It’s a valuable tool that I privately try to evoke while engaging in discussions. When I remember to use it (which is not nearly enough), I usually find that by it's measures, I am either discussing in a small minded way or an average minded way.

I don’t beat myself up over this. I’m just glad that someone strung together so few words, in such a powerful way -- A way that without judgment or condescension compels me to be a better person; to be something more than just another drain on the resources of this world. It at least encourages me toward an effort to elevate my conversations to something more meaningful and constructive -- and sometimes to strive to actually be a great mind.

And if nothing else…
It reminds me that nobody likes a shit talker.

The De-evolution of America

2007-12-23T22:54:00.000-08:00

Irony of the day: The blind race to de-evolve is being won by those who don't believe that their species is a product of evolution.

It shocks me to see how many people are so blind to the fact of this happening. I guess the blindness is one of the results of the fact that it’s happening.

Many years ago, a man from Ireland said to me – America has less culture than a glass of milk. At that moment in history he was absolutely right. And since then, the validity of his statement has been expanding like the universe. This year, the full scope of his point was punctuated or should I say crowned by the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences’ decision to award an Emmy to “Dick in a Box”. I think I even heard something about a Grammy nomination.

In contrast, you can look at a place like the Netherlands. The percentage of their federal budget which is earmarked for the arts is about equivalent to the percentage our federal budget that is dedicated to war.

So, there is the matter of cultural de-evolution. And then there is the matter of the physical size of our brains actually shrinking. It’s the only way I can explain this pandemic of point blank rejection of reality. It has yet to happen on the national level, but on a State by State level the right wing is proudly wiping there ass with the constitution. They are actually teaching Non-science (creationism) as a science in public school science classes.

I live in a society that is actively, willingly and rapidly de-evolving. And it's kinda freaking me out.

Ron Paul recently quoted someone. I forget who he was quoting but the quote went something like:
When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross.

Well, it’s all ready here. And that is exactly how it arrived.

Loose Change

2007-12-23T22:32:00.000-08:00

As with many matters, I see three sides to this one.

There are the compulsive conspiracy theorists, who take this as hands down indisputable fact, without giving it a bit of thought.
There are the tunnel vision blind faith right wingers would see it as absolute fabricated propaganda without a shred of possible merit.
In between, there are those of us who think.

So check it out... and think.

http://www.question911.com/linkout.php?filename=Loose%20Change%202E%201of3.wmv

http://www.loosechange911.com/

Think

Think

Think

...on a lighter note

2007-12-19T15:57:00.000-08:00

A question to the United Kingdom.

What exactly are the varying degrees of skill by which a person can combine a teabag with a container of hot water?

I make tea several times a day. And what has made me curious about this, is the fact that over the years I've encountered more than a few English people, whom have emphatically boasted about their superior tea making abilities.

Can anyone tell me what veiled techniques are being conjured by these sorcerers of the cup and saucer, which apparently have set them apart from us mediocre tea brewers?
Is it in the wrist?

but seriously...

Do these superior water boiling skills actually exist? Or is bragging about not being an invalid just some odd little British tradition?

A cut 'n' paste from AP

2007-12-04T13:12:00.000-08:00

Associated Press
National Debt Grows $1 Million a Minute
By TOM RAUM 12.03.07, 2:37 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Like a ticking time bomb, the national debt is an explosion waiting to happen. It's expanding by about $1.4 billion a day - or nearly $1 million a minute.

What's that mean to you?

It means almost $30,000 in debt for each man, woman, child and infant in the United States.

Even if you've escaped the recent housing and credit crunches and are coping with rising fuel prices, you may still be headed for economic misery, along with the rest of the country. That's because the government is fast straining resources needed to meet interest payments on the national debt, which stands at a mind-numbing $9.13 trillion.

And like homeowners who took out adjustable-rate mortgages, the government faces the prospect of seeing this debt - now at relatively low interest rates - rolling over to higher rates, multiplying the financial pain.

So long as somebody is willing to keep loaning the U.S. government money, the debt is largely out of sight, out of mind.

But the interest payments keep compounding, and could in time squeeze out most other government spending - leading to sharply higher taxes or a cut in basic services like Social Security and other government benefit programs. Or all of the above.

A major economic slowdown, as some economists suggest may be looming, could hasten the day of reckoning.

The national debt - the total accumulation of annual budget deficits - is up from $5.7 trillion when President Bush took office in January 2001 and it will top $10 trillion sometime right before or right after he leaves in January 2009.

That's $10,000,000,000,000.00, or one digit more than an odometer-style "national debt clock" near New York's Times Square can handle. When the privately owned automated clock was activated in 1989, the national debt was $2.7 trillion.

It only gets worse.

Over the next 25 years, the number of Americans aged 65 and up is expected to almost double. The work population will shrink and more and more baby boomers will be drawing Social Security and Medicare benefits, putting new demands on the government's resources.

These guaranteed retirement and health benefit programs now make up the largest component of federal spending. Defense is next. And moving up fast in third place is interest on the national debt, which totaled $430 billion last year.

Aggravating the debt picture: the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates could cost $2.4 trillion over the next decade

Despite vows in both parties to restrain federal spending, the national debt as a percentage of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product has grown from about 35 percent in 1975 to around 65 percent today. By historical standards, it's not proportionately as high as during World War II - when it briefly rose to 120 percent of GDP, but it's a big chunk of liability.

"The problem is going forward," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard and Poors, a major credit-rating agency.

"Our estimate is that the national debt will hit 350 percent of the GDP by 2050 under unchanged policy. Something has to change, because if you look at what's going to happen to expenditures for entitlement programs after us baby boomers start to retire, at the current tax rates, it doesn't work," Wyss said.

With national elections approaching, candidates of both parties are talking about fiscal discipline and reducing the deficit and accusing the other of irresponsible spending. But the national debt itself - a legacy of overspending dating back to the American Revolution - receives only occasional mention.

Who is loaning Washington all this money?

Ordinary investors who buy Treasury bills, notes and U.S. savings bonds, for one. Also it is banks, pension funds, mutual fund companies and state, local and increasingly foreign governments. This accounts for about $5.1 trillion of the total and is called the "publicly held" debt. The remaining $4 trillion is owed to Social Security and other government accounts, according to the Treasury Department, which keeps figures on the national debt down to the penny on its Web site.

Some economists liken the government's plight to consumers who spent like there was no tomorrow - only to find themselves maxed out on credit cards and having a hard time keeping up with rising interest payments.

"The government is in the same predicament as the average homeowner who took out an adjustable mortgage," said Stanley (nyse: SXE - news - people ) Collender, a former congressional budget analyst and now managing director at Qorvis Communications, a business consulting firm.

Much of the recent borrowing has been accomplished through the selling of shorter-term Treasury bills. If these loans roll over to higher rates, interest payments on the national debt could soar. Furthermore, the decline of the dollar against other major currencies is making Treasury securities less attractive to foreigners - even if they remain one of the world's safest investments.

For now, large U.S. trade deficits with much of the rest of the world work in favor of continued foreign investment in Treasuries and dollar-denominated securities. After all, the vast sums Americans pay - in dollars - for imported goods has to go somewhere. But that dynamic could change.

"The first day the Chinese or the Japanese or the Saudis say, `we've bought enough of your paper,' then the debt - whatever level it is at that point - becomes unmanageable," said Collender.

A recent comment by a Chinese lawmaker suggesting the country should buy more euros instead of dollars helped send the Dow Jones plunging more than 300 points.

The dollar is down about 35 percent since the end of 2001 against a basket of major currencies.

Foreign governments and investors now hold some $2.23 trillion - or about 44 percent - of all publicly held U.S. debt. That's up 9.5 percent from a year earlier.

Japan is first with $586 billion, followed by China ($400 billion) and Britain ($244 billion). Saudi Arabia and other oil-exporting countries account for $123 billion, according to the Treasury.

"Borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars from China and OPEC puts not only our future economy, but also our national security, at risk. It is critical that we ensure that countries that control our debt do not control our future," said Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio, a Republican budget hawk.

Of all federal budget categories, interest on the national debt is the one the president and Congress have the least control over. Cutting payments would amount to default, something Washington has never done.

Congress must from time to time raise the debt limit - sort of like a credit card maximum - or the government would be unable to borrow any further to keep it operating and to pay additional debt obligations.

The Democratic-led Congress recently did just that, raising the ceiling to $9.82 trillion as the former $8.97 trillion maximum was about to be exceeded. It was the fifth debt-ceiling increase since Bush became president in 2001.

Democrats are blaming the runup in deficit spending on Bush and his Republican allies who controlled Congress for the first six years of his presidency. They criticize him for resisting improvements in health care, education and other vital areas while seeking nearly $200 billion in new Iraq and Afghanistan war spending.

"We pay in interest four times more than we spend on education and four times what it will cost to cover 10 million children with health insurance for five years," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. "That's fiscal irresponsibility."

Republicans insist congressional Democrats are the irresponsible ones. Bush has reinforced his call for deficit reduction with vetoes and veto threats and cites a looming "train wreck" if entitlement programs are not reined in.

Yet his efforts two years ago to overhaul Social Security had little support, even among fellow Republicans.

The deficit only reflects the gap between government spending and tax revenues for one year. Not exactly how a family or a business keeps its books.

Even during the four most recent years when there was a budget surplus, 1998-2001, the national debt ranged between $5.5 trillion and $5.8 trillion.

As in trying to pay off a large credit-card balance by only making minimum payments, the overall debt might be next to impossible to chisel down appreciably, regardless of who is in the White House or which party controls Congress, without major spending cuts, tax increases or both.

"The basic facts are a matter of arithmetic, not ideology," said Robert L. Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a bipartisan group that advocates eliminating federal deficits.

There's little dispute that current fiscal policies are unsustainable, he said. "Yet too few of our elected leaders in Washington are willing to acknowledge the seriousness of the long-term fiscal problem and even fewer are willing to put it on the political agenda."

Polls show people don't like the idea of saddling future generations with debt, but proposing to pay down the national debt itself doesn't move the needle much.

"People have a tendency to put some of these longer term problems out of their minds because they're so pressed with more imminent worries, such as wages and jobs and income inequality," said pollster Andrew Kohut of the nonpartisan Pew Research Center.

Texas billionaire Ross Perot made paying down the national debt a central element of his quixotic third-party presidential bid in 1992. The national debt then stood at $4 trillion and Perot displayed charts showing it would soar to $8 trillion by 2007 if left unchecked. He was about a trillion low.

Not long ago, it actually looked like the national debt could be paid off - in full. In the late 1990s, the bipartisan Congressional Budget Office projected a surplus of a $5.6 trillion over ten years - and calculated the debt would be paid off as early as 2006.

Former Fed chairman Alan Greenspan recently wrote that he was "stunned" and even troubled by such a prospect. Among other things, he worried about where the government would park its surplus if Treasury bonds went out of existence because they were no longer needed.

Not to worry. That surplus quickly evaporated.

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's (nyse: MCO - news - people ) Economy.com, said he's more concerned that interest on the national debt will become unsustainable than he is that foreign countries will dump their dollar holdings - something that would undermine the value of their own vast holdings. "We're going to have to shell out a lot of resources to make those interest payments. There's a very strong argument as to why it's vital that we address our budget issues before they get measurably worse," Zandi said.

"Of course, that's not going to happen until after the next president is in the White House," he added.

the solution 3.0

2007-11-19T22:49:00.000-08:00

So what am I driving at with all this?

Yeah, I’m a big fat lefty. And I know in my bones — that if all of us big fat lefties and all of them big fat righties could stop fearing the extreme ideals of the other side long enough to find a real meeting place in the middle, we could radically improve this country and the world on more levels than any of us could imagine.

So really what I’m saying is — the problem is the division. Divided we fall. And not enough people are trying to unite us — so that we may truly stand as a nation. I’m getting sick of being pissed at the right wing, while I’m getting more pissed at the division it’s self. I wish more people were. I wish people were saying “Hey! We are divided and it sucks! This fucking division is the first thing that we have to fix.”

Or at least start throwing some unifying ideas on the table. How about a rule for congress? Pass two bills that unite us for every one that we’re divided on. Or how about changing the structure of The White House?

Basically, the outcome of any presidential election satisfies the will of roughly half of the nation. Only about half of the country approves of any given president. When you think about it that way, it doesn’t seem right. Does it? It could even be called un-American. However, we are not likely to see it change, because the average 50/50”ish” Left /Right division in this country is not likely to change for such a long time.

We could change how we structure The White House…
How about no running mate? Whoever loses the election get’s to be Vice President. Sure, not an entirely original thought. In fact we’v seen versions of it on film and television. And by no means would it be a perfect solution to anything.

But it would, with no doubt, bring the executive branch of the federal government vastly closer to being a more complete reflection of the will of the American people as a whole. And to at least try to accomplish that… the will of the American people as a whole — That effort alone may be the most American accomplishment in the history of this nation.

But it may be that nothing so positive and unifying could ever happen here. Maybe we’v grown too comfortable with the division. Perhaps this civil cold war of ideologies has become too ingrained in our culture. The cynic in me thinks that this hatred has irreparably infected the heart our society. But my optimistic side tells me that if we were able to stop hating the Russians, we should be able to stop hating each other.

fun links

2007-11-16T16:08:00.000-08:00

I ran across this site, cafepress.com.
This site has loads of clever stuff --

for all perspectives.

...Here are some items that amused me.

Blind Faith in Bad Leadership is Not Patriotism
http://www.cafepress.com/buy/liberal/-/pv_design_prod/p_storeid.11572568/pNo_11572568/id_4595062/opt_/pg_/c_/fpt_

Proud Member of the Religious Left
http://www.cafepress.com/buy/liberal/-/pv_design_prod/pg_3/p_storeid.13764396/pNo_13764396/id_5354440/opt_/fpt_/c_666/

One Nation Under Surveillance
http://www.cafepress.com/buy/liberal/-/pv_design_prod/p_storeid.24997293/pNo_24997293/id_7759216/opt_/pg_/c_/fpt_

Jesus was a liberal
http://www.cafepress.com/buy/liberal/-/pv_design_prod/p_storeid.14648973/pNo_14648973/id_5716589/opt_/pg_/c_/fpt_

Mark Twain on Patriotism
http://www.cafepress.com/buy/liberal/-/pv_design_details/pg_2/id_12832491/opt_/fpt_/c_666/

FOX SKews
http://www.cafepress.com/cp/moredetails.aspx?showBleed=false&ProductNo=37979146&colorNo=0&pr=F

You are not an island

2007-11-15T13:55:00.000-08:00

If you have a problem with that, move to one.

Accepting and responsibly reacting to the fact that you live in a society does not make you a communist. It just makes you a realist. I'd say that it's what separates us from the animals -- If it were not for the fact that many animals happen to have a stronger sense of social responsibility than most conservatives.

Just as ignoring your bills won’t make them conveniently go away; ignoring the less convenient elements of society won’t make them go away. It just makes them multiply faster.

A society is like an organism. What if your white blood cells were like you? This is what they’d sound like: “Yeah, I know there’s an infection over there. But how is that my fault? I’m just gunna stay over here and take care of the other white blood cells.” The long term result would be your immune system failure and death. Am I being dramatic to suggest that conservatives are killing our society? I don’t know. But, the more that you think about it, the more you realize just how organic a society truly is. And for any of you white blood cells who weren’t paying close enough attention, that body that you just let die, was your host. So you’re dead too. Get it?

Simply turning your back on the dredges of society will not make them go away - nor will it make them any less of a burden on society. Burying your head in the sand only exposes your most vulnerable side to the worst of them.

Not only are you creating your own problems, but you really are making them worse. You are driving them to a point of insolvability. Measured by the practical rule of logic and reality, the right wing mentality, in regard to how to deal with a society of people, is an absolute anti-solution.

Thankfully, this attitude of “I’m gunna sit on my porch with my shotgun and take care of mine” is on the endangered list. Growing out of that attitude is just a natural step in the evolution of our species. So while you continue to fight so hard to turn back the clock on social and mental evolution, us reality based progressives get to watch each new generation become more realistic and more progressive. Y’all had yer shot at draggin’ us back to the days of burning witches at the stake. But enough of us woke up to get us looking forward again. Because that’s where the solution is.

No lead or GHB please.

2007-11-08T13:13:00.000-08:00

Although most of the content of proamericacompanies.com makes you feel like you just sat through an infomercial for the Minutemen, it is at least one source of lead-free and GHB-free toys. And in addition to child safety, the obvious bonus is that buying American Made is good for our economy.
http://www.proamericacompanies.com/toys.html

Speaking of China...
It's all fine and dandy to to say: Screw you, China. You're a bunch of bastards for poisoning our children! But that makes no difference if American fiscal policy keeps making China stronger.

Tax cuts make politicians look good. But the bills still need to get paid. So we just keep increasing our national deficit -- putting us in huge debt to countries like China. As of March of this year, China held over 321 billion dollars worth of U.S. Treasuries. It's too tragic to call it poetic justice so I'll just point it out as an interesting irony, that the politicians elected by people like the minutemen are going to be the direct cause of The American Flag having a tag in the corner of it which reads MADE IN CHINA.

Resolve or Reuse

2007-11-02T23:27:00.000-07:00

If you privately prevent the break from healing, then you know that the crutch it’s self is somehow relieving a much bigger hurt than the broken bone is causing.

Why is abortion still legal? My beliefs on the issue of abortion put aside…
My belief in the Law of Cause and Effect tells me that abortion should have been outlawed a few years ago.

Remember? It wasn’t that long ago, that the Grand Old Party controlled every major branch of the Federal Government. They had the White House, the House and the Senate – In addition to appointing some extra right wing talent to an already ultraconservative Supreme Court. They practically had absolute power, and were in no way humble about it. Particularly when it came to any issue that would ultimately increased the wealth of people and corporations who were already wealthy.

It almost seemed to be a sidebar flaunting of this power, when they found time to rub salt in our children’s wounds, by actually appointing an oil company lobbyist to the post of chief White House advisor on environmental policies.

But what about those social issues that are so important to the religious right??? The super wealthy individuals and the big corporations got there’s… Why didn’t the grass roots heart and soul of the right wing get their pay off? That wealthy 3% of Americans who raked in the benefits of the great Republican heyday are just that… 3%. There’s no way that 3% of the vote can get anyone elected into office. That’s why they need the social conservative vote. Without it, how could enough of them get into power to spoon feed the big corporations and the nation’s wealthiest individuals?

So they’ve kept conservative social issues at the core their agenda – Often talking about these issues with preeminent expressions of utmost concern. For years and years, these debates and speeches were so passionately and sincerely delivered that we just knew it would only take a little more power. If only we could get enough Republicans in office… And then one day, PRAISE THE ALL MIGHTY! It happened!!! With a Republican in the White House, the GOP took control of both bodies of Congress.

That was a very important time in American history, because of how revealing it was. Since they had total power, they had the ability and certainly the will to make the exact changes to this Country that they thought were necessary. You see, not all issues have the same type of objective. With some issues the object is to achieve the obvious goal of the matter. But other issues serve a much larger and far more, long term purpose. For those issues it is much more important that they exist. And that they continue to exist. In fact the longevity of those issues is so important that privately, the politicians don’t really intend to achieve their stated goal on the matter. If you don’t believe me, ask yourself again…

Why didn't they do it when they had the chance?

Think about it! Really... Take a moment and THINK about it. How often does one political party have that much control?

...The answer is once in a blue moon. Right? So when that blue moon rises, you’d better believe that they’ll accomplish everything that is most important to them, while they have the chance. And now that the time of total Republican domination has come and gone, we know what they wanted most. And it had nothing to do with the conservative social issues.

They need abortion to remain legal as much as they need to be seen trying to get it outlawed. They need the Constitutional Separation of Church and State to stand strong, as much as they need to be seen trying to tear it down. They need gays to continue fighting for equal human rights as much as they need to be seen fighting against equal rights. They desperately need these issues to live and flourish. Because if abortion were outlawed, and the doctrine of evangelical Christianity became the next Amendment to the Constitution, and Homosexuality was declared to be a felony punishable according to The Book of Leviticus - If these things happened, then those issues would be solved. And if they were solved they would no longer be issues. And without those issues this party would lose so much of its base that it would cease to be a viable party.

Was it an oversight???

Did they simply forget to overturn Roe v Wade while they had the chance?

...just slipped their minds?

Not likely.

Politicians are very smart people. They are aware of what an opportunistic playing field they are on. They know exactly what they want. And they get as much of it as they can, while they can get it. And they want your vote much more than they want your social issue to be resolved. It’s like the pharmaceutical companies. They invest in the development of treatments not cures. Because cures are bad for business.

But don’t feel forgotten… They’ll keep talking about abortion.

Convenience Sells

2007-10-20T20:52:00.000-07:00

No matter what product you are selling. What you can count on above all else, is our addiction to convenience. Price and Quality are very important to most people. But you'd be surprised at how often those considerations get trumped by Convenience.

As a Left Center Right visual aid scale, imagine a linear spectrum…

For simplicity of reference let’s make it numeric, with "0", the lowest value single digit number, in the center

and "9"s, the highest value single digit number, on the outer ends.

9876543210123456789

Let’s say that this spectrum represents a specific situation in our society. A situation that most people will agree needs a solution.

And each individual digit represents a possible choice, as a coarse of action that can be taken.

Generally, most national issues (aka situations in need of solution) share some basic characteristics. If someone is willing to do some selfless, objective work looking for it, they will find a mutually beneficial solution somewhere in the middle –
987654[3210123]456789.
Sometimes the most viable, realistic and mutually beneficial solution will happen to slightly favor the right –
987654321012[3]456789
sometimes it will slightly favor the left –
987654[3]210123456789.

Simple enough? Reasonable enough? And logical too. But not so convenient if you are so focused on your specific agenda that you become blindly determined to manipulate the policy of an entire complex society to serve only your self centered perspective on the matter.

Hypothetically, here’s how that tends to play out… You scan over an issue like Health Care Reform. You have no interest in finding a mutually beneficial solution, because you lack the vision to see how helping someone else now can actually benefit YOU in the long term. Usually in ten fold. Meaning that, by being unwilling to responsibly participate as a real member of a complex society and incur a $10- expense now you could be setting yourself up for an unavoidable expense of $100- over the long term. A society is a very complex organic thing. If you're living in one, ignoring it won't make it go away. Choosing not to responsibly react to it will never prevent it from affecting you. On the contrary, the less that you participate, the more it will affect you negatively. This concept is simply outside the current scope of your comprehension.

So you scan over this issue, only looking for the choice that will most clearly align with your narrow perspective on the matter. You find your choice of actions, far to the Right of any possible mutually beneficial option –

9876543210123456[7]89.

Your arguments for your position will not include any actual solutions. You will just systematically highlight problems, obstacle and erroneous reason why potential solutions could not possibly work. Any time that someone tries to direct your attention to a place where mutually beneficial solutions actually exist –

987654[3210123]456789

– you will, with an arrogant level of confidence, categorize everything which is to the Left of your ideology –

[9876543210123456]789

– to be nothing but far Left extremism –

[9]876543210123456789.

Rush Limpdick has conditioned you to believe that if it’s not purely Capitalistic, then it must be purely Socialistic, which of course is practically Communistic! “Heathen Liberals!”

So, you go down the list, making every possible solution out to be an evil Socialist plot, designed to do nothing but let dead-beat welfare recipients leach off the people who are willing to work. (It would be very convenient if it were just that simple... Sorry Righty! Reality ain't simple.) Through this manipulative process of elimination, your self-serving ideological number [7] conveniently winds up being the last man standing. This creates the political illusion that your non-solution is the only solution.

Unfortunately for our society, many of you actually are quite successful at selling this illusion to a lot of people. Not because people are stupid. But because it is sales! And most people can be sold on more things than they would expect -- particularly when the salesman has been so skillfully sold on what he is selling. And he's armed with the product feature of CONVENIENCE!

I’m no genius. But I do have the sense to defend myself against the smoke and mirrors of political salesmen by reminding myself that if someone's pitch seems to be a little bit too convenient, it's probably coming from a part of the spectrum that's pretty far from the solution.

Years ago, I was debating a political issue with a Republican friend of mine. He said: "If you want to work, you're a Republican. If you don't want to work, you're a Democrat."

My response was: "If you oversimplify serious, complex issues, with arrogant partisan catch phrases, you're a Republican. If you can accept the complexity of issues and at least try to step back and have an objective look at the big picture, you're a realist."

The convenient oversimplification of difficult complex matters is like Kryptonite that the Right Wing keeps using against our society.

They will keep using it, until it stops working.

No matter how much you believe that it's God's will... [1.0]

2007-09-13T16:02:00.000-07:00

It's really not okay.

One Saturday morning, the Jehovahs came to my door. A man and his son.

Whenever the Jehovahs come knocking, I deal with them as politely and respectfully as time will allow. Because despite the fact that absolute disrespect of my spiritual beliefs is one of the core fundamentals of their spiritual beliefs, I still respect what they are doing. While it is inconvenient to deal with them, it seems that without causing any real harm to others, they are simply practicing the traditions of their faith. They are doing what they believe is necessary to save their souls. And they believe that they are trying to help me. I don't really like it. But in ways, I truly do respect their campaign of disrespect. I have the same respect for Mormon missionaries. Because, just as the idea of going around trying to convert people to my faith would be in sharp contrast to my beliefs; failing to respect the spiritual traditions of others would be an even more pronounced contradiction to my spiritual philosophy.
So, the man and his son...

The young boy was standing in front of his father, holding a copy of The Watchtower. He looked up at me and as a salutation he articulately delivered a clearly rehearsed question: "Do you know what is causing the wars in the world?"

The irony of this moment was so startling that I must have blacked out. I really can't remember what happened next. I can just look back on it and know what my immediate, honest answer would have been. I would have crouched down to meet his eye level and told him that most wars start with religious conflict. I would as plainly as possible, explain that from the dawn of civilization up to the present day, the majority of violent conflicts in the world have been at the hands of the religious and waged against opposing religions. I may have said that to him. And I may have just stood there silent until they walked away. I really don't know.

I'm talking about this stuff to illustrate the fact that I have mixed feelings about this issue. One thing that I'm sure of is this...

If you think that God wants you to hurt someone, you are seriously fucked up.

I saw a news cast about a 6 year old boy being brought to America to be treated for horrible burns. Men invaded his home, doused him with gasoline and set him on fire. In general, our species is not mentally or emotionally built for committing such acts of absolute sadistic horror. Sure: there is no shortage of mentally unstable sadistic fucks out there, who do some equally horrible things. But in this case - considering the circumstances of the attack, and where and when it took place... I doubt that this was a random act of unimaginable horror. It's more likely that these guys were on a mission. It's likely that these were loving, faithful men, perhaps with children of their own. Men who were only capable of dehumanizing their perception of that boy-- thoroughly enough to attack him so cruelly-- because of their core belief that this act was part of God's plan. You don't do shit like that because there was nothing to watch on TV that day. You do it because you have a chronic chemical imbalance and you're off your meds. Or you do it because of your absolute basic belief that the hand of God has led you down that path and to that end.

Now here's the thing. No matter how much you believe that it's God's will... It's really not okay to hurt children. In any circumstance, directly or indirectly, ever.

As a global society, we should establish a world police specifically for capturing people who hurt children. It should be the world's priority to man such an agency with the very best detectives and marshalls in the world. And for the captured and found guilty, a special torture chamber should be built. One which is designed, built and operated by the most disturbed, soulless and imaginative alchemists on Earth. People who make Hannibal Lector look like a nice date for your daughter. And this institution should have two very strict policies:
1- No one gets out alive.
2 - Everyone is kept alive and lucid for as long as possible.
Other than that...
Game on.

the solution 2.0

2007-09-01T18:11:00.000-07:00

Not enough toes to print I G N O R A N T B I G O T

I wish that the phrase “member of the global community” did not sound so…
Activist-ish or treehuggery or however it sounds, which seems to get it dismissed as too fringy to hold equal merit to a phrase like Patriotic American. I wish that, because I think it actually means something very important. I think that it is a very large part of the solution.
You grow up hearing so much about “the spirit of competition”, placed in such a positive light, as if it’s a value, in the same class as honesty, work ethic and kindness.
Competition between schools, departments, geographic areas, and everything else…
How valuable is competition? Without it, do you truly lack the drive to rise above mediocrity? Are we actually so shallow, that we feel it’s not worth bothering to move forward, unless we’re trampling over someone to get there?
Is my potential measured by what I can do, or what I can prove you can’t do?

And why the fuck am I so damn proud to be a part of a fraction of something, rather than just being at harmony with the whole thing.
Fuck that faggot-ass harmony shit! I’m proud to be a part of my fraction!!!
Proud to be an American!
Proud Christian
Muslim Pride
Armenian Pride
Mexican Pride
Gay Pride
Jewish Pride
Ford vs. Chevy
Mac vs. PC
Suni vs. Sheite
Icelandic Pride
Tasmanian Pride
Ethiopian Pride
Russian Pride
Irish Pride
Cardasian Pride!
And now, to help bring it home with a timeless classic, This little tidbit...
The young mother in front of me, with her daughter on her hip, in the check out line at Wal-Mart, did not have enough toes to print out ignorant bigot. So she had WHITE PRIDE tattooed across the tops of her toes.
She is raising a child. A child that could have been a member of the global community. But will more likely be apart of a fraction. A very proud fraction.
Has their not been enough evidence to the fact that the prouder a fraction is, the more it contributes to the problem?

I have no doubt that if this young mother votes, she votes strictly for Republicans. We have a Republican president whom has famously boasted that he wanted to be a “uniter not a divider”. We have a saying in this country: United We Stand Divided We Fall. Many people who voted for Mr. “I want to be a uniter” have bumper stickers on their cars which read: United We Stand. Some inspiring words from the President and the bumper sticker… But just words. Words of absolute hypocrisy. Under the “leadership” of this self proclaimed “uniter” our country has become more divided than it has been since the civil war. Could he stop there? No. He had to go on to isolate our country from the global community so thoroughly, that our nation has practically become the enemy of Planet Earth. The phrase that has so conveniently been left off of the bumper sticker is: Divided We Fall. As we have fallen.

Bill Clinton never touted his intent to be “a uniter”. Instead, he took actions of actual unification. Like appointing a Republican to the office of Secretary of Defense. He took real action to make significant strides toward uniting the political parties. And how did the Republican congress react? They spent the entire Clinton presidency conducting a witch-hunt against him. And don’t forget that while the Republican congress squandered millions of our tax dollars on this relentless political persecution, Bill still managed to not only balance the Federal budget, but he actually elevated our nation's revenue to the largest surplus in history.

Getting back to the point. I am not a proud Democrat or a proud American. If you held a gun to my head and said that I had to pledge my pride to something, I’d tell you that I am a proud member of the global community. And I would not limit that statement to the community of Humans. I believe that if I fail to respect all life and all elements, it would be a failure to respect God. And that's something that I try not to fail at.

But I do talk about the political parties. And I clearly do favor the politicians in the Democratic Party. It's just logical. The only politicians (of the realistically viable parties) in this country whom seem to make real efforts to unite us as nation, as a people, and as a truly responsible member of the global community, happen to be Democrats.
Hopefully, they will have enough success to eventually abolish all political parties.

Is John Lennon’s “Imagine” starting to play in the back of your mind, or is that just me?

the solution 1.0

2007-08-11T14:32:00.000-07:00

What makes me feel better, is my problem. But I keep treating it as the solution. So my problem keeps getting bigger.

As a worker, many situations have made it clear to me, that labor unions are necessary. As a manager, many situations have made it equally clear to me that as a body, the overall mechanism of organized labor is grossly exploitative of the system and basically missing the point, on a lot of levels.

In one of my sort of middle management positions, the hand of higher-ranking management sometimes forced me, to push my working (non-union) crews seven to ten hours into a shift without a meal break. I lost arguments with my bosses on this subject. And I was astonished by the inability of these “union haters”, to see that their own actions were creating even more of a need for labor unions. I would even explain it to them, plainly: “I’m as annoyed with the union as you are… So let’s stop being the reason that they need to exist!” They'd brush this kind of logic off the table with a roll of the eyes, and no more of a verbal response than a sarcastic: “So anyway…”

That type of attitude is out there, in full force. It’s not going away. Ever. Thus, neither will the need for labor unions ever go away.
See where I’m going here? We don’t just make our own problems. We make them worse. We make them permanent.

It’s like if we react to a fly problem in our home, by opening more windows and leaving food out to rot on the table. We wouldn’t do that, right?
It’s like if you find yourself on thin ice at work. So you start missing shifts, to make time to stalk your boss’ wife. Probably not gonna stabilize your position.
It’s like if some Muslims hated America enough to kill a whole bunch of our civilians, one day. And we reacted to that by invading an unrelated Muslim nation, launching an endless offensive crusade that would ultimately drive toward every Muslim on Earth wanting to kill all of us. We’d never do something that illogical.

Don’t get me wrong. Many union locals that I’ve worked with are shamefully missing the point. Union protocols and regulations exist to shield employees from unfair and unsafe work conditions. Business is business. Therefore business is brutal. So employees need this kind of protection. However, so many of their shields against abuse have been re-forged into weapons of laziness, that some labor unions have truly become synonymous with laziness.

But this is all sort of metaphoric. Just examples - leading to a point. I really don’t give a fuck, either away about labor unions. I’m just talking about finding the ability to step back out of your own bullshit, enough to see the big picture. And then see your self objectively in that big picture.
See things your way. But not just your way.
Get what’s yours… But only what’s rightfully yours.
Take advantage of what the system has to offer, without exploiting the system into a deliberately misinterpreted series of loopholes fashioned to accommodate laziness.
If you had the ethics to refrain from manipulating everything into your favor, and just keep your side of the street clean…
What would your place in the big picture look like?
It might look like you’re a part of the solution.
…and not the problem.

What if it were just that simple?

It just may be.

Fags

2007-07-10T16:59:00.000-07:00

There is no argument of the fact that in general, the Republican Party is anti Labor Union, while the Democratic Party is pro Labor Union. So why are so many members of labor unions anti Democrat?
This is very simple. Most members of labor unions are “Blue Collar folk”. Most blue-collar folk hate fags.
Our national hatred of gay people is that powerful. So powerful that when many labor union members are faced with the choice: Do I vote for the party that is trying to help me to better provide for my family? Or do I vote for the party that hates fags as much as I do? They actually feel morally compelled to vote Republican. A moral compulsion to promote hatred… Twisted, ain’t it? But that is the reality of our nations dedication to bigotry. Socially accepted, organized bigotry. Bigotry that takes priority over how well a person can provide for their family. God bless America.
Speaking of God… I’m a big fan of God. I believe in a much bigger God than those self-righteous right-winger do. My God is bigger and Godder than theirs, because my God does not hate fags! My God has no hate. Hatred is a moral sickness. And if anyone is morally sick, it is certainly not God.
I was at work with some right-wing redneck types during a time when the issue of gay marriage was making a lot of headlines. These guys that I worked with were very macho. Contemporary “slap that bitch fuck that ho” macho. Before gay marriage was in the news, not one of these ignorant, bitch slappin’, ho fuckin’ simpletons would have ever been caught dead, uttering a pansy ass phrase like: “The sanctity of marriage” But what do know? There they were, spouting off “the sanctity of marriage” this and “the sanctity of marriage” that. Didn’t matter to them. They’d commit to putting on an apron and washing the dishes and vacuuming the house everyday for the rest of their lives if it meant that they got to actually write their hatred of fags into the constitution. They were drooling at the mouth. Giddy like schoolgirls. Because socially accepted bigotry is all fine and dandy. But now we have a chance to have Federal Law enforcing the hatred of an entire group people who we consider to be less human than us.
God Bless America! Have you heard the most popular statement against gay marriage? Not sure if it’s actually the most popular, but it’s the one that I’ve heard the most. They love to say that it somehow devalues traditional marriage because it’s the same as granting a legal marriage to a couple of animals. Hmm… That’s a pretty clear dehumanization of an entire group of people. A lot like the way that the Nazi’s dehumanized the German’s perception of Jewish people. That movement was very successful at convincing the masses, that the members of an entire group of people were actually not valid people, deserving of human rights. So what is the difference between that and what’s going on now? Is it that gay people actually are less than human? One thing that I’m sure of…Every gay person that I know is in every way morally superior to and more human than any asshole who would carry a sign that reads “God Hates Fags”.

The Point

2007-06-11T09:48:00.000-07:00

Many years ago, Chris Mortensen gave me a J. Krishnamurti book. As I recall, I only read bits of it at a time. Honestly, I can remember very little of what I read. But there is one bit of it which has always stood out in my mind. He wrote about the futility of ideologies. So clearly and logically, he presented and validated this concept, which he encapsulated with the statement that "all ideologies are idiotic". Since then, there have been many significant points in our recent history, at which that profound phrase has come into my mind.
We have reached an other one of those points.

As a global society, we have filled this world with problems. Most of the strives toward solutions have created more problems, because so many ideal solutions to the same problem are in such sharp contrast to one and other. This has gone on for so long that all of the original problems are forgotten. We now drift aimlessly, through the vast debris fields of problems that were spawned by the ideologies of the worlds most powerful idiots.

To get rid of both the ideologies and the idiots would solve most of the worlds problems, immediately. But of coarse, that scenario is idealistic. Not realistic. And my whole point is the historically proven fact that real solutions to real problems have to be about what is realistic. Because an idealistic attempt at solving the problem will not only fail to solve the problem, but also create a three fold of new problems. The more you think about it, the more you realize, that ideology is the great enemy of the global society.

So, if we can't get rid of the ideologies and the idiots, I guess we have to pick one to work on first. It's my thought, that the more we manage to reel in the ideologies, the more idiots will fall out of power. So let's attack the giant at the knees.

At this point I want to disclose the fact that politically, I am a "Lefty". It seems very difficult to logically dispute the fact that the greatest forces of conflict and destruction in the word have historically been and presently are at the hands of the idealists in far Right Wing of various nations. That said, I want to make it very clear that I find the Left Wing to be equally as guilty of idealistic idiocy as the Right. And have in too many cases, been as much of a hindrance to progress as those on the Right. The recently failed, so called "Bi-Partisan Immigration Bill" is a perfect example of both sides being guilty of putting idealism ahead of realism. Once again, both the Left and Right have allowed ideology to conquer progress.

My use of the word progress, brings us to the other end of the point. Real solutions are rarely arrived at in a single step. Just as a movie is built from a series of scenes. A solutions is often built from a series of progressive steps. And no. I'm not talking about Iraq. Not much of that mess is in any way progressive.

The sort of thing that I am talking about is the time that I saw Gay's protesting against Bill Clinton, after "Don't ask. Don't tell" happened. I saw a big picture of Bill, with the word LIAR in bold across it, marching down a Gay parade. Yes. "Don't ask. Don't tell" fell far far short of the level dignity that Bill Clinton had hoped to give to Gay's in the Armed Forces. But it was the most that the Republican congress would let him do. So he did something! He made progress on that issue. Yes. Only a baby step. But progress toward social evolution. He moved us an inch further away from our nation's core of socially accepted bigotry. Perhaps those who protested him would have preferred him to be an idealist rather than a realist. Perhaps they'd prefer that he had stuck to his guns with a measure that Congress would not have passed. Perhaps these idealists would have been happier to see him accomplish nothing. Fortunately for the realistic members of the progressive population, these idealists failed to shoot themselves in the foot.

This is one example of idiotic ideology on the Left. And I really don't need to get much into examples from the Right. The fact that most wars are fought over religious differences speaks enough to that.