Current Events
A Good American
30-Nov-09 08:20 PM
What is a "real American" or a "good American"? How do you define that term? What does it mean?
Does it mean paying your taxes, being honest, and helping your fellow citizens if they need assistance?
Does it mean to support your government and your President and to honor those who have been elected to run the country?
Does it require a belief in a particular God?
Can a person be critical of the government, not support the President, not believe in any God and still be a "good American"?
Who gets to decide who is "good" and who is "bad"?
There is no one correct answer to the above questions; they will differ amongst a group of people based upon values and other factors. How you define what is a good American may differ from how I define it and it doesn't prove one is right or wrong.
Does a "real American" accept the fact that people are diverse both culturally, religiously, and socially across a wide spectrum of influence and is therefore tolerant of those other views; even if they do not agree with their own? Or does a "real American" believe that everyone must hold to the same beliefs, the same values, the same religion, the same politics? Is it really about patriotism and national conformity, or is it about values and freedom?
I think the religious wars are real and they will continue to do devastating harm as long as we keep them alive. The fight over religion has probably killed more people on the planet than any other factor since man first developed the ability to write and communicate. As long as we continue to focus on the differences between people instead of focusing on the similarities that make all humans the same (i.e. race, color, sex, religion, sexual orientation, politics, etc.) then the wars and the hate and the killing will continue. When we focus on our differences it generates anger and contempt which in turn creates fear; and fear ultimately leads to suffering. The things that bind us together are more powerful than the things that divide us.
Any person, regardless of his personal religious or political beliefs, who advocates violence, destruction, murder and mayhem upon society or any other group of people in support of a religious or political view point is dangerous. Every one is entitled to their beliefs as long as they keep them in peace and without threat to those around them. When they cross the line and allow their zealotry to turn to violence then they engage in criminal behavior and must be stopped. This condition is not limited to one particular religious or political view - in fact, it has happened across all spectrums of beliefs. Seeing how that out of the hundreds of millions of Muslims in this country the acts of violence in comparison are exceedingly few, I'd say that the vast majority of muslims in this country are not engaging in criminal or destructive behavior. And to label all muslims as evil because of the actions of a few fundamentalists who engage in violence is grossly unfair and wrong. It would be exactly the same if someone were to say that all Christians believed exactly like Fred Phelps and that he represented the true nature of Christianity. If that were true then I can't imagine why anyone would ever claim the title of "Christian". Thankfully, it is not true.
The bigger question is can a criminal be a good American? It is not the belief that matters - it is the criminal activity that is perpetrated as a result of the belief that must be examined. I believe that any person of any religion, any culture, any political view point (liberal or conservative) can be a good American. It is not dependent upon believing in a certain religion, or voting for a particular party. It does not matter what they believe or disbelieve. The only thing that it requires is respect and tolerance for all people and to live in peace with their fellow man. To respect the views of others that differ from his views and to stand against injustice, violence, and corruption when they seek to destroy the lives of others. That is the ideal at the core of this country and what it is founded upon. That is what made America different and the greatest nation in the world. We should always remember that fact.
Rate this blog post:
|
Hate Crimes Legislation
03-Nov-09 11:22 AM
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
- Congress makes the following findings:
- (1) The incidence of violence motivated by the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim poses a serious national problem.
- (2) Such violence disrupts the tranquility and safety of communities and is deeply divisive.
- (3) State and local authorities are now and will continue to be responsible for prosecuting the overwhelming majority of violent crimes in the United States, including violent crimes motivated by bias. These authorities can carry out their responsibilities more effectively with greater Federal assistance.
- (4) Existing Federal law is inadequate to address this problem.
- (5) A prominent characteristic of a violent crime motivated by bias is that it devastates not just the actual victim and the family and friends of the victim, but frequently savages the community sharing the traits that caused the victim to be selected.
- (6) Such violence substantially affects interstate commerce in many ways, including the following:
- (7) For generations, the institutions of slavery and involuntary servitude were defined by the race, color, and ancestry of those held in bondage. Slavery and involuntary servitude were enforced, both prior to and after the adoption of the 13th amendment to the Constitution of the United States, through widespread public and private violence directed at persons because of their race, color, or ancestry, or perceived race, color, or ancestry. Accordingly, eliminating racially motivated violence is an important means of eliminating, to the extent possible, the badges, incidents, and relics of slavery and involuntary servitude.
- (8) Both at the time when the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution of the United States were adopted, and continuing to date, members of certain religious and national origin groups were and are perceived to be distinct `races'. Thus, in order to eliminate, to the extent possible, the badges, incidents, and relics of slavery, it is necessary to prohibit assaults on the basis of real or perceived religions or national origins, at least to the extent such religions or national origins were regarded as races at the time of the adoption of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution of the United States.
- (9) Federal jurisdiction over certain violent crimes motivated by bias enables Federal, State, and local authorities to work together as partners in the investigation and prosecution of such crimes.
- (10) The problem of crimes motivated by bias is sufficiently serious, widespread, and interstate in nature as to warrant Federal assistance to States, local jurisdictions, and Indian tribes.
- (a) In General- Chapter 13 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
- (2) OFFENSES INVOLVING ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED RELIGION, NATIONAL ORIGIN, GENDER, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY, OR DISABILITY-
- (A) IN GENERAL- Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B) or paragraph (3), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability of any person--
- (i) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both; and
- (ii) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, if--
- title, or both, and shall be subject to the penalty of death in accordance with chapter 228 (if death results from the offense), if--
- (i) death results from the offense; or
- (ii) the offense includes kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.
- Nothing in this division, or an amendment made by this division, shall be construed or applied in a manner that infringes on any rights under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States, or substantially burdens any exercise of religion (regardless of whether compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief), speech, expression, association, if such exercise of religion, speech, expression, or association was not intended to--
- (1) plan or prepare for an act of physical violence; or
- (2) incite an imminent act of physical violence against another.
- (3) FREE EXPRESSION- Nothing in this division shall be construed to allow prosecution based solely upon an individual's expression of racial, religious, political, or other beliefs or solely upon an individual's membership in a group advocating or espousing such beliefs.
- (4) FIRST AMENDMENT- Nothing in this division, or an amendment made by this division, shall be construed to diminish any rights under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
- (5) CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS- Nothing in this division shall be construed to prohibit any constitutionally protected speech, expressive conduct or activities (regardless of whether compelled by, or central to, a system of religious belief), including the exercise of religion protected by the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States and peaceful picketing or demonstration.
Rate this blog post:
CEO's Have No Intentions of Hiring
29-Sep-09 06:32 PM
Yet another article today outlining the fact that some of America's CEO's have no plans to increase hiring despite the fact that the economy appears to be on the upswing. No, they say that even if their sales increase that it will be at least a 12 to 18 months lag before they would make any comittments to start hiring people. CEO's of companies and corporations can just increase the work load on their already under-staffed employees and get them to produce more output without the expense of re-hiring displaced workers.
Personally, I have just about lost all faith in our current system. CEO's are charged with keeping their companies healthy, turning profits, and providing ever increasing wealth for their stockholders and investors. People and employees are only a means to an end to achieve this and they are as expendable and worthless as a loose collection of nuts and bolts and odds and ends needed to temporarily patch something together. The problem, and I am generalizing, is that CEO's of major corporations and businesses today have lost sight of the human factor and have no sight of a moral compass whatsoever. They've lost sight of the fact that one of the main reasons their businesses are not growing and have slow sales is because their customers (their employees) have been kicked to the gutter so they can maintain their ever increasing profit margins with as little discomfort to them as possible. How do they expect sales to begin growing again if people continue to get laid off? Do they not understand that by providing a job to those out of work that it will in turn provide increased sales and activity to their own businesses? Has our society and our culture become so corrupt and greedy that we have now rationalized and accepted the costs of the human suffering and despair as simply the means to an end of keeping our capitalist empires in place? For what gain or purpose does this serve except for the very privileged, wealthy few? What more do businesses want in terms of incentives and perks from the government to encourage them to do business? No taxes at all? Free reign with no regulations or rules of any kind to make an extra dollar by any means possible regardless of the moral or legal ramifications trampled in the process?
As a hard working American professional who has worked my entire life and have strived for the American dream and the desire to provide for my family and my retirement, I am truly disgusted by what I currently see in this country in the form of corporate America. Their inability and unwillingness to do the right thing for the country and the people is disturbing. They rail and complain against any moves by the government to control their actions as unfair and as socialist, yet they are the first ones in line seeking "socialist" handouts for themselves when they fail. They are hypocritical and their only interest is making more money for themselves- at any cost or expense - no matter what they might have to do to obtain it. They have kicked the American worker to the gutter one too many times and many of us are being forced to survive outside the walls of their gleaming ivory towers and I am beginning to care less if those towers crumble. We have truly lost our way if we can't see that there is something wrong with this picture.
Rate this blog post:
My Letter To President Obama
22-Aug-09 10:39 AM
A recent Newsweek article reveals that at least half of Americans are misinformed on health care reform and actually believe in the lies and misrepresentations that have been propagated by those opposed to the legislation. Here is some of the findings as quoted in the article:
Dear President Obama,
I am immensely proud as an American to have supported your campaign and now your administration as you tackle some of the biggest challenges facing our country in over fifty years. I appreciate the hard work and effort you are putting into the work of moving the country forward on vital issues concerning economic recovery and health care reform. I am especially thankful to finally have a President to whom I can write and I know will listen and appreciate my words.
I will keep this as brief as possible. I am writing to you today concerning the recent announcements by yourself and key members of your administration that the public option in the current health care reform debate may be up for negotiation or removal from the final bill. I realize that it is still early into the discussions and a lot of work remains on any final consensus on a bill, but please note that I am strongly in favor of the inclusion of the public option in the final version of the bill. Quite honestly, I believe that the public option is itself already a compromise to the much better single payer system that this country desperately needs and as such should not be offered up for negotiation or removal. To lose the public option out of the health care reform bill would result in a bill not worthy of your signature. The public option is the only element of the bill that will bring any change of force to the current system and I trust you will not barter or exchange this for some lesser, weaker system (such as health exchange co-ops) that I believe will leave the status quo firmly in place.
While I certainly understand that politics and Washington is all about negotiation and compromise, I cannot stress strongly enough that in this instance, for this historic piece of legislation, this is not primarily about politics. Those who are attempting to make this a political power grab are those who wish nothing more than an opportunity to score big with special interests and lobbyists in the health care industry. As you know, these special interests are exerting every influence imaginable to derail the possibility of any type of government involvement in the health care industry. Mr. President, please do not allow this debate on health care reform become only about politics. This is the opportunity to bring the CHANGE that we not only can believe in but that we desperately need. This is an issue of life and death, and the very quality of life for millions and millions of Americans. The simple fact of the matter is that without the strength and influence of our government via a public option provision to ensure the standards and rules by which the industry must be run, then I do not believe we will see true reform to our health care insurance system. I appreciate and admire your efforts to reach bipartisan support on a bill that will affect all Americans, but the importance of bipartisan support must remain secondary to the primary importance of a meaningful bill that actually has the power and the strength to affect change.
As a professional who is currently unemployed and on COBRA I can assure you that this legislation is not about politics for me. Due to my own personal health care needs I am deeply concerned for my family and the quality of care that will be available in the future. I am greatly disheartened by those in our country who have been so vocal and disrespectful in their angry and hateful opposition to the health care reform legislation. I can only think that the majority of them probably enjoy good health and do not fully realize the profound problems and inequities in our current health care system. I have no reason to believe that the health care insurance industry will ever do the right thing on their own accord and they will receive yet another pass by Washington if this important legislation does not have the fire power to enforce the changes necessary. The only change I can believe in at this stage are the principles that we must stand up and protect from being removed from this bill. Please, do not give away the public option of the health care reform bill in it’s final version that you sign into law.
Thank you for your hard work and for your extraordinary leadership in bringing these crucially important issues forward. True health care reform has been forgotten and ignored for far too long and we are too close now to give in to those who had the opportunity to fix it but chose to ignore it for the past eight years.
Sincerely yours,
TD3k
Rate this blog post:
- 46 percent of Americans believe reform will result in health-care coverage for all illegal immigrants
- Half of us think the federal government will become directly involved in making personal health-care decisions.
- 53 percent of Republicans believe “death panels” will exist in some form, that the government will require the elderly to make decisions about how and when they want to die.(The real meaning of "end-of-life consultation" is actually something that, in practice, gives most people comfort and hope.) The number does drop to 30 percent when you look at the entire population, which still means a third of America thinks Barack Obama wants to kill your grandmother.
- Some people believe that pregnancies involving babies with Down syndrome will be forced to have an abortion or risk losing their health insurance
- This combined with the onslaught of recent attempts by those crashing town hall meetings and using bullying tactics to disrupt and interrupt the people trying to discuss the health care reform legislation, stories are now appearing that those in Congress may be attempting to scale back the legislation when they return in September after the break. This in an attempt to calm the hysteria that seems to be spreading by those who are fueled and energized by these wildly false bits of information regarding health care reform. As a result of all of this, I felt compelled to write to President Obama to share my feelings. Here is the letter I sent:
Dear President Obama,
I am immensely proud as an American to have supported your campaign and now your administration as you tackle some of the biggest challenges facing our country in over fifty years. I appreciate the hard work and effort you are putting into the work of moving the country forward on vital issues concerning economic recovery and health care reform. I am especially thankful to finally have a President to whom I can write and I know will listen and appreciate my words.
I will keep this as brief as possible. I am writing to you today concerning the recent announcements by yourself and key members of your administration that the public option in the current health care reform debate may be up for negotiation or removal from the final bill. I realize that it is still early into the discussions and a lot of work remains on any final consensus on a bill, but please note that I am strongly in favor of the inclusion of the public option in the final version of the bill. Quite honestly, I believe that the public option is itself already a compromise to the much better single payer system that this country desperately needs and as such should not be offered up for negotiation or removal. To lose the public option out of the health care reform bill would result in a bill not worthy of your signature. The public option is the only element of the bill that will bring any change of force to the current system and I trust you will not barter or exchange this for some lesser, weaker system (such as health exchange co-ops) that I believe will leave the status quo firmly in place.
While I certainly understand that politics and Washington is all about negotiation and compromise, I cannot stress strongly enough that in this instance, for this historic piece of legislation, this is not primarily about politics. Those who are attempting to make this a political power grab are those who wish nothing more than an opportunity to score big with special interests and lobbyists in the health care industry. As you know, these special interests are exerting every influence imaginable to derail the possibility of any type of government involvement in the health care industry. Mr. President, please do not allow this debate on health care reform become only about politics. This is the opportunity to bring the CHANGE that we not only can believe in but that we desperately need. This is an issue of life and death, and the very quality of life for millions and millions of Americans. The simple fact of the matter is that without the strength and influence of our government via a public option provision to ensure the standards and rules by which the industry must be run, then I do not believe we will see true reform to our health care insurance system. I appreciate and admire your efforts to reach bipartisan support on a bill that will affect all Americans, but the importance of bipartisan support must remain secondary to the primary importance of a meaningful bill that actually has the power and the strength to affect change.
As a professional who is currently unemployed and on COBRA I can assure you that this legislation is not about politics for me. Due to my own personal health care needs I am deeply concerned for my family and the quality of care that will be available in the future. I am greatly disheartened by those in our country who have been so vocal and disrespectful in their angry and hateful opposition to the health care reform legislation. I can only think that the majority of them probably enjoy good health and do not fully realize the profound problems and inequities in our current health care system. I have no reason to believe that the health care insurance industry will ever do the right thing on their own accord and they will receive yet another pass by Washington if this important legislation does not have the fire power to enforce the changes necessary. The only change I can believe in at this stage are the principles that we must stand up and protect from being removed from this bill. Please, do not give away the public option of the health care reform bill in it’s final version that you sign into law.
Thank you for your hard work and for your extraordinary leadership in bringing these crucially important issues forward. True health care reform has been forgotten and ignored for far too long and we are too close now to give in to those who had the opportunity to fix it but chose to ignore it for the past eight years.
Sincerely yours,
TD3k
Rate this blog post:
The Mojave Cross Memorial
18-Aug-09 06:00 PM
In 2001 the ACLU and an Oregon resident filed a lawsuit claiming that the cross is a religious symbol on government property and thus is a violation of the Establishment Clause of the first amendment. This set off a chain of events and legal maneuvering. In 2002 Congress designated the cross and the surrounding property as a "national memorial" to honor the fallen dead of World War I and ordered the land to be given to the Veteran's of Foreign War. The District Court and the Ninth Circuit Court sided with the ACLU that the symbol was unconstitutional and ordered the cross to be covered. The case will now come before the Supreme Court in October 2009 for a final hearing.
The main argument presented by those who wish to keep the cross in place is that the latin cross is not a religious symbol. Instead they claim that it is an international symbol that represents loss and sacrifice. They further argue that groups such as the ACLU and American's United are only interested in removing the symbol out of religious hatred for Christianity and to dishonor war veterans. They have also stated that the cross is innocuous and does not violate the first amendment in that it does not force anyone to participate in any religious ceremony. They do not believe there is any harm in having this symbol representative of ALL the veterans who died during World War I.
Here are some counter points worthy of consideration:
- The Latin cross is a religious symbol and should be treated as such. It is a central symbol of Christianity and for those who are Christian it is offensive to strip away it's sacred meaning by saying it has no religious meaning.
- Veteran Memorials should honor all of our country's veterans, not just those of a particular belief system. According to the U.S. Department of Defense, 29% of those currently serving in the U.S. military are not Christian. Our veterans come from Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu and Muslim backgrounds, while some choose to follow other belief systems or profess no faith at all.
- The Constitution mandates separation of church and state. Our country's founders wanted religion and government to remain separate, which is why our Constitution requires the government to remain neutral on the subject of religion. One of the freedoms our veterans sought to protect is the right for all to practice their belief system of choice. This cross on government property goes against that principle.
- The government, in maintaining this cross, is discriminating against veterans of other faiths and those who choose no faith at all. The Mojave National Preserve in California denied a request in 1999 to erect a Buddhist shrine near the cross. This clearly shows the government's favoritism, and makes those who are not Christian feel like second-class citizens.
- The courts should remain open to lawsuits objecting to church-state violations. Some will argue that just because someone is offended by a religious symbol, he or she does not have the right to sue the government and demand it be removed. If we followed this interpretation of the Constitution, the government could display any religious symbols it wants anywhere it wants - on license plates, in public buildings, maybe even in public schools - and those forced to view these displays could do nothing about it. That's not what this country stands for and the government must be held accountable when it strips away our freedoms.
Health Care Reform - The Facts
14-Aug-09 12:44 AM
Find below the e-mail sent by David Axelrod, Senior Advisor to President Obama, outlining some specific issues regarding the current debate over Health Care Reform. The White House has also published a website that contains FAQs and additional information regarding the current Health Care Reform legislation. As I've mentioned in my previous post, this is very important legislation that will affect all of us and it is imperative that the real facts of the legislation be known. The lies, the misinformation, and the fear mongering must be checked if we want to have a serious debate on these important issues.
---------------------
Dear Friend,
This is probably one of the longest emails I’ve ever sent, but it could be the most important.
Across the country we are seeing vigorous debate about health insurance reform.
Unfortunately, some of the old tactics we know so well are back — even the viral emails that fly unchecked and under the radar, spreading all sorts of lies and distortions.
As President Obama said at the town hall in New Hampshire, "where we do disagree, let's disagree over things that are real, not these wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to anything that's actually been proposed."
So let’s start a chain email of our own. At the end of my email, you’ll find a lot of information about health insurance reform, distilled into 8 ways reform provides security and stability to those with or without coverage, 8 common myths about reform and 8 reasons we need health insurance reform now.
Right now, someone you know probably has a question about reform that could be answered by what’s below. So what are you waiting for? Forward this email.
Thanks,
David
David Axelrod
Senior Adviser to the President
8 ways reform provides security and stability to those with or without coverage
8 common myths about health insurance reform
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck/faq
8 Reasons We Need Health Insurance Reform Now
---------------------
Dear Friend,
This is probably one of the longest emails I’ve ever sent, but it could be the most important.
Across the country we are seeing vigorous debate about health insurance reform.
Unfortunately, some of the old tactics we know so well are back — even the viral emails that fly unchecked and under the radar, spreading all sorts of lies and distortions.
As President Obama said at the town hall in New Hampshire, "where we do disagree, let's disagree over things that are real, not these wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to anything that's actually been proposed."
So let’s start a chain email of our own. At the end of my email, you’ll find a lot of information about health insurance reform, distilled into 8 ways reform provides security and stability to those with or without coverage, 8 common myths about reform and 8 reasons we need health insurance reform now.
Right now, someone you know probably has a question about reform that could be answered by what’s below. So what are you waiting for? Forward this email.
Thanks,
David
David Axelrod
Senior Adviser to the President
8 ways reform provides security and stability to those with or without coverage
- Ends Discrimination for Pre-Existing Conditions: Insurance companies will be prohibited from refusing you coverage because of your medical history.
- Ends Exorbitant Out-of-Pocket Expenses, Deductibles or Co-Pays: Insurance companies will have to abide by yearly caps on how much they can charge for out-of-pocket expenses.
- Ends Cost-Sharing for Preventive Care: Insurance companies must fully cover, without charge, regular checkups and tests that help you prevent illness, such as mammograms or eye and foot exams for diabetics.
- Ends Dropping of Coverage for Seriously Ill: Insurance companies will be prohibited from dropping or watering down insurance coverage for those who become seriously ill.
- Ends Gender Discrimination: Insurance companies will be prohibited from charging you more because of your gender.
- Ends Annual or Lifetime Caps on Coverage: Insurance companies will be prevented from placing annual or lifetime caps on the coverage you receive.
- Extends Coverage for Young Adults: Children would continue to be eligible for family coverage through the age of 26.
- Guarantees Insurance Renewal: Insurance companies will be required to renew any policy as long as the policyholder pays their premium in full. Insurance companies won't be allowed to refuse renewal because someone became sick.
8 common myths about health insurance reform
- Reform will stop "rationing" - not increase it: It’s a myth that reform will mean a "government takeover" of health care or lead to "rationing." To the contrary, reform will forbid many forms of rationing that are currently being used by insurance companies.
- We can’t afford reform: It's the status quo we can't afford. It’s a myth that reform will bust the budget. To the contrary, the President has identified ways to pay for the vast majority of the up-front costs by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse within existing government health programs; ending big subsidies to insurance companies; and increasing efficiency with such steps as coordinating care and streamlining paperwork. In the long term, reform can help bring down costs that will otherwise lead to a fiscal crisis.
- Reform would encourage "euthanasia": It does not. It’s a malicious myth that reform would encourage or even require euthanasia for seniors. For seniors who want to consult with their family and physicians about end-of life decisions, reform will help to cover these voluntary, private consultations for those who want help with these personal and difficult family decisions.
- Vets' health care is safe and sound: It’s a myth that health insurance reform will affect veterans' access to the care they get now. To the contrary, the President's budget significantly expands coverage under the VA, extending care to 500,000 more veterans who were previously excluded. The VA Healthcare system will continue to be available for all eligible veterans.
- Reform will benefit small business - not burden it: It’s a myth that health insurance reform will hurt small businesses. To the contrary, reform will ease the burdens on small businesses, provide tax credits to help them pay for employee coverage and help level the playing field with big firms who pay much less to cover their employees on average.
- Your Medicare is safe, and stronger with reform: It’s myth that Health Insurance Reform would be financed by cutting Medicare benefits. To the contrary, reform will improve the long-term financial health of Medicare, ensure better coordination, eliminate waste and unnecessary subsidies to insurance companies, and help to close the Medicare "doughnut" hole to make prescription drugs more affordable for seniors.
- You can keep your own insurance: It’s myth that reform will force you out of your current insurance plan or force you to change doctors. To the contrary, reform will expand your choices, not eliminate them.
- No, government will not do anything with your bank account: It is an absurd myth that government will be in charge of your bank accounts. Health insurance reform will simplify administration, making it easier and more convenient for you to pay bills in a method that you choose. Just like paying a phone bill or a utility bill, you can pay by traditional check, or by a direct electronic payment. And forms will be standardized so they will be easier to understand. The choice is up to you – and the same rules of privacy will apply as they do for all other electronic payments that people make.
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck
http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/realitycheck/faq
8 Reasons We Need Health Insurance Reform Now
- Coverage Denied to Millions: A recent national survey estimated that 12.6 million non-elderly adults – 36 percent of those who tried to purchase health insurance directly from an insurance company in the individual insurance market – were in fact discriminated against because of a pre-existing condition in the previous three years or dropped from coverage when they became seriously ill. Learn more:http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/denied_coverage/index.html
- Less Care for More Costs: With each passing year, Americans are paying more for health care coverage. Employer-sponsored health insurance premiums have nearly doubled since 2000, a rate three times faster than wages. In 2008, the average premium for a family plan purchased through an employer was $12,680, nearly the annual earnings of a full-time minimum wage job. Americans pay more than ever for health insurance, but get less coverage. Learn more:http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hiddencosts/index.html
- Roadblocks to Care for Women: Women’s reproductive health requires more regular contact with health care providers, including yearly pap smears, mammograms, and obstetric care. Women are also more likely to report fair or poor health than men (9.5% versus 9.0%). While rates of chronic conditions such as diabetes and high blood pressure are similar to men, women are twice as likely to suffer from headaches and are more likely to experience joint, back or neck pain. These chronic conditions often require regular and frequent treatment and follow-up care. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/women/index.html
- Hard Times in the Heartland: Throughout rural America, there are nearly 50 million people who face challenges in accessing health care. The past several decades have consistently shown higher rates of poverty, mortality, uninsurance, and limited access to a primary health care provider in rural areas. With the recent economic downturn, there is potential for an increase in many of the health disparities and access concerns that are already elevated in rural communities. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/hardtimes
- Small Businesses Struggle to Provide Health Coverage: Nearly one-third of the uninsured – 13 million people – are employees of firms with less than 100 workers. From 2000 to 2007, the proportion of non-elderly Americans covered by employer-based health insurance fell from 66% to 61%. Much of this decline stems from small business. The percentage of small businesses offering coverage dropped from 68% to 59%, while large firms held stable at 99%. About a third of such workers in firms with fewer than 50 employees obtain insurance through a spouse. Learn more: http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/helpbottomline
- The Tragedies are Personal: Half of all personal bankruptcies are at least partly the result of medical expenses. The typical elderly couple may have to save nearly $300,000 to pay for health costs not covered by Medicare alone. Learn more:http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction
- Diminishing Access to Care: From 2000 to 2007, the proportion of non-elderly Americans covered by employer-based health insurance fell from 66% to 61%. An estimated 87 million people - one in every three Americans under the age of 65 - were uninsured at some point in 2007 and 2008. More than 80% of the uninsured are in working families. Learn more:http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/inaction/diminishing/index.html
- The Trends are Troubling: Without reform, health care costs will continue to skyrocket unabated, putting unbearable strain on families, businesses, and state and federal government budgets. Perhaps the most visible sign of the need for health care reform is the 46 million Americans currently without health insurance - projections suggest that this number will rise to about 72 million in 2040 in the absence of reform. Learn more:http://www.WhiteHouse.gov/assets/documents/CEA_Health_Care_Report.pdf
- Rate this blog post:
Health Care Reform - My Letter
10-Aug-09 12:42 PM
We are in the midst of a national debate that is of immense importance to this country, our economy, and our general well being. It is unfortunately a divisive one and one that elicits strong emotion and opinion. It is a complex issue and it affects every single one of us and it is health care reform. There has been an inordinate amount of false information, misinformation, and outright lies circulating in the media and on the internet regarding the current bills before Congress. During the month of August a battle is going to be waged by both sides that will determine the fate in the near future of what we do with our health care system. To that end I have written to my Senators and Congressman outlining to them some key points that I feel are important to this discussion. Here is my letter:
Dear Senator/Congressman,
I am writing to you today to make known my concerns and wishes regarding the current health care reform bill(s) that are currently under consideration in the US Congress. First let me state that I believe that this one particular issue is one of the most urgent, pressing needs facing our country today and I place great value and importance on it. To that end, allow me to make a few key points.
I am in support of health care reform legislation. I want to see a bill passed this year addressing the urgent needs concerning this subject. As an individual who has to deal with health insurance companies on a regular basis, I know the problems and the inequalities that exist in the current system. These must be addressed and corrected immediately. While I appreciate the complexity dealing with such an issue, you must resolve to work through this issue in a bi-partisan fashion with the Democratic leaders in both the House and the Senate to clear these hurdles. Not just any bill will do; it must contain and address the following:
Thank you for your time and I appreciate the hard work ahead. In closing I would also like to add that the recent attempts by certain groups to disrupt town hall meetings across the country should be admonished and condemned. Not because they are in opposition, but because they are attempting to derail the democratic process of government leaders communicating with their respective constituents. Open debates and forums allowing questions should be encouraged in lieu of the mindless, immature antics of those who would shout over and drown out others who wish to speak. Please speak out against this unruly and unhelpful practice that only further divides people along party lines.
Sincerely yours,
TD3k
Rate this blog post:
Dear Senator/Congressman,
I am writing to you today to make known my concerns and wishes regarding the current health care reform bill(s) that are currently under consideration in the US Congress. First let me state that I believe that this one particular issue is one of the most urgent, pressing needs facing our country today and I place great value and importance on it. To that end, allow me to make a few key points.
I am in support of health care reform legislation. I want to see a bill passed this year addressing the urgent needs concerning this subject. As an individual who has to deal with health insurance companies on a regular basis, I know the problems and the inequalities that exist in the current system. These must be addressed and corrected immediately. While I appreciate the complexity dealing with such an issue, you must resolve to work through this issue in a bi-partisan fashion with the Democratic leaders in both the House and the Senate to clear these hurdles. Not just any bill will do; it must contain and address the following:
- A public option providing for health insurance coverage for those who cannot afford coverage, lose their jobs, or work for an employer that does not provide coverage. The public option should be designed so as to provide competition in the private markets to encourage lower pricing, competition and set the framework for the basic rules and regulations that all insurance providers must adhere to.
- No longer allow health insurance companies to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, or to rescind coverage due to onset of a severe illness. In short, this insurance must model exactly the same type of coverage that members of the US Congress enjoy as administered by the federal office of personnel management. The American citizens should be able to get coverage with no physicals, no testing, no applications, no refusals by the provider to pay for treatments or services prescribed by the doctor, and as I said earlier, no rescissions or dropping of coverage due to severe health conditions or expense. Nothing less will do.
- Complete choice of personal doctors and hospitals without restrictions or interference of insurance companies dictating or rationing care in any manner. Americans want choices and I am prepared to pay for them if they are fair, equitable, reasonable, and just.
Thank you for your time and I appreciate the hard work ahead. In closing I would also like to add that the recent attempts by certain groups to disrupt town hall meetings across the country should be admonished and condemned. Not because they are in opposition, but because they are attempting to derail the democratic process of government leaders communicating with their respective constituents. Open debates and forums allowing questions should be encouraged in lieu of the mindless, immature antics of those who would shout over and drown out others who wish to speak. Please speak out against this unruly and unhelpful practice that only further divides people along party lines.
Sincerely yours,
TD3k
Rate this blog post:
What's Up With That?
27-Jul-09 01:11 PM
There are so many things happening these days in the world of politics, religion and technology that it is becoming increasingly difficult for the part time blogger to keep the bases covered. To that end, I am introducing a segment that I will call "What's Up With That?" that will appear in a recurring format and will attempt to address a handful of issues that bear comment, but perhaps not worthy of a full article. I hope to cover a wider range of topics in a shorter amount of time in this manner. So, here we go:
Windows 7
I have been testing Windows 7 on my Mac Pro desktop for a couple of months now and overall like what I see. It does appear to have a slight speed increase over Vista and other welcome enhancements and tweaks that really should've been included in Vista. But will I upgrade to Windows 7 when it comes out? No way. What's up with Microsoft on their insane pricing policy for their OS anyway? They continue to stick with their confusing assortment of OS packages for people to have to choose from, but there is no significant discount for those (like me) who had purchased Vista to upgrade to 7. I will not spend another $200 on an OS that is not that much different in appearance or functionality from Vista. Where is the $30 upgrade option like Apple is doing for Leopard users to Snow Leopard? I would've gladly gone that route. If Microsoft is hoping for an onslaught of people migrating to Windows 7 I will go ahead and make a prediction right now that it's not going to happen due to their pricing alone.
Iran Diplomacy
The Obama administration is attempting to make diplomatic connections with Iran in a hope to maybe bridge some of the differences between our governments, cultures, and world views. This is something that is long overdue and should be attempted whether you think it will work or not. I certainly have my doubts, but think it is imperative that we try. So, what's up with Secretary of Defense Gates going to Israel this week and appearing on national TV to tell the world that the US will continue to supply Israel with the latest state of the art weaponry and technology to defend itself from attack? Was there ever any question about the US severing it's ally status with Israel? Israel then turns around and says all options are on the table in dealing with Iran. Call me ignorant, but that is a guaranteed move to foil any diplomatic discussions with Iran before they even begin. I am not suggesting we sever our ties with Israel, but at the very least we have to give the appearance of being neutral and willing to engage in meaningful discussions or why bother?
Rate this blog post:
Heard It On The Newsvine
07-Jul-09 08:36 PM
As I mentioned in the previous article I have been spending some time in the Newsvine discussion forums over at MSNBC. For each story published to their website they provide a discussion forum so that everyday folks like you and I can join in and add our two cents on any given subject or article. I think it's a great idea and really allows for some dynamic interchange of thoughts and ideas on current and breaking news events. Since I don't get that many comments here on TD3k Speaks, it has been a bit more interesting over there with people leaving comments on your comments. Blogging is more fun when people interact and leave opinions, regardless if they agree with you or not.
However, I have to say, there is also a large number of people in the discussion forums that are there for the express purpose of trolling and slandering anyone who disagrees with their opinion. Such juvenile behavior is nothing new, but it can be very irritating and even disturbing. There are some truly mean and hateful people in this world I am sad to say. I have seen hate filled rants and comments on subjects ranging from the health care debate, politics, and of course religion. I have been particularly discouraged by those who feel that the health care system in the US is just fine and think it should be left alone. They have their coverage and they don't really care whether anyone else does or not. There are those who are so partisan and biased in their comments as to be completely illogical and almost impossible to comprehend. These comments occur on both sides of the political fence, but the Obama-haters are particularly vocal at the moment. And then you have comments from people who just like to make a comment or leave an opinion on the topic at hand. It is always interesting reading if you can get past those who are insisting that everyone agree with them or those who proclaim without discretion that if you disagree with them then you are an idiot.
I've added some links in the sidebar for the RSS feeds on the articles and the comments that I have posted. Check those out and join in the conversation if you like or start your own newsvine account and join in the fun. It is free and rather entertaining. As you contribute by adding comments to various articles, you increase your "Vineacity" rating which is a graphical icon representing your earned reputation. I just recently earned the rank of "Fruitfulness" (see diagram below).
However, I have to say, there is also a large number of people in the discussion forums that are there for the express purpose of trolling and slandering anyone who disagrees with their opinion. Such juvenile behavior is nothing new, but it can be very irritating and even disturbing. There are some truly mean and hateful people in this world I am sad to say. I have seen hate filled rants and comments on subjects ranging from the health care debate, politics, and of course religion. I have been particularly discouraged by those who feel that the health care system in the US is just fine and think it should be left alone. They have their coverage and they don't really care whether anyone else does or not. There are those who are so partisan and biased in their comments as to be completely illogical and almost impossible to comprehend. These comments occur on both sides of the political fence, but the Obama-haters are particularly vocal at the moment. And then you have comments from people who just like to make a comment or leave an opinion on the topic at hand. It is always interesting reading if you can get past those who are insisting that everyone agree with them or those who proclaim without discretion that if you disagree with them then you are an idiot.
I've added some links in the sidebar for the RSS feeds on the articles and the comments that I have posted. Check those out and join in the conversation if you like or start your own newsvine account and join in the fun. It is free and rather entertaining. As you contribute by adding comments to various articles, you increase your "Vineacity" rating which is a graphical icon representing your earned reputation. I just recently earned the rank of "Fruitfulness" (see diagram below).
Rate this blog post:
The Battle Continues...
28-May-09 11:27 AM
As the battle wears on in California over the ban on same sex marriage, as upheld by the California Supreme Court yesterday, a couple of thoughts on the subject. To begin with, it is completely clear that the two opposing sides of this argument will probably never reach a consensus or a compromise. Whether you are for it or against it, you are probably very unlikely to change your mind or your opinions, although polls are showing that some people are doing just that. Regardless of the slight shift in poll numbers, it is clear that it is an issue that has the country split down the middle with only the smallest of percentages separating the two camps.
I have stated my views numerous times on this blog on this subject and they have not changed. I believe the ruling yesterday by the Supreme Court was not so much a true question on the civil liberty aspects of gay marriage as much as it was a ruling against the argument that Proposition 8 revised the California Constitution as opposed to just amending it. Opponents of Proposition 8 unsuccessfully argued that the voter initiative went beyond a constitutional amendment and represented a revision to the state constitution. The California Supreme Court did not agree. Only one Justice dissented: Justice Moreno in his lone dissenting opinion stated, "[T]he aim of Proposition 8 and all similar initiative measures that seek to alter the California Constitution to deny a fundamental right to a group that has historically been subject to discrimination on the basis of a suspect classification, violates the essence of the equal protection clause of the California Constitution and fundamentally alters its scope and meaning. Such a change cannot be accomplished through the initiative process by a simple amendment to our Constitution enacted by a bare majority of the voters; it must be accomplished, if at all, by a constitutional revision to modify the equal protection clause to protect some, rather than all, similarly situated persons. I would therefore hold that Proposition 8 is not a lawful amendment of the California Constitution."
I agree with him 100%. Also, the very notion of voters being able to vote on initiatives which at the very heart attempt to limit or restrict basic rights and freedoms of specific groups of people is not only insulting, but it is morally wrong. It is especially insensitive when only the narrowest margins of a majority are then allowed to impose their restrictions based on such a majority vote thus establishing a simple majority tyranny. At the absolute minimum, any such votes whereby specific rights and freedoms are at risk, there should be required a super majority vote, that is more than just a simple majority, in order for any such restrictions be allowed, (i.e. 2/3 minimum required). The idea of a super majority vote is very common in all types of voting processes to prevent a simple majority tyranny by only very slight margins. Even still, I personally believe it is wrong to ever apply a majority vote model when any type of restrictions of civil liberties are at stake for any group. No majority should ever be allowed to trample on or deny the rights of a minority...ever.
So, as the battle continues and opponents prepare to go to the ballot box again in early 2010, two high profile lawyers just filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of two gay men and two gay women in California and many believe this will go straight to the US Supreme Court. Lawyers Theodore Olson and David Boies have joined forces and are planning on taking this argument ultimately to the US Supreme Court, in spite of the ACLU and some other LGBT Organizations objecting saying that such a move is premature. Theodore Olson was quoted as saying at a news conference in Los Angeles :
"There will be many people who will think this is not the time to go to federal. Both David and I have studied the court for more years than probably either one of us would like to admit. We think we know what we are doing." David Boies agreed: "Reasonable minds can differ, but when you have people being denied civil rights today, I think it is impossible as lawyers and as an American to say 'No, you have to wait, now is not the right time.' I think if we had done that in prior civil rights battles, we would not be where we are."
The two lawyers became household names during the 2000 Presidential Elections when Theodore Olson represented the Bush campaign and David Boies represented the Al Gore campaign to argue before the Supreme Court about the election results. The two have now joined forces and are of the same mind on the matter regarding same sex marriage. It is unfortunate that such actions have to be taken in order to secure the rights of the minority, but that has always been the case through out history and we never seem to learn our lessons very well. I still maintain that nobody on the opposing side has adequately been able to demonstrate in any believable fashion how allowing the LGBT community to enjoy the legal and civil liberties offered by marriage will result in any harm or injustice to anyone else. Quite simply put, it does not. It is only an argument based on religious views and principles and nothing else. Such arguments may not be allowed to be the reason to restrict civil rights and freedoms for any group of people in this country.
I have stated my views numerous times on this blog on this subject and they have not changed. I believe the ruling yesterday by the Supreme Court was not so much a true question on the civil liberty aspects of gay marriage as much as it was a ruling against the argument that Proposition 8 revised the California Constitution as opposed to just amending it. Opponents of Proposition 8 unsuccessfully argued that the voter initiative went beyond a constitutional amendment and represented a revision to the state constitution. The California Supreme Court did not agree. Only one Justice dissented: Justice Moreno in his lone dissenting opinion stated, "[T]he aim of Proposition 8 and all similar initiative measures that seek to alter the California Constitution to deny a fundamental right to a group that has historically been subject to discrimination on the basis of a suspect classification, violates the essence of the equal protection clause of the California Constitution and fundamentally alters its scope and meaning. Such a change cannot be accomplished through the initiative process by a simple amendment to our Constitution enacted by a bare majority of the voters; it must be accomplished, if at all, by a constitutional revision to modify the equal protection clause to protect some, rather than all, similarly situated persons. I would therefore hold that Proposition 8 is not a lawful amendment of the California Constitution."
I agree with him 100%. Also, the very notion of voters being able to vote on initiatives which at the very heart attempt to limit or restrict basic rights and freedoms of specific groups of people is not only insulting, but it is morally wrong. It is especially insensitive when only the narrowest margins of a majority are then allowed to impose their restrictions based on such a majority vote thus establishing a simple majority tyranny. At the absolute minimum, any such votes whereby specific rights and freedoms are at risk, there should be required a super majority vote, that is more than just a simple majority, in order for any such restrictions be allowed, (i.e. 2/3 minimum required). The idea of a super majority vote is very common in all types of voting processes to prevent a simple majority tyranny by only very slight margins. Even still, I personally believe it is wrong to ever apply a majority vote model when any type of restrictions of civil liberties are at stake for any group. No majority should ever be allowed to trample on or deny the rights of a minority...ever.
So, as the battle continues and opponents prepare to go to the ballot box again in early 2010, two high profile lawyers just filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of two gay men and two gay women in California and many believe this will go straight to the US Supreme Court. Lawyers Theodore Olson and David Boies have joined forces and are planning on taking this argument ultimately to the US Supreme Court, in spite of the ACLU and some other LGBT Organizations objecting saying that such a move is premature. Theodore Olson was quoted as saying at a news conference in Los Angeles :
"There will be many people who will think this is not the time to go to federal. Both David and I have studied the court for more years than probably either one of us would like to admit. We think we know what we are doing." David Boies agreed: "Reasonable minds can differ, but when you have people being denied civil rights today, I think it is impossible as lawyers and as an American to say 'No, you have to wait, now is not the right time.' I think if we had done that in prior civil rights battles, we would not be where we are."
The two lawyers became household names during the 2000 Presidential Elections when Theodore Olson represented the Bush campaign and David Boies represented the Al Gore campaign to argue before the Supreme Court about the election results. The two have now joined forces and are of the same mind on the matter regarding same sex marriage. It is unfortunate that such actions have to be taken in order to secure the rights of the minority, but that has always been the case through out history and we never seem to learn our lessons very well. I still maintain that nobody on the opposing side has adequately been able to demonstrate in any believable fashion how allowing the LGBT community to enjoy the legal and civil liberties offered by marriage will result in any harm or injustice to anyone else. Quite simply put, it does not. It is only an argument based on religious views and principles and nothing else. Such arguments may not be allowed to be the reason to restrict civil rights and freedoms for any group of people in this country.
Not All Texans Are Malcontents
16-Apr-09 08:32 PM
Note: This article has been edited from it’s original content.*
There’s no polite way to say this, no way to make it pretty and neat, so here it goes: In my opinion, Governor Rick Perry is a malcontent and political agitator. He is quite possibly the biggest demagogue to ever stand up in front of a crowd of right-wing, anti-tax cry babies and proclaim that Texas may secede from the United States of America. Actually, I think he is the only one who has ever done that in the history of the state and the nation. I am still in shock at the absolutely incomprehensible magnitude of such an irresponsible statement coming from the mouth of the chief executive of the state. It is so utterly pretentious and devoid of any common sense principles, that it can only be described as demagoguery of the cheapest kind. A mind-melting lapse of intelligence that suggests that the Governor is out to score political points with those on the very edge of the far right. He even exclaimed that he was “with the right-wing extremists” while making his secession comments on Wednesday. I wonder if Governor Perry had the presence of mind to remove his American flag lapel pin from his collar (the one that he never took off for the past 8 years) before making such a bold and unpatriotic statement of dissidence? There are not enough adjectives in the English language (and believe me I am leaving a lot of the ones I really want to use out) to adequately describe the ineptitude necessary to formulate such a statement as made by Governor Perry.
Governor Perry does not speak for me and he does not represent me as a Texan. Contrary to popular belief, not all Texans are right wing fanatics and ultra conservative. As a Texan, the Governor should know that it is legally impossible for Texas to secede from the United States. It is possible for the state to break up into four smaller states, but Texas is NOT leaving the Union. To make such a rabble-rousing remark does nothing but make the state look like a collection of right-wing extremist wack-jobs who like to talk tough and act mean. This kind of rhetoric reveals just how low the GOP has sunk with the loss of the last Presidential election. It also shows just how low Governor Perry is willing to go to draw attention and support as he prepares for his bid to win the Governorship again in 2010. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Texans who do agree with the Governor and who see fit to keep re-electing him and people who think like him. My hope is that this kind of senseless talk will result in people waking up and replacing the Governor with a sensible, intelligent person who is able to serve the common good of the people of the state without blind duty to partisan politics.
In case Mr. Perry and the anti-tax tea dumpers haven’t noticed, the work that the Obama administration and Congress is doing to correct the economy is starting to work as the stimulus money begins making it’s way into the system. For the first time in a very long time there are signs of hope and improvement in the economy and this is the best response that the GOP can come up with? Crying about taxes and the government spending too much money? Where were the pity parties when one trillion dollars was spent on the misguided and unnecessary war in Iraq? Didn’t hear anything about that one did you? If Governor Perry and the GOP insist on throwing temper tantrums to get attention, then please just go away. Try to make some constructive noise for a change and maybe somebody will listen and take you seriously.
(*My apologies to anyone offended by my frankness in the original article. I have attempted to tone the language down here to be less incendiary and insulting. While I can always respect those with differing views and opinions, and welcome debate and opportunities to explore both sides of an issue, I think that it is always important to differentiate between constructive criticisms and comments versus demagoguery fueled by political rabble-rousing. There is nothing logical or constructive about the latter and it does not fall into the same category. While I can appreciate the concern many have expressed over the recent stimulus bills and the extraordinary amount of monies invested into these programs, it is pretty easy to again argue the necessity of such actions given the crucial and fragile condition of the US economy.)
There’s no polite way to say this, no way to make it pretty and neat, so here it goes: In my opinion, Governor Rick Perry is a malcontent and political agitator. He is quite possibly the biggest demagogue to ever stand up in front of a crowd of right-wing, anti-tax cry babies and proclaim that Texas may secede from the United States of America. Actually, I think he is the only one who has ever done that in the history of the state and the nation. I am still in shock at the absolutely incomprehensible magnitude of such an irresponsible statement coming from the mouth of the chief executive of the state. It is so utterly pretentious and devoid of any common sense principles, that it can only be described as demagoguery of the cheapest kind. A mind-melting lapse of intelligence that suggests that the Governor is out to score political points with those on the very edge of the far right. He even exclaimed that he was “with the right-wing extremists” while making his secession comments on Wednesday. I wonder if Governor Perry had the presence of mind to remove his American flag lapel pin from his collar (the one that he never took off for the past 8 years) before making such a bold and unpatriotic statement of dissidence? There are not enough adjectives in the English language (and believe me I am leaving a lot of the ones I really want to use out) to adequately describe the ineptitude necessary to formulate such a statement as made by Governor Perry.
Governor Perry does not speak for me and he does not represent me as a Texan. Contrary to popular belief, not all Texans are right wing fanatics and ultra conservative. As a Texan, the Governor should know that it is legally impossible for Texas to secede from the United States. It is possible for the state to break up into four smaller states, but Texas is NOT leaving the Union. To make such a rabble-rousing remark does nothing but make the state look like a collection of right-wing extremist wack-jobs who like to talk tough and act mean. This kind of rhetoric reveals just how low the GOP has sunk with the loss of the last Presidential election. It also shows just how low Governor Perry is willing to go to draw attention and support as he prepares for his bid to win the Governorship again in 2010. Unfortunately, there are a lot of Texans who do agree with the Governor and who see fit to keep re-electing him and people who think like him. My hope is that this kind of senseless talk will result in people waking up and replacing the Governor with a sensible, intelligent person who is able to serve the common good of the people of the state without blind duty to partisan politics.
In case Mr. Perry and the anti-tax tea dumpers haven’t noticed, the work that the Obama administration and Congress is doing to correct the economy is starting to work as the stimulus money begins making it’s way into the system. For the first time in a very long time there are signs of hope and improvement in the economy and this is the best response that the GOP can come up with? Crying about taxes and the government spending too much money? Where were the pity parties when one trillion dollars was spent on the misguided and unnecessary war in Iraq? Didn’t hear anything about that one did you? If Governor Perry and the GOP insist on throwing temper tantrums to get attention, then please just go away. Try to make some constructive noise for a change and maybe somebody will listen and take you seriously.
(*My apologies to anyone offended by my frankness in the original article. I have attempted to tone the language down here to be less incendiary and insulting. While I can always respect those with differing views and opinions, and welcome debate and opportunities to explore both sides of an issue, I think that it is always important to differentiate between constructive criticisms and comments versus demagoguery fueled by political rabble-rousing. There is nothing logical or constructive about the latter and it does not fall into the same category. While I can appreciate the concern many have expressed over the recent stimulus bills and the extraordinary amount of monies invested into these programs, it is pretty easy to again argue the necessity of such actions given the crucial and fragile condition of the US economy.)
GOP Wrong About Government Spending
27-Mar-09 09:37 AM
An interesting story appeared on NPR today regarding the new Obama administration budget and the Republican response that has been generated. The full article can be read here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102410826
Here are some excerpts from the article that I would like to comment on:
“While President Obama's proposed budget rolls through the House and Senate, Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan is one of the key lawmakers putting together an alternative plan.
As the top Republican on the House Budget Committee, he will be the one to deliver that plan to the House floor next week. On Thursday, House Republicans released an 18-page pamphlet, "The Republican Road to Recovery," which outlines their break with the president's budget goals.
"We don't think it's right to impose a $1.9 trillion tax increase on our economy during a recession, so we're not going to raise taxes," Ryan tells NPR's Renee Montagne. "No. 2, we don't think it's right to have a huge slew of borrowing — they're doubling our national debt in five and half years, tripling it in just over 10 years. So we think we need to focus on controlling spending and reforming government...
Ryan has referred to the budget plan as "the third and great final wave of government expansion, building on the Great Society and the New Deal." He says there's "probably truth" to the idea that some Americans might think comparisons to the New Deal are good thing — "because that's what President Obama is saying about his budget — that's what the administration is saying is that this is the most sweeping and transformative budget since the New Deal. They probably believe that that's what people want."
But Ryan says unemployment during the New Deal ranged from 12 to 25 percent. "Henry Morgenthau, FDR's Treasury secretary, came to the Ways and Means Committee at the end of that period and said, 'This was a disaster.' It didn't work. We borrowed so much money; we ran up the debt. We didn't get out of the Depression until World War II came along."...”
First of all, I commend the Republican Congressman for at least taking the time to come up with a proposal for consideration as opposed to just objecting and not offering anything in return. This is how government is supposed to work. We can all agree that we don't always agree, but if you are going to be in opposition to the majority then offer a viable plan that offers a different solution. The majority must also be willing to allow the minority to speak and to hear their ideas. If they do not, then that is just as bad.
That said, however, the information Mr. Ryan presents regarding the Great Depression is not completely accurate. Based upon my own research of the subject here is what I've learned.
Unemployment hit a high of 25% before the New Deal was implemented by the FDR administration. Looking at the historical economic data of the period, right after the implementation of the New Deal, unemployment rates began to fall and the Gross National Product of the Country immediately went from a steep downward trend to spiking upward. Unemployment was reduced down to around 12%, or was cut in half. While 12% is still very high, how can anyone say that cutting unemployment in half is not successful? How can growth in GDP not be considered successful? Unemployment leveled up to around 12% at the start of World War II and by the end of the war the country was out of the depression and unemployment was around 3%.
I always laugh when I hear fiscal conservatives like Ryan dismiss the idea of the government spending money during hard economic times as "not necessary" and that it "doesn't work" and then proceed to try and use the example of the New Deal program and the start of the war as proof. Both instances prove the exact opposite. Whether you are talking about the New Deal program or whether you are talking about the onset of World War II, the net result of both of these events was INCREASED government spending and that's what ended the depression. Whether the government is spending money building dams, roads or buildings to put people to work, or whether they are building tanks, airplanes and munitions and training millions of soldiers to fight a war, is completely irrelevant; it is still government spending and that is what ended the Great Depression. So, there is absolutely no logic to the argument to say the New Deal didn't end the depression - World War II did. What's the difference?
Also, most economists agree that the New Deal would've been even more successful if not for one interesting point. FDR's treasury secretary would not allow the funding for the New Deal programs in the regular budget. Instead, the spending came out of an emergency spending budget and during the entire implementation of the New Deal the FDR administration was attempting to also balance the budget at the behest of the Treasury Secretary. Instead of focusing 100% on the current need, others were forcing pressure that helped negate some of the effects of the programs. Morgenthau was opposed to the New Deal from the very beginning and so it is not surprising that he would say negative things about it, even in the light of the economic data that showed something entirely different. Had Morgenthau not been involved, it is possible the New Deal might have ended the Depression before the start of the war.
For Ryan and the GOP to stand up now and oppose the idea of raising much needed revenues by modest tax increases on the wealthiest people in the country is beyond reasonable and is irresponsible. The fact is, regardless of your politics, it was the government that came to the rescue to save our stock market from this current financial meltdown. It will be the strength of our government that will continue to help pull us out and it will be the strength of our government that will formulate the much needed regulatory checks and balances to keep things in sync. We must reject as false the ideology that the markets can regulate themselves and that the government should be continually reduced and downsized. This has been the GOP plan all along and is the primary basis of their continued insistence of permanent tax cuts and the gutting of our regulatory systems. Given the current wars, the continued financial involvement needed due to the corruption on Wall Street, and the immediate need for health care reform (data now shows that 4 in 5 people without health care insurance either have jobs or in families who have jobs - yet they are still uninsured), the idea of asking the wealthiest among us to contribute more to the common good for the country and to their fellow citizen is not asking too much. People will still be wealthy and very well off even after the modest tax increases. No matter what alternative plan the GOP comes up with, I doubt that it can muster the necessary resources needed to keep this ship afloat. I think we can all agree that some spending will have to be curtailed, but we must also wake up and realize that additional monies will also need to be raised. Those are the harsh realities we need to come to understand. It is time to leave strict ideologies behind and to embrace pragmatic solutions that will keep our country and it’s people strong.
Here are some excerpts from the article that I would like to comment on:
“While President Obama's proposed budget rolls through the House and Senate, Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan is one of the key lawmakers putting together an alternative plan.
As the top Republican on the House Budget Committee, he will be the one to deliver that plan to the House floor next week. On Thursday, House Republicans released an 18-page pamphlet, "The Republican Road to Recovery," which outlines their break with the president's budget goals.
"We don't think it's right to impose a $1.9 trillion tax increase on our economy during a recession, so we're not going to raise taxes," Ryan tells NPR's Renee Montagne. "No. 2, we don't think it's right to have a huge slew of borrowing — they're doubling our national debt in five and half years, tripling it in just over 10 years. So we think we need to focus on controlling spending and reforming government...
Ryan has referred to the budget plan as "the third and great final wave of government expansion, building on the Great Society and the New Deal." He says there's "probably truth" to the idea that some Americans might think comparisons to the New Deal are good thing — "because that's what President Obama is saying about his budget — that's what the administration is saying is that this is the most sweeping and transformative budget since the New Deal. They probably believe that that's what people want."
But Ryan says unemployment during the New Deal ranged from 12 to 25 percent. "Henry Morgenthau, FDR's Treasury secretary, came to the Ways and Means Committee at the end of that period and said, 'This was a disaster.' It didn't work. We borrowed so much money; we ran up the debt. We didn't get out of the Depression until World War II came along."...”
First of all, I commend the Republican Congressman for at least taking the time to come up with a proposal for consideration as opposed to just objecting and not offering anything in return. This is how government is supposed to work. We can all agree that we don't always agree, but if you are going to be in opposition to the majority then offer a viable plan that offers a different solution. The majority must also be willing to allow the minority to speak and to hear their ideas. If they do not, then that is just as bad.
That said, however, the information Mr. Ryan presents regarding the Great Depression is not completely accurate. Based upon my own research of the subject here is what I've learned.
Unemployment hit a high of 25% before the New Deal was implemented by the FDR administration. Looking at the historical economic data of the period, right after the implementation of the New Deal, unemployment rates began to fall and the Gross National Product of the Country immediately went from a steep downward trend to spiking upward. Unemployment was reduced down to around 12%, or was cut in half. While 12% is still very high, how can anyone say that cutting unemployment in half is not successful? How can growth in GDP not be considered successful? Unemployment leveled up to around 12% at the start of World War II and by the end of the war the country was out of the depression and unemployment was around 3%.
I always laugh when I hear fiscal conservatives like Ryan dismiss the idea of the government spending money during hard economic times as "not necessary" and that it "doesn't work" and then proceed to try and use the example of the New Deal program and the start of the war as proof. Both instances prove the exact opposite. Whether you are talking about the New Deal program or whether you are talking about the onset of World War II, the net result of both of these events was INCREASED government spending and that's what ended the depression. Whether the government is spending money building dams, roads or buildings to put people to work, or whether they are building tanks, airplanes and munitions and training millions of soldiers to fight a war, is completely irrelevant; it is still government spending and that is what ended the Great Depression. So, there is absolutely no logic to the argument to say the New Deal didn't end the depression - World War II did. What's the difference?
Also, most economists agree that the New Deal would've been even more successful if not for one interesting point. FDR's treasury secretary would not allow the funding for the New Deal programs in the regular budget. Instead, the spending came out of an emergency spending budget and during the entire implementation of the New Deal the FDR administration was attempting to also balance the budget at the behest of the Treasury Secretary. Instead of focusing 100% on the current need, others were forcing pressure that helped negate some of the effects of the programs. Morgenthau was opposed to the New Deal from the very beginning and so it is not surprising that he would say negative things about it, even in the light of the economic data that showed something entirely different. Had Morgenthau not been involved, it is possible the New Deal might have ended the Depression before the start of the war.
For Ryan and the GOP to stand up now and oppose the idea of raising much needed revenues by modest tax increases on the wealthiest people in the country is beyond reasonable and is irresponsible. The fact is, regardless of your politics, it was the government that came to the rescue to save our stock market from this current financial meltdown. It will be the strength of our government that will continue to help pull us out and it will be the strength of our government that will formulate the much needed regulatory checks and balances to keep things in sync. We must reject as false the ideology that the markets can regulate themselves and that the government should be continually reduced and downsized. This has been the GOP plan all along and is the primary basis of their continued insistence of permanent tax cuts and the gutting of our regulatory systems. Given the current wars, the continued financial involvement needed due to the corruption on Wall Street, and the immediate need for health care reform (data now shows that 4 in 5 people without health care insurance either have jobs or in families who have jobs - yet they are still uninsured), the idea of asking the wealthiest among us to contribute more to the common good for the country and to their fellow citizen is not asking too much. People will still be wealthy and very well off even after the modest tax increases. No matter what alternative plan the GOP comes up with, I doubt that it can muster the necessary resources needed to keep this ship afloat. I think we can all agree that some spending will have to be curtailed, but we must also wake up and realize that additional monies will also need to be raised. Those are the harsh realities we need to come to understand. It is time to leave strict ideologies behind and to embrace pragmatic solutions that will keep our country and it’s people strong.
My Letter To President Obama
15-Mar-09 09:10 PM
As many of you will know, AIG announced this weekend that they were going to go ahead and payout hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds as bonuses to some of their employees. They are doing this in-spite of the tremendous outcry from the public and their demands that these bonuses not be paid. AIG has chosen to ignore the will of the people who have given this money and are continuing ahead with no regard to the outcry against this behavior. As a result, I have written to President Obama urging him to take whatever actions he may legally take to curtail this abuse of tax payer money. I encourage each of you to do the same. If you are currently doing business with AIG I would encourage you to cancel your business dealings with them. America should completely boycott this greedy, unethical and immoral corporation until it bleeds to death. We should also demand full repayment of ALL of the federal bail out money to be paid back to the US government where the money can be used to help those who are in desperate need of help. Please, do your part - this is important. You can write to President Obama at this link.
-----------------------
President Obama:
I am writing to express my complete disgust and disapproval of how AIG is continuing with their plans to use the federal bailout money to pay their nefarious bonuses. I will keep this very brief and to the point. This angers me greatly and I fully expect you and Congress to do everything within your power to stop this misuse of our tax dollars. We are not idiots and we know that the funds that were given out were for the primary purpose of keeping people employed and getting the markets functioning again.
There is no way I can believe for a second the stories being proffered by AIG as the justification for this breach of trust. These are extraordinarily difficult times for millions of Americans who are struggling to survive. It is inexcusable and unconscionable for this kind of activity to be happening in front of our very eyes; not to mention what may be happening behind closed doors and unreported. Please, Mr. President, address this issue openly and publicly and do anything within your power to stop this abuse and misuse of the public funds that were given in good faith, but which are now being recklessly abused.
The change we seek will not be born easily and will not be wrested from the hands who desperately cling to the manacles of corruption. I am but one voice but I speak for tens of thousands who agree with me - please do what you can and please continue to address this issue with all other corporations and businesses who would seek to destroy the good will and the prosperity of the American people. Thank you for your time and thank you for having the courage and the decency to call these unethical actions shameful and wrong.
With all my support.
-TD3k
-----------------------
President Obama:
I am writing to express my complete disgust and disapproval of how AIG is continuing with their plans to use the federal bailout money to pay their nefarious bonuses. I will keep this very brief and to the point. This angers me greatly and I fully expect you and Congress to do everything within your power to stop this misuse of our tax dollars. We are not idiots and we know that the funds that were given out were for the primary purpose of keeping people employed and getting the markets functioning again.
There is no way I can believe for a second the stories being proffered by AIG as the justification for this breach of trust. These are extraordinarily difficult times for millions of Americans who are struggling to survive. It is inexcusable and unconscionable for this kind of activity to be happening in front of our very eyes; not to mention what may be happening behind closed doors and unreported. Please, Mr. President, address this issue openly and publicly and do anything within your power to stop this abuse and misuse of the public funds that were given in good faith, but which are now being recklessly abused.
The change we seek will not be born easily and will not be wrested from the hands who desperately cling to the manacles of corruption. I am but one voice but I speak for tens of thousands who agree with me - please do what you can and please continue to address this issue with all other corporations and businesses who would seek to destroy the good will and the prosperity of the American people. Thank you for your time and thank you for having the courage and the decency to call these unethical actions shameful and wrong.
With all my support.
-TD3k
Letter To The Texas Governor
13-Mar-09 01:06 AM
Texas Governor Rick Perry announced on Thursday, March 12, 2009 that he would reject $555 million in federal stimulus money that would go to assist Texans who are unemployed and who had reached the end of their unemployment coverage. Perry said that such a move would require him to raise taxes on businesses to provide for additional funds when the stimulus money ran out. Perry is an outspoken critic of President Obama's economic recovery plan for the country and many feel that this move has more to do with political posturing than with any real threats posed to businesses. As I enter into my 17th week of unemployment, I was compelled to send an e-mail letter to Mr. Perry to share my thoughts with him and I now share with you. If you live in Texas and are as mad as I am, I encourage you to let your voice be heard. You can contact the Governor's office and leave your comments here.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Gov. Perry:
I deeply condemn your unconscionable decision to reject the $555 million in federal stimulus money to help Texans with unemployment coverage. At such an extraordinarily difficult time for thousands of Texans who are struggling to deal with the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression, you have clearly shown that your interest in helping those who need assistance is secondary to your desire to score political points with your party and your narrow social conservative views. While I am sure you feel quite justified in your decision, I can tell you that the majority of Texans will disapprove of your selfish, uncaring actions. Given the fact that the TWC faces deficits as early as October and then possible insolvency, it is unethical and immoral for you to ignore such a pressing need for the sake of political expediency on your part. While you are trying to protect businesses from any additional expenditures, you seem to forget that the businesses have already protected themselves by letting their employees go and now no one is looking out for the working man. How convenient that the corporations and big businesses have such a champion as you to hold their hand and protect them from the threat of evil taxes. Quite honestly sir, you have no soul and no capacity for honest reasoning. Please, hear the appeal of the people and change course on this decision while you still can.
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
Gov. Perry:
I deeply condemn your unconscionable decision to reject the $555 million in federal stimulus money to help Texans with unemployment coverage. At such an extraordinarily difficult time for thousands of Texans who are struggling to deal with the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression, you have clearly shown that your interest in helping those who need assistance is secondary to your desire to score political points with your party and your narrow social conservative views. While I am sure you feel quite justified in your decision, I can tell you that the majority of Texans will disapprove of your selfish, uncaring actions. Given the fact that the TWC faces deficits as early as October and then possible insolvency, it is unethical and immoral for you to ignore such a pressing need for the sake of political expediency on your part. While you are trying to protect businesses from any additional expenditures, you seem to forget that the businesses have already protected themselves by letting their employees go and now no one is looking out for the working man. How convenient that the corporations and big businesses have such a champion as you to hold their hand and protect them from the threat of evil taxes. Quite honestly sir, you have no soul and no capacity for honest reasoning. Please, hear the appeal of the people and change course on this decision while you still can.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Americans United Action List
29-Jan-09 10:57 AM
The lists of issues facing our nation and the new Obama administration are staggering. The country is faced with many pressing challenges and problems that need immediate attention. Many of these issues are the direct result of 8 years of Bush administration policies and programs that need to be re-examined and checked in accordance with our Constitution. The economy is of primary importance, but lest we forget, there are other important issues that need addressing. The following list is taken directly from the Americans United For the Separation of Church and State website, and represents the top 9 religious freedom objectives that President Obama should consider for immediate action. Here is the list:
----------------------------
As Barack Obama assumes the presidency, Americans United for Separation of Church and State has prepared a list of nine religious liberty issues that merit special attention from the White House. Called “9 in ’09,” this campaign seeks to repair the damage that occurred to the wall of separation between church and state during the Bush administration.
Americans United calls on President Obama to make this list a priority.
1. Restrict Faith-Based Funding: The Bush administration’s dangerous executive orders promoting the “faith-based” initiative should be overridden. Religious organizations should not be singled out for special government treatment and generous tax subsidies.
2. Ban Faith-Based Job Bias: An executive order should be issued barring religiously based job bias in all publicly funded programs. Not one dime in tax funds should go to “faith-based” organizations that discriminate in hiring.
3. Select Good Judges: Give America judges who support the Bill of Rights, including its church-state separation provision. Our country deserves federal judges who will respect, not eviscerate, the First Amendment.
4. Reform Justice Department: America must have a Justice Department that understands its duty to uphold constitutional rights, not one that parrots the views of extreme Religious Right legal groups.
5. Stop School Vouchers: Cease all federal tax funding for misguided school voucher “experiments” in Washington, D.C., (or anywhere else) that subsidize religious and other private schools.
6. Protect Military Personnel: Sever the tie between fundamentalist groups and the military. The United States must have a military that doesn’t take a stand on theological issues and that does not pressure its service personnel to adopt religious beliefs.
7. Defend Sound Science: Base public policy on science, not theology. Public policy on issues such as stem-cell research and education about human origins must be based on science, not religious dogma.
8. Resist Church Politicking: Oppose attempts to overturn the federal ban on church politicking. No tax-exempt house of worship should be permitted to engage in partisan politicking by endorsing or opposing candidates for public office.
9. Oppose Sectarian Symbolism: Use the presidential bully pulpit to oppose sectarian resolutions in Congress. We must see an end to polarizing resolutions by Congress that promote one faith over others, thus sending the message that some Americans are second-class citizens.
Support AU Efforts Like This - Donate Today!
----------------------------
As Barack Obama assumes the presidency, Americans United for Separation of Church and State has prepared a list of nine religious liberty issues that merit special attention from the White House. Called “9 in ’09,” this campaign seeks to repair the damage that occurred to the wall of separation between church and state during the Bush administration.
Americans United calls on President Obama to make this list a priority.
1. Restrict Faith-Based Funding: The Bush administration’s dangerous executive orders promoting the “faith-based” initiative should be overridden. Religious organizations should not be singled out for special government treatment and generous tax subsidies.
2. Ban Faith-Based Job Bias: An executive order should be issued barring religiously based job bias in all publicly funded programs. Not one dime in tax funds should go to “faith-based” organizations that discriminate in hiring.
3. Select Good Judges: Give America judges who support the Bill of Rights, including its church-state separation provision. Our country deserves federal judges who will respect, not eviscerate, the First Amendment.
4. Reform Justice Department: America must have a Justice Department that understands its duty to uphold constitutional rights, not one that parrots the views of extreme Religious Right legal groups.
5. Stop School Vouchers: Cease all federal tax funding for misguided school voucher “experiments” in Washington, D.C., (or anywhere else) that subsidize religious and other private schools.
6. Protect Military Personnel: Sever the tie between fundamentalist groups and the military. The United States must have a military that doesn’t take a stand on theological issues and that does not pressure its service personnel to adopt religious beliefs.
7. Defend Sound Science: Base public policy on science, not theology. Public policy on issues such as stem-cell research and education about human origins must be based on science, not religious dogma.
8. Resist Church Politicking: Oppose attempts to overturn the federal ban on church politicking. No tax-exempt house of worship should be permitted to engage in partisan politicking by endorsing or opposing candidates for public office.
9. Oppose Sectarian Symbolism: Use the presidential bully pulpit to oppose sectarian resolutions in Congress. We must see an end to polarizing resolutions by Congress that promote one faith over others, thus sending the message that some Americans are second-class citizens.
Support AU Efforts Like This - Donate Today!
Barack Obama's Inaugural Address
20-Jan-09 01:56 PM
-----------------
"My fellow citizens: I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors.
I thank President Bush for his service to our nation..... as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.
Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents.
So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.
That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age.
Homes have been lost, jobs shed, businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly, our schools fail too many, and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.
These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable, but no less profound, is a sapping of confidence across our land; a nagging fear that America's decline is inevitable, that the next generation must lower its sights.
Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real, they are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this America: They will be met.
On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.
On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics.
We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.
In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of shortcuts or settling for less.
It has not been the path for the faint-hearted, for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame.
Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things -- some celebrated, but more often men and women obscure in their labor -- who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.
For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life. For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West, endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth.
For us, they fought and died in places Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sahn.
Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction.
This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions -- that time has surely passed.
Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.
For everywhere we look, there is work to be done.
The state of our economy calls for action: bold and swift. And we will act not only to create new jobs but to lay a new foundation for growth.
We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together.
We will restore science to its rightful place and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality.... and lower its costs.
We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age.
All this we can do. All this we will do.
Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions, who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short, for they have forgotten what this country has already done, what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose and necessity to courage.
What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long, no longer apply.
The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works, whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified.
Where the answer is "yes", we intend to move forward. Where the answer is "no", programs will end.
And those of us who manage the public's knowledge will be held to account, to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.
Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched.
But this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control. The nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous.
The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our gross domestic product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on the ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart -- not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.
As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals.
Our founding fathers faced with perils that we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations.
Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake.
And so, to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and we are ready to lead once more.
Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with the sturdy alliances and enduring convictions.
They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use. Our security emanates from the justness of our cause; the force of our example; the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.
We are the keepers of this legacy, guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort, even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We'll begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people and forge a hard- earned peace in Afghanistan.
With old friends and former foes, we'll work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat and roll back the specter of a warming planet.
We will not apologize for our way of life nor will we waver in its defense.
And for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that, "Our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken. You cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you."
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness.
We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, and nonbelievers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth.
And because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.
To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.
To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict or blame their society's ills on the West, know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy.
To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.
To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds.
And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to the suffering outside our borders, nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.
As we consider the road that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratitude those brave Americans who, at this very hour, patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us, just as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages.
We honor them not only because they are guardians of our liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service: a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves.
And yet, at this moment, a moment that will define a generation, it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all.
For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies.
It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break; the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours.
It is the firefighter's courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.
Our challenges may be new, the instruments with which we meet them may be new, but those values upon which our success depends, honesty and hard work, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism -- these things are old.
These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history.
What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility -- a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character than giving our all to a difficult task.
This is the price and the promise of citizenship.
This is the source of our confidence: the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.
This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed, why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent mall. And why a man whose father less than 60 years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.
So let us mark this day in remembrance of who we are and how far we have traveled.
In the year of America's birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by nine campfires on the shores of an icy river.
The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood.
At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people:
"Let it be told to the future world that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive, that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet it."
America, in the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words; with hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come; let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.
Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States of America."
8 Years Never Seemed So Long
15-Jan-09 08:53 PM
Tonight, President Bush bid farewell to the nation via a short televised appearance from the White House. It was a quintessential Bush moment, complete with the familiar smirk and smiles while talking about serious subjects while he attempted to play one last jedi mind trick on the nation with his paltry list of accomplishments while in office. In his now familiar attempt to remind the nation of 9/11 (in case we had forgotten), Bush began to list his achievements over the last 8 years. Noticeably glossing over the extraordinary bad economy and rough financial times that he is leaving the nation in, Bush at least was gracious in talking about his successor and his ever triumphant, up beat outlook for the future of the country.
He did acknowledge briefly the economic downturn and noted that all Americans were in this mess together. And while that is true enough, it's just that some of us are in over our eyebrows while others can still afford to buy two mansions in Dallas and maintain another large, sprawling ranch in central Texas. Hard to imagine how a person on a president's salary can afford so much, especially during such "tough" economic times. He went on to note other hallmarks of his administration by citing his mixing of federal tax monies with faith based organizations as a "good" thing that helps needy families. Thomas Jefferson and John Adams would be shocked and outraged to see such a program. Not that faith based charities are bad, for they are not bad - they do very good works; it is the mixing of federal tax monies with religious organizations that is the odiferous and constitutionally ignorant offense here. Bush seems completely oblivious to these facts and claims this gem proudly; always failing to see the uncomfortable and tenuous connections this places on a government that according to the constitution must remain neutral on the subject of religion.
Another one of particular interest that he specifically lay claim to were his achievements in reducing the advance of stem cell research to fight the prevention of deadly human disease. Of course he didn't word it that way, but merely made reference to the protection of the unborn saying that it is always evil to kill the innocent for any reason. Another policy that was clearly guided solely on religious principle without regard for any scientific or true humanitarian advancements for mankind. He then noted particular pleasure in having selected two ultra conservative judges to the supreme court as another important hallmark of his legacy. Thankfully Bush is leaving office before he could've nominated another conservative to the high bench that would've shifted the court in a disastrous keel to the right thereby setting up the potential unraveling of years and years of advances in civil liberties and freedoms for many millions of Americans. As long as you are middle class and higher, then you need not worry about such issues unless you have any sort of a social conscious about fairness and equality for all.
Any regular reader of this blog will know that I am not, nor ever have been a fan of Mr. Bush. I make no bones about it, I am glad to see him and his entire collection of cronies and crooks leave with him. I've been counting down the days on this blog marking his departure for a very long time now. My aversion to this president is not simply because of political affiliations, but because of his 8 year string of mind numbingly horrible and irrevocable decisions he has made while leading this country. That is not to say that he has never done anything good, or that he has never made a single good decision, because he has on a few selected subjects (i.e. support for stopping the spread of AIDS in Africa, etc). But let’s just say that the bad decisions, errors and mistakes, far outweigh any good he may have done. And that is how history will remember this president I am quite certain.
Goodbye 2008
31-Dec-08 05:15 PM
As 2008 comes to a thankful close, it is good to stop and recap the more memorable events of the year. “Good” is a relative term when speaking of 2008 as very few good things occurred during the year. if you are the type that counts “still breathing” and “wearing pants that have been washed within at least the past 3 days” as “good” then you might not consider that 2008 was really all that bad. Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinion but from my view point it was a rough year. Not just for me in particular - but for a lot of people. Besides, my pants were put on fresh this morning but that doesn’t change the verdict on 2008.
Simply put, 2008 was a doozy. No, actually it was a blood letting. Some made it all the way through and retained both their jobs and their home and for that you can truly be thankful. Others are not so lucky. Many millions have lost their jobs and many millions have lost their homes - and many have also lost both. It seems that as the year progressed things got progressively worse; especially here at home. Even though it’s not particularly pleasant, here is a brief recap of the events of 2008 by month. Click on the links of each month for greater detail and even more events that occurred during that month. This is just to put the year in perspective; I intend to look forward to 2009 and the uncertain promises that it holds. 2009 could continue the trend for awhile yet - but here’s hoping for better and happier times ahead.
January
U.S. Attorney General Opens Investigation into Destroyed Tapes (Jan. 2)
California Sues EPA (Jan. 2)
Markets Plunge Around the World (Jan. 21)
February
Economy Loses Jobs for the First Time in 52 Months (Feb. 1)
Senate Votes to Ban Severe Interrogation Techniques (Feb. 13)
Castro Resigns as President of Cuba (Feb. 19)
March
Bush Vetoes Bill That Would Ban Severe Interrogation Techniques (March 8)
Government Intervenes to Avert Financial Crises (March 11)
Bush Acknowledges Toll of War on Anniversary of War (March 19)
April
Senate Passes Housing Relief Bill (April 10)
Dozens Are Killed in Suicide Attacks in Iraq (April 15)
Pope Denounces Pedophile Priests (April 15)
May
State Department Renews Deal with Controversial Contractor (May 9)
Polar Bear Designated as Threatened (May 14)
California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Gay Marriage (May 15)
June
Five-Year Inquiry Finds Bush Exaggerated Evidence on Iraq (June 5)
Unemployment Rate Spikes To 5.5% (June 6)
North Korea Takes Steps Toward Denuclearization (June 26)
July
Treasury Department Proposes Rescue Plan for Mortgage Companies (July 13)
U.S. Envoy Participates in Talks with Iran (July 19)
Judge Rules that Bush's Advisers Must Comply with Subpoenas (July 31)
August
The Summer Games Open with a Spectacular Ceremony and Tragedy (Aug. 8)
Al-Qaeda Increases Its Strength and Threat (Aug.12 )
McCain Chooses Outsider as Running Mate (Aug. 29)
September
Report Finds That Former Attorney General Mishandled Sensitive Documents (Sept. 2)
Unemployment Rate Reaches Highest Level in Five Years at 6.1% (Sept. 5)
U.S. Financial Markets Roiled by Turmoil (Sept. 7)
Russia Agrees to Withdraw from Georgia (Sept. 8)
October
Connecticut Legalizes Gay Marriage (Oct. 10)
Investigation Concludes That Palin Abused Power (Oct. 10)
Bush Administration Memorandum Asserts Federal Money Can Fund Groups That Discriminate Based on Faith (Oct. 18)
Economy Shrinks for First Time in Years (Oct. 30)
November
Barack Obama Is Elected President (Nov. 4)
California Votes to Outlaw Same-Sex Marriage (Nov. 4)
Economy Stumbles Further (Nov. 7)
China Announces Enormous Stimulus Package (Nov. 9)
Stock Market Tumbles Again (Nov. 19)
December
Dow Plunges Amid Report That Economy Is in Recession (Dec. 1)
Unemployment Rate Increases Again to 6.7% (Dec. 5)
Journalist Throws Shoes at Bush (Dec. 14)
Bush Unveils $17.4 Billion Rescue of Auto Industry (Dec. 19)
Simply put, 2008 was a doozy. No, actually it was a blood letting. Some made it all the way through and retained both their jobs and their home and for that you can truly be thankful. Others are not so lucky. Many millions have lost their jobs and many millions have lost their homes - and many have also lost both. It seems that as the year progressed things got progressively worse; especially here at home. Even though it’s not particularly pleasant, here is a brief recap of the events of 2008 by month. Click on the links of each month for greater detail and even more events that occurred during that month. This is just to put the year in perspective; I intend to look forward to 2009 and the uncertain promises that it holds. 2009 could continue the trend for awhile yet - but here’s hoping for better and happier times ahead.
January
U.S. Attorney General Opens Investigation into Destroyed Tapes (Jan. 2)
California Sues EPA (Jan. 2)
Markets Plunge Around the World (Jan. 21)
February
Economy Loses Jobs for the First Time in 52 Months (Feb. 1)
Senate Votes to Ban Severe Interrogation Techniques (Feb. 13)
Castro Resigns as President of Cuba (Feb. 19)
March
Bush Vetoes Bill That Would Ban Severe Interrogation Techniques (March 8)
Government Intervenes to Avert Financial Crises (March 11)
Bush Acknowledges Toll of War on Anniversary of War (March 19)
April
Senate Passes Housing Relief Bill (April 10)
Dozens Are Killed in Suicide Attacks in Iraq (April 15)
Pope Denounces Pedophile Priests (April 15)
May
State Department Renews Deal with Controversial Contractor (May 9)
Polar Bear Designated as Threatened (May 14)
California Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Gay Marriage (May 15)
June
Five-Year Inquiry Finds Bush Exaggerated Evidence on Iraq (June 5)
Unemployment Rate Spikes To 5.5% (June 6)
North Korea Takes Steps Toward Denuclearization (June 26)
July
Treasury Department Proposes Rescue Plan for Mortgage Companies (July 13)
U.S. Envoy Participates in Talks with Iran (July 19)
Judge Rules that Bush's Advisers Must Comply with Subpoenas (July 31)
August
The Summer Games Open with a Spectacular Ceremony and Tragedy (Aug. 8)
Al-Qaeda Increases Its Strength and Threat (Aug.12 )
McCain Chooses Outsider as Running Mate (Aug. 29)
September
Report Finds That Former Attorney General Mishandled Sensitive Documents (Sept. 2)
Unemployment Rate Reaches Highest Level in Five Years at 6.1% (Sept. 5)
U.S. Financial Markets Roiled by Turmoil (Sept. 7)
Russia Agrees to Withdraw from Georgia (Sept. 8)
October
Connecticut Legalizes Gay Marriage (Oct. 10)
Investigation Concludes That Palin Abused Power (Oct. 10)
Bush Administration Memorandum Asserts Federal Money Can Fund Groups That Discriminate Based on Faith (Oct. 18)
Economy Shrinks for First Time in Years (Oct. 30)
November
Barack Obama Is Elected President (Nov. 4)
California Votes to Outlaw Same-Sex Marriage (Nov. 4)
Economy Stumbles Further (Nov. 7)
China Announces Enormous Stimulus Package (Nov. 9)
Stock Market Tumbles Again (Nov. 19)
December
Dow Plunges Amid Report That Economy Is in Recession (Dec. 1)
Unemployment Rate Increases Again to 6.7% (Dec. 5)
Journalist Throws Shoes at Bush (Dec. 14)
Bush Unveils $17.4 Billion Rescue of Auto Industry (Dec. 19)
Prop 8 The Musical
07-Dec-08 12:10 PM
The battle continues even after the voter approval of Proposition 8 in California. I predict that ultimately this referendum will be overturned by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. I would say the vast majority of those who have argued in favor of Proposition 8 have done so mostly on religious beliefs. The problem, however, is that by holding referendums like this on issues that deal with basic rights and freedoms of individuals, and then overturning those rights primarily because of religious view points held by the voting majority; the outcome is an unfair influence on governmental policy which is supposed to treat all people the same and with equality. How many other controversial, basic rights issues could possibly be overturned or reversed if we allowed each of them shortly after they were passed to go before referendum votes and let the voters decide their fate? It is doubtful if slavery, interracial marriages, or voting rights for women would’ve ever been allowed to endure if it had been left up to the voters to decide. Each of the issues just listed were very unpopular issues with the majority of people at the time they were passed, yet through the passage of time these controversial issues were eventually accepted by the majority of the people as the right choice. Today it would be inconceivable for someone to stand up and advocate the reversal of any of those issues because they are now considered “basic” rights.
Prop 8 The Musical is a very short production written by Marc Shaiman and featuring some big name actors like Jack Black and John C. Reilly. Neither of these actors are gay themselves, but lend their talents here in support of the overthrow of Proposition 8 because they believe it is unconstitutional and unfair to gay couples. In an interview on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, both Black, Reilly, and Shaiman appear to discuss the musical and why they did it.
Prop 8 The Musical is a very short production written by Marc Shaiman and featuring some big name actors like Jack Black and John C. Reilly. Neither of these actors are gay themselves, but lend their talents here in support of the overthrow of Proposition 8 because they believe it is unconstitutional and unfair to gay couples. In an interview on Countdown with Keith Olbermann, both Black, Reilly, and Shaiman appear to discuss the musical and why they did it.
See more Jack Black videos at Funny or Die
It Happened Again
23-Nov-08 11:05 AM
On Monday, November 17, 2008 I fell victim once again to the reckless mismanagement of a business and the national economy, and I lost my job. I lost my previous job less than a year earlier on December 7, 2007 which was due primarily to extremely bad business decisions by the CEO and upper management of the company, basically forcing it into near bankruptcy. Prior to this, I have been gainfully employed full time since my first layoff which occurred back on April 30, 2000.
This layoff was not a surprise; it was not unanticipated and even though I was told repeatedly by my superiors that everything was good and there was nothing to worry about, I knew deep inside that things were not alright. I’d been down this road before and I knew better. Several weeks back I began networking through my various contacts to get a “feel” for what was out in the job market and what opportunities might be available. Up until this year, I always had a favorable response - a glimmer of hope - the good news that somebody was always looking for help: not this time. Every report I got back from my various sources in different regional locations were exactly the same - there is nothing out there - nobody is hiring - hang on to your job if you can because it appears things are only going to get worse - bleak news indeed.
So, I resigned myself to the idea of holding on and hoping for the best and thinking that because I was at least employeed with a large firm with multiple offices and projects all over the world, they would be best suited to keep me employed during these dark financial times that are now upon us. I was wrong. As I’ve always known and as has always been my experience, businesses in our great capitalistic empire of America are not concerned with the well being of their employees; they are only concerned about making money and profit. If you are not making money for a business then you will be terminated -- end of story. So, when the news was delivered, I was not surprised but I was scared. The future looks very bleak and for the first time ever, I don’t see the bottom nor any good place to land. I am free falling in the abyss of unemployment, hoping when I find the bottom it will be soft and easy and not hard and rough.
Even still, in spite of all of this, I remain hopeful. I am not depressed. I am not tormented. It is all I can do to control the anger and contempt I feel for those in charge who’ve allowed this plague upon us - but that will not bring the jobs back now. I am resigned to doing some things professionally which I had been needing to do for a long time which will hopefully help me to further advance my career into the future. I am also even looking at other possible ventures and explorations into completely different fields of work - using this opportunity as my escape route out and the possible passage to a new exciting work experience. And, I have also thought about starting my own business. I have not made any firm decisions yet. My wife and I have been able to save up some funds and we will be OK for the immediate future. This is why I am not to stressed out. My greatest concern, of course, is my health insurance which I simply must have to survive. I am diabetic and my medical supplies are very expensive. A three month supply of insulin costs $1,300 if I had to pay for it out of my pocket. That’s just for the insulin and does not even begin to cover the other costs of insulin pump supplies and other medications that I need. This is why I am not in favor of health insurances being tied to a job. If I lose my job, no fault of my own, then I also lose my health coverage and am put financially at risk of losing everything I own so I can simply live.
That is not the way America should be - we can do much better and I believe we will now that we have new leadership waiting in the wings. I could be wrong about the incoming administration, I am fully aware of that. But, at least I am in agreement with the proposed policies and ideals that they championed during the campaign. I certainly hope they will hold the course and remain true to those ideals and not forget them. Compromise will be needed for the major hurdles and challenges facing the country and I am all for compromise if it means getting issues and problems resolved. The incessant fighting and bickering must stop and it can only stop when those who are in charge lead by example and provide the opportunities necessary for the rest of the nation to follow in like mind and step. We will see very soon.
Future posts may be sporadic and long in appearing as I focus on the tasks at hand. To all of those who have already lost their jobs - find something to grab on to and hold on. To those who have not yet lost their jobs but will in the near future - wake up and prepare yourself as best you can for what’s coming. Don’t believe the lies and false hopes of those who would mislead you into a false sense of security. And to everyone else, let’s all be thankful for what we do have and be mindful to help those around us who are going to need help in the difficult days ahead.
This layoff was not a surprise; it was not unanticipated and even though I was told repeatedly by my superiors that everything was good and there was nothing to worry about, I knew deep inside that things were not alright. I’d been down this road before and I knew better. Several weeks back I began networking through my various contacts to get a “feel” for what was out in the job market and what opportunities might be available. Up until this year, I always had a favorable response - a glimmer of hope - the good news that somebody was always looking for help: not this time. Every report I got back from my various sources in different regional locations were exactly the same - there is nothing out there - nobody is hiring - hang on to your job if you can because it appears things are only going to get worse - bleak news indeed.
So, I resigned myself to the idea of holding on and hoping for the best and thinking that because I was at least employeed with a large firm with multiple offices and projects all over the world, they would be best suited to keep me employed during these dark financial times that are now upon us. I was wrong. As I’ve always known and as has always been my experience, businesses in our great capitalistic empire of America are not concerned with the well being of their employees; they are only concerned about making money and profit. If you are not making money for a business then you will be terminated -- end of story. So, when the news was delivered, I was not surprised but I was scared. The future looks very bleak and for the first time ever, I don’t see the bottom nor any good place to land. I am free falling in the abyss of unemployment, hoping when I find the bottom it will be soft and easy and not hard and rough.
Even still, in spite of all of this, I remain hopeful. I am not depressed. I am not tormented. It is all I can do to control the anger and contempt I feel for those in charge who’ve allowed this plague upon us - but that will not bring the jobs back now. I am resigned to doing some things professionally which I had been needing to do for a long time which will hopefully help me to further advance my career into the future. I am also even looking at other possible ventures and explorations into completely different fields of work - using this opportunity as my escape route out and the possible passage to a new exciting work experience. And, I have also thought about starting my own business. I have not made any firm decisions yet. My wife and I have been able to save up some funds and we will be OK for the immediate future. This is why I am not to stressed out. My greatest concern, of course, is my health insurance which I simply must have to survive. I am diabetic and my medical supplies are very expensive. A three month supply of insulin costs $1,300 if I had to pay for it out of my pocket. That’s just for the insulin and does not even begin to cover the other costs of insulin pump supplies and other medications that I need. This is why I am not in favor of health insurances being tied to a job. If I lose my job, no fault of my own, then I also lose my health coverage and am put financially at risk of losing everything I own so I can simply live.
That is not the way America should be - we can do much better and I believe we will now that we have new leadership waiting in the wings. I could be wrong about the incoming administration, I am fully aware of that. But, at least I am in agreement with the proposed policies and ideals that they championed during the campaign. I certainly hope they will hold the course and remain true to those ideals and not forget them. Compromise will be needed for the major hurdles and challenges facing the country and I am all for compromise if it means getting issues and problems resolved. The incessant fighting and bickering must stop and it can only stop when those who are in charge lead by example and provide the opportunities necessary for the rest of the nation to follow in like mind and step. We will see very soon.
Future posts may be sporadic and long in appearing as I focus on the tasks at hand. To all of those who have already lost their jobs - find something to grab on to and hold on. To those who have not yet lost their jobs but will in the near future - wake up and prepare yourself as best you can for what’s coming. Don’t believe the lies and false hopes of those who would mislead you into a false sense of security. And to everyone else, let’s all be thankful for what we do have and be mindful to help those around us who are going to need help in the difficult days ahead.
Birthday Wishes From the Maker
31-Oct-08 12:36 AM
I received an unexpected message the other day from the Maker** to wish me a Happy Birthday and it was such a wittily crafted note, I thought it would be interesting to share with everyone. Here it is...
--------------------------
Well, I have very little in the way of a pithy yarn to spin about your origins [other than already in lore] but I did want to make sure that I celebrated* the day you became less 'conceptual' and more 'actual'. It's probably time I told you that I built you using an RBMK-1000 platform [you may have heard of it, it was big in the news back in '86 and, consequently, pretty cheap to get]. I know there used to be some safety protocols but I kinda lost them and they were in Russian anyway which is like a whole 'nuther language. Anyway, might not want to jump around... or stray too far from any large deposits of Boron and don't get stressed or anything... especially if people start bandying about with terms like "Level 7 International Nuclear event". Those people are just needlessly worrying you... well, not 'needlessly', more... 'legitimately'.
Look, the point is you have other things to worry about... like this box I found in my last move with a whole bunch of loose bolts, pop rivets and gaskets that were all labeled "The Dave 3000. Important!" I don't even want to think about where those were supposed to go.
Anyway! Enjoy your birthday, buddy. I hope you have a great time and life is going well... at least I hope your half-life is.
* - The way I plan on celebrating is by picking up the two handguns I purchased last week. They are awesome.
Brock Torso**
--------------------------
Well, I have very little in the way of a pithy yarn to spin about your origins [other than already in lore] but I did want to make sure that I celebrated* the day you became less 'conceptual' and more 'actual'. It's probably time I told you that I built you using an RBMK-1000 platform [you may have heard of it, it was big in the news back in '86 and, consequently, pretty cheap to get]. I know there used to be some safety protocols but I kinda lost them and they were in Russian anyway which is like a whole 'nuther language. Anyway, might not want to jump around... or stray too far from any large deposits of Boron and don't get stressed or anything... especially if people start bandying about with terms like "Level 7 International Nuclear event". Those people are just needlessly worrying you... well, not 'needlessly', more... 'legitimately'.
Look, the point is you have other things to worry about... like this box I found in my last move with a whole bunch of loose bolts, pop rivets and gaskets that were all labeled "The Dave 3000. Important!" I don't even want to think about where those were supposed to go.
Anyway! Enjoy your birthday, buddy. I hope you have a great time and life is going well... at least I hope your half-life is.
* - The way I plan on celebrating is by picking up the two handguns I purchased last week. They are awesome.
Brock Torso**
Early Voting
26-Oct-08 11:00 AM
The wife and I went and did early voting yesterday and we are both glad that is done. It sounds like voter turn out this year could be extremely high on November 4 making for long lines and possible delays. I voted in the democratic primaries earlier this year and there were long lines for that event which was very surprising. Right now work has me out of town quite a bit and it looks like I may be out of town on November 4, so early voting made a lot of sense for us this year.
At the sub courthouse where we voted the voting machines were computerized and were very easy to use. The directions were posted in english and spanish and it was very easy to navigate. We voted on Saturday evening and I estimated that they had approximately twenty voting booths and they were all full. So, even for early voting, there was a good turn out on a Saturday evening. Even so, we were in and out in about 15 minutes.
If you have not voted yet I encourage you to do so. And if you haven’t figured out who are you are voting for you don’t have much time to make up your mind. Suffice it to say, both sides have engaged in a bit of dirty pool and misleading statements. I highly recommend Fact Check dot Org for a good resource where you can find non-partisan reports on the statements made by both campaigns and a factual analysis of whether or not they are accurate or bogus. Both sides are guilty of misleading statements; some more so than others. After having checked this website as well as the Politifact website, it appears to me that McCain and Palin are in the lead by quite a bit when it comes to misleading statements, erroneous comments, and downright mistruths. Not surprising for a team that appears to be far behind in the polls and trying to gain ground by any means possible.
I do admire McCain, however, for correcting people at his rallies for making false statements and claims against Barack Obama. He wouldn’t have to be making these corrections if it had not been for the vast amounts of misinformation and lies that were put out into the public square in the first place by the republican political machine. Myths regarding Barack Obama have abounded by the republican juggernaut along with other statements of inaccuracies and misleading statements. On any given issue made by either party in this election, it is easy to go and check the facts for yourself and make up your own mind. Just make sure your fact checking is based on neutral reporting and not partisan sponsored websites. This has been a long election cycle and I am ready for it to be over.
At the sub courthouse where we voted the voting machines were computerized and were very easy to use. The directions were posted in english and spanish and it was very easy to navigate. We voted on Saturday evening and I estimated that they had approximately twenty voting booths and they were all full. So, even for early voting, there was a good turn out on a Saturday evening. Even so, we were in and out in about 15 minutes.
If you have not voted yet I encourage you to do so. And if you haven’t figured out who are you are voting for you don’t have much time to make up your mind. Suffice it to say, both sides have engaged in a bit of dirty pool and misleading statements. I highly recommend Fact Check dot Org for a good resource where you can find non-partisan reports on the statements made by both campaigns and a factual analysis of whether or not they are accurate or bogus. Both sides are guilty of misleading statements; some more so than others. After having checked this website as well as the Politifact website, it appears to me that McCain and Palin are in the lead by quite a bit when it comes to misleading statements, erroneous comments, and downright mistruths. Not surprising for a team that appears to be far behind in the polls and trying to gain ground by any means possible.
I do admire McCain, however, for correcting people at his rallies for making false statements and claims against Barack Obama. He wouldn’t have to be making these corrections if it had not been for the vast amounts of misinformation and lies that were put out into the public square in the first place by the republican political machine. Myths regarding Barack Obama have abounded by the republican juggernaut along with other statements of inaccuracies and misleading statements. On any given issue made by either party in this election, it is easy to go and check the facts for yourself and make up your own mind. Just make sure your fact checking is based on neutral reporting and not partisan sponsored websites. This has been a long election cycle and I am ready for it to be over.
Remembering Grandma
24-Sep-08 09:42 AM
She had a morbid fear of thunderstorms and was always quick to urge us into the storm cellar that she and Papa had built in their back yard at the first signs of inclement weather. I remember as a young kid the dark, stormy nights spent in that dank, musty underground shelter listening to the fury of the wind and the hail and the rain screaming outside while listening in wonder to the stories being told by Papa and Granny on the inside by the flame of a kerosene lantern. Papa would sit holding on to a rope that was attached to the cellar door the whole time we were in there in case a twister dropped out of a cloud and tried to suck us out of there. Both Papa and Granny grew up in Oklahoma and they had lived through some severe weather events including tornadoes, and they gave mother nature full respect and right of way when she turned dark and angry. After the fury of the storm would pass, Papa would always open the door and go out to make sure it was safe for the rest of us to leave. He would give the all clear sign and we would clamber up the concrete steps and returned to our beds while the lightning still flashed silently in the distant clouds. Granny would tell us good night but to keep a “weather eye” out in case anymore storms brewed up in the middle of the night. All of my grandparents are now gone but their memories will live forever with me. So, for my granny, thanks for all you did, for all you gave, and all you taught. You will be missed, but never forgotten.
McCain's America
27-Aug-08 01:29 PM
When I watch this video of John McCain I see a man who is obviously struggling with a topic that I am not convinced that he believes fully. The stuttering and the halted speech just seems like a desperate attempt to say things to appease a certain group of people; and if that’s true then that is unfortunate. McCain is being touted as the guy who is tough and will stand up and tell everyone exactly what he stands for and what he believes in, but when it comes to the topic of religion he sure seems to be caving in to conform to the image and script that he’s expected to parrot from the right.
It’s not a matter of what one’s personal religious view points are, what you believe in or whether or not you have faith in God or not, it’s about the simple fact of being able to understand that the role of the government, as our founders intended, was to be neutral in all matters of religion, so that it metes out justice and fairness for all without regard to religious affiliation. This is a right of all Americans, and not just those who are religious.
Protecting Church State Separation
04-Aug-08 11:55 PM
A subject of increasing importance these days is the principle of the separation of church and state. It is an important topic and one that should be discussed and understood by all. Believe it or not, there are those in the United States who do not understand the role of this important principle, and there are even those who think it is a myth and that it does not exist in our Constitution. As a proud member of First Freedom First, I am posting here verbatim a very concise and informative synopsis that deals with this important topic.
Church-state separation is an historic principle and is supported by countless Americans. But just how these values impact everyday life, or how they are under attack, is not always clear. The following eight issues highlight today’s most pressing concerns:
1. The First Amendment requires government to remain neutral on matters of religion. This basic tenet not only protects religious institutions from the influence of politics, but ensures that the religious beliefs of lawmakers do not infiltrate our laws.
2. End of life decisions are among the most personal of all, and should be based on what’s right for you and your family. Church-state separation restricts interference with end of life care in order to further a political or religious agenda.
3. The choices one makes about reproductive health are choices of individual conscience. Church-state separation ensures that religious doctrine doesn’t take precedence over the laws that allow individual control of reproductive issues.
4. Every American enjoys the right to practice, or not practice, any religion. Maintaining church-state separation means that we are not subjected to government-supported religion and that tax dollars are not allowed to fund any initiatives grounded in faith.
5. Public Education must be free of religious bias. Church-state separation restricts the government from promoting religion or religious views in the classroom.
6. Advancement and innovation, especially in the medical field, require research rooted in science. By maintaining the separation between church and state, we guarantee that the narrow religious beliefs of some lawmakers do not limit the research that saves lives.
7. Private houses of worship have the right to promote specific marriage and family traditions, but the government does not. Church-state separation is critical to ensure that our nation’s laws do not limit the definition of marriage or family, resulting in blatant discrimination.
8. This country is rooted in the traditions of religious freedom, the freedom to practice when and how you want and the freedom to refrain from religious practice. Lawmakers are constantly trying to infiltrate the public sector with tactics like prayer in school and forced devotions during the meetings of government organizations. Protect the separation between church and state and no citizen will feel the pressure to conform to anyone else’s religious beliefs.
First Freedom First was created to inform citizens about church-state issues and to create a platform for those who need to speak out against the violations that threatens church-state separation. For more information on these issues, please visit the websites of American’s United and First Freedom First.
Church-state separation is an historic principle and is supported by countless Americans. But just how these values impact everyday life, or how they are under attack, is not always clear. The following eight issues highlight today’s most pressing concerns:
1. The First Amendment requires government to remain neutral on matters of religion. This basic tenet not only protects religious institutions from the influence of politics, but ensures that the religious beliefs of lawmakers do not infiltrate our laws.
2. End of life decisions are among the most personal of all, and should be based on what’s right for you and your family. Church-state separation restricts interference with end of life care in order to further a political or religious agenda.
3. The choices one makes about reproductive health are choices of individual conscience. Church-state separation ensures that religious doctrine doesn’t take precedence over the laws that allow individual control of reproductive issues.
4. Every American enjoys the right to practice, or not practice, any religion. Maintaining church-state separation means that we are not subjected to government-supported religion and that tax dollars are not allowed to fund any initiatives grounded in faith.
5. Public Education must be free of religious bias. Church-state separation restricts the government from promoting religion or religious views in the classroom.
6. Advancement and innovation, especially in the medical field, require research rooted in science. By maintaining the separation between church and state, we guarantee that the narrow religious beliefs of some lawmakers do not limit the research that saves lives.
7. Private houses of worship have the right to promote specific marriage and family traditions, but the government does not. Church-state separation is critical to ensure that our nation’s laws do not limit the definition of marriage or family, resulting in blatant discrimination.
8. This country is rooted in the traditions of religious freedom, the freedom to practice when and how you want and the freedom to refrain from religious practice. Lawmakers are constantly trying to infiltrate the public sector with tactics like prayer in school and forced devotions during the meetings of government organizations. Protect the separation between church and state and no citizen will feel the pressure to conform to anyone else’s religious beliefs.
First Freedom First was created to inform citizens about church-state issues and to create a platform for those who need to speak out against the violations that threatens church-state separation. For more information on these issues, please visit the websites of American’s United and First Freedom First.
Telecom Immunity
02-Jul-08 10:16 AM
The Senate will be voting soon on legislation regarding the Bush Administration’s illegal wiretapping program. It’s important that the bill not contain any immunity for the telecom companies that helped the President break the law.
The Senate is planning on voting on the measure on July 8 and as it stands right now, it appears that they are prepared to sweep this under the rug and look the other way. If you are concerned about this cover up and believe that the rule of law should be upheld and that the principles and rules of the Constitution should be upheld and protected, then please contact your Senators to let them know. There is nothing patriotic about breaking the law and snubbing the principles of our most important document that created this country. Have a Happy July 4th celebration!!
- Let a judge sort it out. If what the telecom companies did was legal, why shouldn’t we let the cases go to court? If it was illegal, that’s all the more reason not to grant immunity.
- This is about fundamental rights. The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution explicitly states that the government needs a warrant to conduct a search — that includes wiretapping. Congress should err on the side of our Constitution and not bow to political pressure by signing off on telecom immunity. Americans deserve nothing less.
- When people break the law, they should be held accountable. When companies break the law, they should be too. Passing a bill that lets companies off the hook for spying on their customers isn’t fair and it doesn’t uphold the rule of law.
- The Bush Administration is trying to cover up its own illegal behavior. The President shouldn’t be able to hide the full extent of an illegal program by shutting down lawsuits. And Congress certainly shouldn’t help him to do it.
- This affects countless Americans. Telecoms need to testify in a court of law about exactly what happened and why. If telecom immunity passes, we may never know how big the scandal really was.
The Senate is planning on voting on the measure on July 8 and as it stands right now, it appears that they are prepared to sweep this under the rug and look the other way. If you are concerned about this cover up and believe that the rule of law should be upheld and that the principles and rules of the Constitution should be upheld and protected, then please contact your Senators to let them know. There is nothing patriotic about breaking the law and snubbing the principles of our most important document that created this country. Have a Happy July 4th celebration!!
Collection of Random Topics
21-Jun-08 09:38 AM
There are many topics worthy of discussion, but not really worthy of a dedicated post by themselves. Some of these topics have been building up in my brain lately, so allow me to release the pressure valve and spew some of them forth herewith. I reserve the right to come back at a later date and embellish any of these topics further as warranted by current events or stupid actions by people who should know better. So, in no particular order of importance or interest:
Gay Marriage Rights
Conservative and religious right leaders in California are chomping at the bit to try and pass a state constitutional amendment this November to nullify the recently acquired rights of gay couples from marrying in the state. They are spreading false information about marriage statistics and trying to convince everyone that by allowing gay couples to marry that the very institution of heteosexual marriage is somehow jeopardized and in danger of being eradicated off the face of the earth. Normally, this topic alone is worth an entire post by itself, but i have neither the energy nor the will to further debate this topic as it is so completely juvenille and senseless that it is exasperating to even try to and expend brain cells to debate it. Other than all of the arguments I have already posted on this blog about this topic, suffice it to say that the misinformation about marriage and the alarmist concerns of the destruction of heterosexual marriage is completely senseless and unwarranted. I stop short of calling it stupid (although it is) but I maintain that nobody but nobody can adequately explain how by allowing a group of people (gays and lesbians) to enjoy the same legal protections of marriage that that is going to jeopardize heterosexual marriage. It is a myth and one without any merit. Next topic.
Apple Goodies - iPhone 3G and Mobile Me
There is a wealth of techno goodies about to shower forth from the techno gods in Cupertino in early July, now only a few short weeks away. You’d have to be living in a hole in the sewers of London not to have already heard this news by now. Twice the features and half the price of the original iPhone, faster speeds, more third party applications, GPS, Microsoft Exchange support for enterprises and business users, and the best user interface ever designed for a mobile device make this a must have techno gadget for the masses. Notwithstanding all the goodness, to keep this journalistically pure, I will point out that there is much concern over the pricing plans with AT&T and who will be eligible for the lower prices. The $199 and $299 prices quoted during the WWDC Keynote address will not be available to everyone, depending upon existing cell phone contracts. This is nothing really new in the industry, but I can see a lot of people being disappointed to find out that they don’t qualify for the lower prices. But, like a good Republican, I know I qualify for the rates so I don’t really care if anybody else does or not. Tough luck.
Mobile Me is the replacement of the Dot Mac web service from Apple of which I have been a member for a few years now. While I have generally been pleased with Dot Mac, I am looking forward to the new push email, contacts and calendar capabilities that will be offered by the new service. As billed during the WWDC, this is exchange service for the rest of us. Dot Mac did have a few bugs and quirks in it and I am hoping that this new service will resolve some of those annoying glitches that would creep up from time to time. It is going to be so nice to be able to add calendar events or contacts to my laptop or Mac and then have that automatically sync up to my iPhone. This service also debuts in early July and I am ready for it.
Eletrical Loadbanks and Short Circuits
DId you know that the quasi-technical definition of an eletrical short is when electrical current flows unintentionally and uncontrolled between two conductors? In other words, it is when electricity goes where it’s not supposed to go and the consequential results are usually fried or charred electrical equipment.
An electrical loadbank is a piece of electrical equipment that simulates electrical load generated by equipment when the equipment is not present. It is used for testing such things as uninterrupted power supplies (UPS) and battery back up systems. With a loadbank apparatus you can simulate all different kinds of electrical events for the express purpose of testing out your emergency back up plans to deal with such emergencies.
Now you may wonder what is so important or interesting about this last bit of information and the answer is absolutely nothing. I said this would be a post on random topics and that’s what I just delivered.
Gay Marriage Rights
Conservative and religious right leaders in California are chomping at the bit to try and pass a state constitutional amendment this November to nullify the recently acquired rights of gay couples from marrying in the state. They are spreading false information about marriage statistics and trying to convince everyone that by allowing gay couples to marry that the very institution of heteosexual marriage is somehow jeopardized and in danger of being eradicated off the face of the earth. Normally, this topic alone is worth an entire post by itself, but i have neither the energy nor the will to further debate this topic as it is so completely juvenille and senseless that it is exasperating to even try to and expend brain cells to debate it. Other than all of the arguments I have already posted on this blog about this topic, suffice it to say that the misinformation about marriage and the alarmist concerns of the destruction of heterosexual marriage is completely senseless and unwarranted. I stop short of calling it stupid (although it is) but I maintain that nobody but nobody can adequately explain how by allowing a group of people (gays and lesbians) to enjoy the same legal protections of marriage that that is going to jeopardize heterosexual marriage. It is a myth and one without any merit. Next topic.
Apple Goodies - iPhone 3G and Mobile Me
There is a wealth of techno goodies about to shower forth from the techno gods in Cupertino in early July, now only a few short weeks away. You’d have to be living in a hole in the sewers of London not to have already heard this news by now. Twice the features and half the price of the original iPhone, faster speeds, more third party applications, GPS, Microsoft Exchange support for enterprises and business users, and the best user interface ever designed for a mobile device make this a must have techno gadget for the masses. Notwithstanding all the goodness, to keep this journalistically pure, I will point out that there is much concern over the pricing plans with AT&T and who will be eligible for the lower prices. The $199 and $299 prices quoted during the WWDC Keynote address will not be available to everyone, depending upon existing cell phone contracts. This is nothing really new in the industry, but I can see a lot of people being disappointed to find out that they don’t qualify for the lower prices. But, like a good Republican, I know I qualify for the rates so I don’t really care if anybody else does or not. Tough luck.
Mobile Me is the replacement of the Dot Mac web service from Apple of which I have been a member for a few years now. While I have generally been pleased with Dot Mac, I am looking forward to the new push email, contacts and calendar capabilities that will be offered by the new service. As billed during the WWDC, this is exchange service for the rest of us. Dot Mac did have a few bugs and quirks in it and I am hoping that this new service will resolve some of those annoying glitches that would creep up from time to time. It is going to be so nice to be able to add calendar events or contacts to my laptop or Mac and then have that automatically sync up to my iPhone. This service also debuts in early July and I am ready for it.
Eletrical Loadbanks and Short Circuits
DId you know that the quasi-technical definition of an eletrical short is when electrical current flows unintentionally and uncontrolled between two conductors? In other words, it is when electricity goes where it’s not supposed to go and the consequential results are usually fried or charred electrical equipment.
An electrical loadbank is a piece of electrical equipment that simulates electrical load generated by equipment when the equipment is not present. It is used for testing such things as uninterrupted power supplies (UPS) and battery back up systems. With a loadbank apparatus you can simulate all different kinds of electrical events for the express purpose of testing out your emergency back up plans to deal with such emergencies.
Now you may wonder what is so important or interesting about this last bit of information and the answer is absolutely nothing. I said this would be a post on random topics and that’s what I just delivered.
2008 Election Prediction
09-Jun-08 10:20 PM
I will admit that I am voting for Obama and I am hoping he will win. I realize this may persuade my prediction making abilities slightly, but I can also state that I am happy that John McCain is the Republican candidate out of all of the other people who were running against him. Should my prediction flounder and McCain is able to get elected, I will be at least happy it is him and not the likes of Huckabee or Tancredo or some of the other far-right ultra conservatives. McCain is by far the most liberal (or moderate) of the bunch that was running and I think it may be why he won. There is an expectancy of change in the air and people are instinctively rejecting the failed policies of the Bush administration and are looking for new leadership. The only way Senator McCain could possibly win in November is if he were to completely reject the current Bush policies and present a solid, unified, well thought out strategy that addresses the dire probelms facing the country today. Any semblance of serving up the same old hash that has been served for the last seven years will send McCain to the back of the line and Obama will be the man.
Just remember, you read it here first on TD3k Speaks. I have already established a precedent by making a reasonably accurate prediction with my earlier announcement of 2008 being a sucky year. $5 per gallon gas will probably be here by the end of the year, and that my friends, sucks!! So, let’s put the conservative agenda away for awhile and let’s break out some good old progressive, forward thinking ideas and let’s plan on some big improvements starting in 2009!!
Pump Wars
28-May-08 12:18 AM
While our troops patrol Iraqi gas stations in Baghdad, it looks like we are now going to need to send them back home so they can guard the pumps at home. If gasoline continues to rise in price above the $4 per gallon mark (and it appears that it probably will), it may very well take proactive intervention from either police or military forces to keep law and order at the pumps. If not, people may eventually be forced into vigilante style methods of self protection when topping off the tank; complete with body armor, hand guns, and rocket launchers affixed to the sides of armor plated SUVs and pick up trucks. All kidding aside, if crime levels are already starting to escalate across the country at the $4 level, what can we expect if the prices climb even higher?
I can honestly say that in all of my 46 years of living in this country, I cannot recall a more bleak, desperate sense of foreboding and uncertainty that currently hangs in the atmosphere today. I don't think we have anyone to blame but ourselves for our current predicament and lack of any kind of a game plan to move us forward in the right direction. Leave the oil in the ground and let's move forward with new fuel technologies that will provide cleaner and more abundant resources that will leave us free of the dependence on foreign oil. Oil is probably still the cheapest option available, but if the prices continue to rise at their current rates, that may no longer be true and the wheels of industry are not going to be well greased on oil that is grossly too expensive. Meanwhile, I'm going to break out my Mad Max outfit and rig my car for defensive deployment conditions.
Toon News
15-Apr-08 07:19 PM
Faith That Kills
01-Apr-08 07:55 AM
I've been trying to wrap my brain around the recent story involving an Oregon family who allowed their 15 month old baby to die from bronchial pneumonia and a blood infection because of their insistence on not seeking medical help, but rather relying solely on prayer to cure the baby. If you have not yet read the details of the story, you can read it here - a truly tragic situation.
The story brings many questions to mind that people must grapple with. The most disturbing one, however, is how can a parent justify the suffering of their child - even up to the point of death - by placing a belief in faith above a common medical treatment? A simple round of antibiotics would have saved the babies' life according to the medical examiner. How can a system of belief rationalize that a God would require such behavior to the point of being oblivious to the extreme pain and suffering this poor child endured? Some might make the point that the parents have the right to follow their religious convictions and for the state of Oregon to interfere in the matter and bring criminal charges against them is a violation of separation of church and state. Another point, I would guess (I don't know for sure) that this family, being members of a fundamentalist Christian church, more than likely hold to an anti-choice abortion view and probably favor the criminalization of a woman who chooses to have an abortion - I again, I don't know that - but I am making an assumption based on statistics. And lastly, the church that these parents belong to state that prayer is the only acceptable means by which anyone should seek medical assistance, and should this method of treatment result in death, then that simply means that it was God's will for death to occur.
Here are a few points I would like to make on each of these topics. I concur completely with an article written by Dr. Arthur Caplan in which he states that when it comes to matters of faith and religion, adults should be free to exercise their rights to refuse medical help if they so choose for themselves, but when it comes to children or people who rely solely on the assistance of parents or others for their care, then a person should not be allowed to essentially place their belief systems above the safety and well being of the dependent's right to live and to avoid pain and suffering. Most of us agree that matters of faith are deeply personal things and they should not be tampered with by others. But the law must protect children and those against needless suffering and death at the hands of another person's belief - even if it is their parents. If indeed these parents are pro-life advocates, as many fundamentalist Christians are, I cannot understand how they could possibly justify their actions to allow suffering and death to occur to an infant. Again, I don't know this families position on the matter, but I am merely making a point. If it is wrong for a mother to-be to choose an abortion for any reason, then isn't it just as wrong to allow a fully sentient human being child to also die when other means of helping it are available?
Finally, the other aspect of this story that I find puzzling is the admission by the parents and the church that they belong to is that if prayer alone does not alter the outcome of a situation and if a person dies, then that indicates that it was "God's will" for death to occur. I find this to be a truly bizarre belief because if that statement is true, then what is the point of praying? All prayer, as best as I can tell, is an appeal or a supplication to the almighty for a particular outcome wanted by the one who is praying. If what you are asking for is not granted and then you concede that the reason is that it was not God's will, then isn't that an admission that prayer is an attempt to change the will or mind of God? How can mortals have any influence on the immortal? If God's will is always going to occur anyway, then the same outcome is always going to occur regardless of prayer or not. I realize some people draw tremendous strength from prayer and that is fine, but in the final analysis it would appear is that prayer is not going to change the final outcome of a situation because God is simply not going to go against his will. But, if they had given the baby medicine and she had lived, then was God's will usurped? I realize this is a purely theological question which is convoluted but it is one that I find to be almost inexplicable.
To conclude, I believe it is right and necessary for these parents to be punished in this matter. Not for their faith or their beliefs, but for allowing a child to suffer and die needlessly when readily available medical help would have saved it's life. I fully support a person's right to refuse medical help for themselves, and I even support the rights of those who are terminally ill to choose doctor assisted suicide if it will prevent them from experiencing extreme pain and suffering. But when it comes to children and those who cannot make their wishes known, then we should always act on the side of eliminating pain, suffering and death if at all possible.
The story brings many questions to mind that people must grapple with. The most disturbing one, however, is how can a parent justify the suffering of their child - even up to the point of death - by placing a belief in faith above a common medical treatment? A simple round of antibiotics would have saved the babies' life according to the medical examiner. How can a system of belief rationalize that a God would require such behavior to the point of being oblivious to the extreme pain and suffering this poor child endured? Some might make the point that the parents have the right to follow their religious convictions and for the state of Oregon to interfere in the matter and bring criminal charges against them is a violation of separation of church and state. Another point, I would guess (I don't know for sure) that this family, being members of a fundamentalist Christian church, more than likely hold to an anti-choice abortion view and probably favor the criminalization of a woman who chooses to have an abortion - I again, I don't know that - but I am making an assumption based on statistics. And lastly, the church that these parents belong to state that prayer is the only acceptable means by which anyone should seek medical assistance, and should this method of treatment result in death, then that simply means that it was God's will for death to occur.
Here are a few points I would like to make on each of these topics. I concur completely with an article written by Dr. Arthur Caplan in which he states that when it comes to matters of faith and religion, adults should be free to exercise their rights to refuse medical help if they so choose for themselves, but when it comes to children or people who rely solely on the assistance of parents or others for their care, then a person should not be allowed to essentially place their belief systems above the safety and well being of the dependent's right to live and to avoid pain and suffering. Most of us agree that matters of faith are deeply personal things and they should not be tampered with by others. But the law must protect children and those against needless suffering and death at the hands of another person's belief - even if it is their parents. If indeed these parents are pro-life advocates, as many fundamentalist Christians are, I cannot understand how they could possibly justify their actions to allow suffering and death to occur to an infant. Again, I don't know this families position on the matter, but I am merely making a point. If it is wrong for a mother to-be to choose an abortion for any reason, then isn't it just as wrong to allow a fully sentient human being child to also die when other means of helping it are available?
Finally, the other aspect of this story that I find puzzling is the admission by the parents and the church that they belong to is that if prayer alone does not alter the outcome of a situation and if a person dies, then that indicates that it was "God's will" for death to occur. I find this to be a truly bizarre belief because if that statement is true, then what is the point of praying? All prayer, as best as I can tell, is an appeal or a supplication to the almighty for a particular outcome wanted by the one who is praying. If what you are asking for is not granted and then you concede that the reason is that it was not God's will, then isn't that an admission that prayer is an attempt to change the will or mind of God? How can mortals have any influence on the immortal? If God's will is always going to occur anyway, then the same outcome is always going to occur regardless of prayer or not. I realize some people draw tremendous strength from prayer and that is fine, but in the final analysis it would appear is that prayer is not going to change the final outcome of a situation because God is simply not going to go against his will. But, if they had given the baby medicine and she had lived, then was God's will usurped? I realize this is a purely theological question which is convoluted but it is one that I find to be almost inexplicable.
To conclude, I believe it is right and necessary for these parents to be punished in this matter. Not for their faith or their beliefs, but for allowing a child to suffer and die needlessly when readily available medical help would have saved it's life. I fully support a person's right to refuse medical help for themselves, and I even support the rights of those who are terminally ill to choose doctor assisted suicide if it will prevent them from experiencing extreme pain and suffering. But when it comes to children and those who cannot make their wishes known, then we should always act on the side of eliminating pain, suffering and death if at all possible.
American Freedom Campaign
25-Mar-08 10:28 PM
I am a proud supporter of the American Freedom Campaign - an organization dedicated to the preservation of the Constitution and the battle against our civil liberties and the egregious misuse of executive power by the current administration. I am posting here an appeal for concerned citizens to get involved by signing the AFC petition and, if possible, giving financial support to their efforts. Please take a few minutes to learn more about the AFC, their mission, and why it is important to get involved. The following information is the property of the AFC and is published here at their request. Thanks for your time.
-------------------------------------------------------
What would you do to help save our Constitutional Republic?
The American Freedom Campaign has set a goal for itself. We want to expand our base of online supporters from 38,000 to 50,000 people over the course of the next month. With this 30+ percent increase, we will enhance our ability to influence Congress when important bills are under consideration. We will also be able to activate a larger number of Americans during the upcoming general election season when the issue of excessive presidential power should be at the top of the national agenda.
Why should you join the American Freedom Campaign - either by signing our petition or by signing up for AFC updates on our home page? That's a good question, and here is why:
http://www.americanfreedomcampaign.org/
We hope that you will consider making a financial contribution to the American Freedom Campaign. To visit our donation page, just click on this link:
https://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/2629/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=2644
-------------------------------------------------------
What would you do to help save our Constitutional Republic?
The American Freedom Campaign has set a goal for itself. We want to expand our base of online supporters from 38,000 to 50,000 people over the course of the next month. With this 30+ percent increase, we will enhance our ability to influence Congress when important bills are under consideration. We will also be able to activate a larger number of Americans during the upcoming general election season when the issue of excessive presidential power should be at the top of the national agenda.
Why should you join the American Freedom Campaign - either by signing our petition or by signing up for AFC updates on our home page? That's a good question, and here is why:
- The American Freedom Campaign was launched less than eight months ago to build a grassroots movement to help restore the Constitution and reverse the violations of civil liberties and human rights that have occurred over the past seven years.
- Over the past few months, the American Freedom Campaign has filled an important role in Washington by leading the fight to restore our system of checks and balances. While there are many organizations fighting specific policies considered unconstitutional, few, if any, are focused almost exclusively on restraining executive overreach.
- Consistent with its mission to restore checks and balances, AFC aggressively - and successfully - pushed the U.S. House to pass a contempt resolution against Bush administration officials who refused to comply with congressional subpoenas. The Capitol Hill newspaper, Roll Call, in an article about the contempt vote in the House, cited AFC as an example - in fact, the only example - of an advocacy group generating grassroots pressure on House members.
- AFC has also helped inject constitutional balance of powers issues into the debate over the nation's Iraq policy. As the Bush administration negotiates an agreement with the Iraqi government to establish the parameters of the two nations' bilateral relationship beyond 2008, AFC is working with members of Congress to ensure that no significant commitment is made without the approval of Congress. Toward this end, AFC hosted a conference call on which Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), joined by two constitutional scholars from Yale Law School, introduced a resolution expressing the sense of the House that any major agreement reached without congressional approval will be invalid.
- As the 2008 campaign moves forward, AFC will play a critically important educational role. We will aggressively push the message that the Bush administration's dramatic expansion of executive power makes the selection of the next president one of the most important decisions the citizens of this nation will ever make.
http://www.americanfreedomcampaign.org/
We hope that you will consider making a financial contribution to the American Freedom Campaign. To visit our donation page, just click on this link:
https://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/2629/shop/custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=2644
A Single Word Says A Lot...
21-Mar-08 07:34 PM
If there were ever any doubts by anyone who hasn't been living under a rock for the past seven years, this adequately sums up the Bush Administration's attitude towards the majority of the American population and anyone else who disagrees with them. This little two letter word "So", very accurately portrays the sum total of the entire thought processes and intellectual reasoning that drives the decisions and the policies of the current administration. It doesn't matter what the topic is, whether it is the war in Iraq and the fact that 2/3 of the American people strongly believe that the cost of the war is not worth the astronomical costs to our nation, or whether you are talking about the far ranging dissenting opinions on the use of torture, domestic spying, invasion of privacy or civil liberty violations, The response to all dissenters, to all those who have a differing view, to those who dare not go along with the half baked policies of the megalomaniacs of executive power, is "so?" It's an abbreviated way of saying, "who cares?" Or another way of saying, "policies and decisions can't be based on the will of the people, unless they agree with us."
"Don't go to war in Iraq - they had nothing to do with 9/11" - 'SO"
"The cost of this war is going to be astronomically expensive" - "SO"
"It is against federal and international law to torture people" - "SO"
"Three years after the fact, many people in New Orleans are still suffering from Katrina" - "SO"
"Stem cell research offers the promise of finding medical cures for some of the most deadly diseases known to man" - "SO"
"Forty six million Americans are without health care insurance and stand to lose everything they own should their health fail" - "SO"
And the list goes on and on. Pick your topic, any topic, and the response from this administration is always the same.
This is arrogance completely out of control and it has to stop.
Surf's Up - Grab Your Water-board
08-Mar-08 09:36 PM
President Bush said Saturday he vetoed legislation that would ban the CIA from using harsh interrogation methods such as water-boarding to break suspected terrorists because it would end practices that have prevented attacks. "The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror," Bush said in his weekly radio address taped for broadcast Saturday. "So today I vetoed it," Bush said. (from the Associated Press).
Bush cites the terrorist bombing attacks that occurred on July 7, 2005 in London as justification for why we should continue the practice of water-boarding so as to prevent future attacks. But, exactly "which attacks have been thwarted by the use of water-boarding?" This is the question that needs to be answered. Bush has stated on several occasions: "To the critics, I ask them this: when we, within the law, interrogate and get information that protects ourselves and possibly others in other nations to prevent attacks, which attack would they have hoped that we wouldn't have prevented?"
Indeed sir, which attacks specifically have been prevented by the diabolical use of water-boarding? I'd really like to know. Bush has also stated that the actions that he is taking on this are "within the law" and that the Justice Dept. will review to make certain that it is within the law. Guess what? The Justice Dept. has not done so and has never made a statement that water-boarding is legal, simply because it is not. It is a torture technique that simulates death by drowning and has been used through out history including the Inquisition and various wars including the Vietnam war.
Republican presidential nominee, John McCain, who has been vociferously opposed to the use of water-boarding and who has on a number of occasions reprimanded fellow Republicans for taking such a lax stance against it's use, has repeatedly said that there is no question that it is torture, and as such he questioned the effectiveness of it's use. But, alas, John McCain voted against the Senate bill that banned the use of water-boarding against detainees. I wonder why? It is very curious to see McCain change positions on such a poignant position. Could this also be a clue as to what kind of a President he might be?
Here is the problem in my opinion. We have an administration today that talks about morality and family values and decency and all the other virtues which are vital to any healthy society, and they are willing to push and promote these ideals (even at the expense of other people's civil liberties), that in their attempt to justify and condone the war in Iraq, their moral compass has spun so far off center that it is completely pointing in the wrong direction. They are so turned around and confused that they don't even recognize torture and abuse when they look it square in the eyes. How can one not understand that the practice of torture cannot yield verifiable, dependable information that can be acted upon? Just ask John McCain. A person will say anything to prevent pain, they will confess to anything to prevent suffering, and they will reveal as many terrorist plans as you'd like to deliver and not a shred of it will be necessarily true.
Understand, I am not questioning President Bush's or John McCain's patriotism or willingness to protect innocent lives, I am only attempting to point out what happens when you willfully choose to take the easy route instead of the hard one. If we were really serious about busting Al Qaeda and learning their secrets, we wouldn't resort to something as easy and primitive as torture - we would try to work harder to get real, tangible information; and I hope that we are doing that. In the words of Thomas Paine, a man wise beyond his years, he stated: "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right." He also stated: _
It simply must also be noted that the use of torture on detainees who are caught on the battlefield does not mean that the only detainees who will be captured and potentially tortured are the bad guys. Where are the battlefields in the war on terror? It is the city streets and neighborhoods of towns and cities and many innocent civilians could easily be rounded up in a raid and because of their proximity to a known enemy encampment automatically be considered as enemy combatants. The likelihood then of receiving false information by torturing innocent civilians is even further exacerbated. That thought alone should make anyone recoil against the very notion.
And lastly, if the world sees that America openly supports, condones, and justifies the blatant use of torture as a permissible way to extract information from a prisoner, then that sends the clear signal that it is quite OK for the rest of the world to treat American military and civilians in the same manner. Because we fool ourselves into believing that "if we do it then it's OK, but if you do it then it's evil", we so blur the line of morality that we only deceive ourselves - no one else. In the end, we lose the moral high ground and we have started down the road to thinking and behaving in the same manner as the terrorists - and that is a really, really scary thought so we better stop for a minute and reconsider this matter again. These are my opinions; I welcome any comments that may differ.
My Answers To The Questions
13-Feb-08 07:02 PM
Here are my answers to a series of ten questions that were recently compiled by First Freedom First as a discussion starter on the issue of separation of church and state. Of course, these are just my opinions, but the idea is to induce people into thinking about these questions and examining their stance on these very important issues. I welcome any and all comments, especially those who may have a differing view than mine:
1. Leaders on the religious right often say that America is a “Christian Nation.” Do you agree with this statement?
Absolutely not. There are more Christians than any other religion in this nation, but the nation was not founded on a theocracy or on Christian doctrine.
2. Do you think Houses of Worship should be allowed to endorse political candidates and retain their tax exempt status?
No. Tax exempt status is one of the benefits churches enjoy as a result of the wall between government and religion. If a church feels compelled to intermix politics in with it's teachings and openly endorses political candidates from the pulpit, they should lose their tax exempt status and pay taxes.
3. Do you think public schools should sponsor school prayer or, as a parent, should this choice be left to me?
Public schools have no business dealing in the realm of religion. Since their funding comes from taxes and the government, the public school should remain neutral on the subject of religion out of respect for all faiths. Prayer may be practiced at any time by any student, but should never be sponsored as a school program where students are coerced into participating.
4. Would you support a law that mandates teaching creationism in my child’s public school science classes?
No. The only thing that should be taught in science class is science. Creationism and intelligent design are concepts that do not adhere to the scientific method and are untestable - they therefore should not be presented as science.
5. Do you think my pharmacist should be allowed to deny me doctor-prescribed medications based on his or her religious beliefs?
No. The pharmacist has a duty to dispense doctor authorized medications to patients - it has no bearing on his personal opinions, beliefs or convictions. If a pharmacist is not able to morally comply with the requirements of the job he should seek some other form of employment.
6. Will you respect the rights of those in our diverse communities of faith who deem same-gender marriage to be consistent with their religious creed?
Absolutely. I happen to believe that sexual orientation is not a choice anymore than your genetics or your nationality are a choice. To allow people the right and dignity to be who they are without discrimination is the right of all humans.
7. Should “faith-based” charities that receive public funds be allowed to discriminate against employees or applicants based on religious beliefs?
This is why public funds given to faith based charities is a bad idea. Tax money should never be used by a business or entity that discriminates against anyone as the tax money is a collective representation of everyone from the community. Churches are free to discriminate along these lines as their money is all freely donated by people of like convictions. Faith based charities may do what they like unless they take government money, then they may not discriminate for any reason.
8. Do you think one's right to disbelieve in God is protected by the same laws that protect someone else's right to believe?
Absolutely. The first amendment protects all people of all faiths, or people of no faith. No one is compelled to believe anything against their will.
9. Do you think everyone’s religious freedom needs to be protected by what Thomas Jefferson called “a wall of separation” between church and state?
Yes. Without the separation between church and state the two entities become entangled and poison each other. Religion takes on the mantle of state power and can coerce people into matters of faith - and the state can take on the pious nature and deception of divine right and lose sight of secular law by pretending to enforce God's law on narrow and subjective interpretations of doctrine.
10. What should guide our policies on public health and medical research: science or religion?
Public health and medical research should be based purely on science and fact. Ehtical and moral questions can be left up to the individual based on their own unique beliefs and code of moral conduct.
If anyone thinks I'm fit for public office and would like to see "TD3k robot-extraordinaire" run in future elections, please leave your comments or e-mail for instructions on sending cash donations to my presidential campaign. Or, better yet, please make sure you vote for your candidate of choice in the primaries and in the general election this November. Vote your conscience and make a difference.
1. Leaders on the religious right often say that America is a “Christian Nation.” Do you agree with this statement?
Absolutely not. There are more Christians than any other religion in this nation, but the nation was not founded on a theocracy or on Christian doctrine.
2. Do you think Houses of Worship should be allowed to endorse political candidates and retain their tax exempt status?
No. Tax exempt status is one of the benefits churches enjoy as a result of the wall between government and religion. If a church feels compelled to intermix politics in with it's teachings and openly endorses political candidates from the pulpit, they should lose their tax exempt status and pay taxes.
3. Do you think public schools should sponsor school prayer or, as a parent, should this choice be left to me?
Public schools have no business dealing in the realm of religion. Since their funding comes from taxes and the government, the public school should remain neutral on the subject of religion out of respect for all faiths. Prayer may be practiced at any time by any student, but should never be sponsored as a school program where students are coerced into participating.
4. Would you support a law that mandates teaching creationism in my child’s public school science classes?
No. The only thing that should be taught in science class is science. Creationism and intelligent design are concepts that do not adhere to the scientific method and are untestable - they therefore should not be presented as science.
5. Do you think my pharmacist should be allowed to deny me doctor-prescribed medications based on his or her religious beliefs?
No. The pharmacist has a duty to dispense doctor authorized medications to patients - it has no bearing on his personal opinions, beliefs or convictions. If a pharmacist is not able to morally comply with the requirements of the job he should seek some other form of employment.
6. Will you respect the rights of those in our diverse communities of faith who deem same-gender marriage to be consistent with their religious creed?
Absolutely. I happen to believe that sexual orientation is not a choice anymore than your genetics or your nationality are a choice. To allow people the right and dignity to be who they are without discrimination is the right of all humans.
7. Should “faith-based” charities that receive public funds be allowed to discriminate against employees or applicants based on religious beliefs?
This is why public funds given to faith based charities is a bad idea. Tax money should never be used by a business or entity that discriminates against anyone as the tax money is a collective representation of everyone from the community. Churches are free to discriminate along these lines as their money is all freely donated by people of like convictions. Faith based charities may do what they like unless they take government money, then they may not discriminate for any reason.
8. Do you think one's right to disbelieve in God is protected by the same laws that protect someone else's right to believe?
Absolutely. The first amendment protects all people of all faiths, or people of no faith. No one is compelled to believe anything against their will.
9. Do you think everyone’s religious freedom needs to be protected by what Thomas Jefferson called “a wall of separation” between church and state?
Yes. Without the separation between church and state the two entities become entangled and poison each other. Religion takes on the mantle of state power and can coerce people into matters of faith - and the state can take on the pious nature and deception of divine right and lose sight of secular law by pretending to enforce God's law on narrow and subjective interpretations of doctrine.
10. What should guide our policies on public health and medical research: science or religion?
Public health and medical research should be based purely on science and fact. Ehtical and moral questions can be left up to the individual based on their own unique beliefs and code of moral conduct.
If anyone thinks I'm fit for public office and would like to see "TD3k robot-extraordinaire" run in future elections, please leave your comments or e-mail for instructions on sending cash donations to my presidential campaign. Or, better yet, please make sure you vote for your candidate of choice in the primaries and in the general election this November. Vote your conscience and make a difference.
The Fate of the Union - Hooah!!
30-Jan-08 12:26 AM
As the curtain came down on the 2008 State of the Union speech this past Monday night, I couldn't help but think that it was really the "fate" of the Union. I will refrain from saying "told ya so" (see earlier post "2008 To Suck"), but at least we can be thankful that this was the last speech to be endured by the worst President this country has ever had. As we once again heard more sugar coated rhetoric and agonizingly arrogant threats towards Congress, the American people was left slack jawed and eyes glazed over at their TV sets as the unmistakeable truth slowly seeped into our minds. We have nothing new to hope for except the faint possibility that by the end of this year a new president will be elected to take on the enormous task of cleaning up the mess that they will inherit from the current administration. Oh, and did I mention that if by some ill fated fortune we do end up with another Republican President, I will be committing Japanese hari-kari on You Tube with a dull butter knife?
While we all try to contemplate just exactly where the $150 billion economic stimulus money is going to come from (perhaps the treasury will print more money, or some unneeded Pentagon weapons program will be nixed, perhaps it will be rained from the sky like manna from heaven, but God forbid it sure as hell will not come from any vile, evil, corrupt taxes - for if it does it would be the complete and total ruin of the nation!! No, I suspect it will probably just be borrowed like everything else), take a view at this 75 year old citizen's response to President Bush's unremarkable state of the union address.
While we all try to contemplate just exactly where the $150 billion economic stimulus money is going to come from (perhaps the treasury will print more money, or some unneeded Pentagon weapons program will be nixed, perhaps it will be rained from the sky like manna from heaven, but God forbid it sure as hell will not come from any vile, evil, corrupt taxes - for if it does it would be the complete and total ruin of the nation!! No, I suspect it will probably just be borrowed like everything else), take a view at this 75 year old citizen's response to President Bush's unremarkable state of the union address.
Macworld 2008 Recap
19-Jan-08 11:56 PM
This past week, Macworld 2008 was held in San Francisco and Steve Jobs once again unveiled some amazing new devices and gadgets to the cheering crowds and Mac faithful everywhere. There was nothing as revolutionary or as exciting as the iPhone with the possible exception of the new Mac Book Air ultra thin laptop. But even that is probably not as revolutionary as what the iPhone has been to the telecommunications industry. Here is a recap of what was revealed:
Time Capsule: A new 802.11n wireless base station that also sports a hard drive built inside. Comes in two flavors; a 500GB or a 1TB version selling for $299 and $499 respectively. This new device allows a home or office with several Mac users to backup their computers wirelessly via Time Machine to a centralized location without wires. This is especially convenient for laptop users who have had to rely on small portable hard drives and cables to back up their hard drives.
iPhone Software Update: There was no mention of a new 3G capable iPhone as some had predicted, but in it's place was an announcement of an upgrade to the iPhone firmware to version 1.1.3 - a free download for all existing iPhone users and a $20 upgrade option for all iTouch iPod users as it added core new features previously unavailable on the iTouch. The new features include the ability for the iPhone to pinpoint your location and mark it with an indicator on a map by using triangulation of cell phone towers. This feature works amazing well and seems very accurate. The more cell phone towers in your vicinity, the more detail your location will be zoomed in on the map. Also included is the ability to rearrange the icons on the iPhone home page, add new homepages (up to 9) and web clips which are snap shots of web pages that retain their shape and zoom scale so that you can go back to it at anytime with just a single press of an icon. Very cool. Some other smaller features including song lyrics being displayed in iPod mode and an upcoming SDK to third party developers so that the iPhone can be further expanded and developed to run more new apps.
Apple TV Update & iTunes Movie Rentals: It was the year of the free software download. Steve announced a completely new software interface for the Apple TV as a free download for existing customers that will feature true 720p video qulaity and 5.1 Dolby digital surround sound. No new equipment to purchase. Also, the price of the Apple TV has been reduced from $299 to $229 for the 40GB model. In addition, iTunes will begin immediately to offer movie rentals which can be viewed on any computer (Mac or PC), hand helds, iPods, or on Apple TV with content provided from all the major film studio in Hollywood. Pricing is similar to all other movie rental services and content can now be purchased with your remote from the living room couch - no computer required.
(Side Note: I found this somewhat ironic because I distincly remember not so many years past that Steve Jobs didn't think that using a computer to watch movies and videos was a very good idea. He has now come full circle on this one and has obviously changed his mind considerably on this subject. It was also interesting just this past week that when asked to comment on the new Amazon Kindle portable electronic book reader, Steve made the bold proclamation that "nobody reads anymore these days". That seems like a bit of a stretch to me - I know I still enjoy reading. I think the Kindle is a very interesting device but needs some additional design work to make it right. I wonder if Steve will change his mind on the book reader like he did on the Apple TV? How far away are we from an iBook or an iReader?)
Macbook Air: And last but certainly not least was the revelation of the world's thinnest laptop computer ever manufactured measuring a mere .16 inches at it's thinnest to a a very modest .76 inches at it's largest measurement and weighing only 3 pounds. The laptop features a full 13.3 inch LED screen with instant on capabilities and brilliant sharp graphics. There is a full sized back lit keyboard and touch pad with intelligent controls. Comes with 2GB of RAM and a 80GB hard drive, the unit does not include an optical disk drive, but can be added as a peripheral if desired. You can also use a built in software feature that allows the Macbook Air to commandeer the optical drive of any nearby Mac or PC to wirelessly install programs from a CD or DVD; and that is totally cool. Priced at $1,799 Apple is obviously not targeting or promoting this device as an econo-book, but rather as an object of total coolness and desire. How cool is it that this laptop can fit inside an envelope? Dang cool.
If you are sick of your current computer, or have had it up to your eyeballs with Windows, viruses and spyware, and are just generally pissed off with the entire world and can't wait until there is a new President in power, then may I suggest you make the switch to the happy side of the street where everything is in technicolor and in perpetual bloom. Check out the offerings of the Apple team in Cupertino - I think you will like what you see when you see what you like,
If you want to learn more on any of this cool stuff just announced at Macworld 2008, go to www.apple.com for more details. And no, believe it or not, I do not work for Apple.
2008 To Suck
14-Jan-08 11:10 PM
Call me an ungrateful, miserable little whiner if you must, but if the first thirteen days of 2008 is any indication of what lies ahead, I am fully prepared to declare that 2008 is going to suck - and suck hard. Please spare me the lectures on positive attitudes and motivational thinking and all that do-goody-good bullshit, and let's examine the facts for just a flipping moment. I don't consider myself a pessimist as much as I do a realist and a pragmatist. Instead of wishing and hoping for a brighter tomorrow, I much prefer to stare down the oily barrel of the shot gun of reality and look my problems right in it's butt-ugly face. It might be a dangerous course of action but at least you know what you're dealing with and you will be better prepared to deal with the crushing defeat and bitter disappointments that are likely to come your way.
2008 has started off as a real jim-dandy for me with all of the stress and hypertension that goes along with starting a new job with strange new people in a strange new environment. There is no better way to start off the new year than in completely unfamiliar surroundings with people you do not know and working on things you've never seen before. Yes sir, it's been a barrel of monkeys and I really, really enjoy driving in rush hour traffic for over two hours each and every day. Things could be worse - I could be unemployed and living under a bridge and eating out of a garbage can; which will be the subject of a future post if and when that should ever happen.
But, let's not forget all the other great things that 2008 has unveiled already such as the impending recession that the economy seems to be spiraling into. This combined with the massive losses in the stock market and the sub prime mortgage debacle which has turned into a voracious black hole of poverty threatening to suck the U.S. economy into utter oblivion, has left everyone feeling vulnerable and exposed. Gas prices continue to soar with no end in sight and it is apparent that the trillion dollars we've just spent on a war in Iraq hasn't done jack-squat to ensure cheap oil for the US. Global warming continues on it's march in rendering the planet a lifeless lump of smoldering coal while our elected officials argue over whether or not human activity has had any negative impact on the environment.
On top of everything else, this is an election year with another selection of candidates that are not very inspiring or exciting and are already partaking in childish pranks, name calling, and finger pointing thinking that somehow this makes a good impression on the voting public. The only thing it shows is a lack of ideas and initiatives and in it's place we get character assassinations and revelations of sins 25 years past as though they have any bearing on a presidential election. On a side note, if Huckabee or any other Republican somehow manages to fool everyone again and gets elected to the White House, I will be forced to either move out of the country and change my citizenship to another country, or take up permanent residency at my nearest local mental asylum.
So far, 2008 has exuded all the warmth and charm of a wet, mangy dog with infected ears. I'm not quite ready to snuggle up next to it and call it my friend just yet, but there is a whole lot of time left, fortunately, for things to improve. Should things start turning around and looking up I might be able to upgrade the prognosis of 2008 from "sucking" to "tolerable". Stay tuned. The one good foreseeable thing to look forward to in 2008 is that it is the last year that "W" and Dick get to torture people in the name of national security. Praise Jeebus.
2008 has started off as a real jim-dandy for me with all of the stress and hypertension that goes along with starting a new job with strange new people in a strange new environment. There is no better way to start off the new year than in completely unfamiliar surroundings with people you do not know and working on things you've never seen before. Yes sir, it's been a barrel of monkeys and I really, really enjoy driving in rush hour traffic for over two hours each and every day. Things could be worse - I could be unemployed and living under a bridge and eating out of a garbage can; which will be the subject of a future post if and when that should ever happen.
But, let's not forget all the other great things that 2008 has unveiled already such as the impending recession that the economy seems to be spiraling into. This combined with the massive losses in the stock market and the sub prime mortgage debacle which has turned into a voracious black hole of poverty threatening to suck the U.S. economy into utter oblivion, has left everyone feeling vulnerable and exposed. Gas prices continue to soar with no end in sight and it is apparent that the trillion dollars we've just spent on a war in Iraq hasn't done jack-squat to ensure cheap oil for the US. Global warming continues on it's march in rendering the planet a lifeless lump of smoldering coal while our elected officials argue over whether or not human activity has had any negative impact on the environment.
On top of everything else, this is an election year with another selection of candidates that are not very inspiring or exciting and are already partaking in childish pranks, name calling, and finger pointing thinking that somehow this makes a good impression on the voting public. The only thing it shows is a lack of ideas and initiatives and in it's place we get character assassinations and revelations of sins 25 years past as though they have any bearing on a presidential election. On a side note, if Huckabee or any other Republican somehow manages to fool everyone again and gets elected to the White House, I will be forced to either move out of the country and change my citizenship to another country, or take up permanent residency at my nearest local mental asylum.
So far, 2008 has exuded all the warmth and charm of a wet, mangy dog with infected ears. I'm not quite ready to snuggle up next to it and call it my friend just yet, but there is a whole lot of time left, fortunately, for things to improve. Should things start turning around and looking up I might be able to upgrade the prognosis of 2008 from "sucking" to "tolerable". Stay tuned. The one good foreseeable thing to look forward to in 2008 is that it is the last year that "W" and Dick get to torture people in the name of national security. Praise Jeebus.
2(007) In Review
01-Jan-08 11:53 PM
2007 is now complete and marks it's place in the history books. If you survived, congratulations. Hopefully you will also survive 2008. As we prepare for yet another year of fun and adventure, I thought it would be interesting to look back at 2007 and briefly recap some of the highlights from the year just past. What a great way to reflect on the misadventures and unforgettable moments of our fellow human counter-parts while at the same time helping us to stave off the icy grip of Alzheimer's from our cerebral cortexes. Here's my short list....Please note, this short list will probably not include much of anything that was really important in your life in 2007; you will have to supply your on list for that stuff.
January 2007
Jan. 4 - Nancy Pelosi becomes the first female speaker of the US House of Representatives
Jan. 17 - The Doomsday Clock is set to 5 minutes before midnight
Jan. 30 - Microsoft releases Vista and Office 2007
February 2007
Feb. 2 - An unseasonal tornado in central Florida kills at least 20 people
Feb. 2 - The IPCC publishes it's 4th assessment report, having concluded that global climate change is "very likely" to have a predominantly human cause.
Feb. 13 - North Korea agrees to shut down its nuclear facilities in Yongbyon by April 14 as a first step towards complete denuclearization, receiving in return energy aid equivalent to 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil.
March 2007
March 6 - Mega Millions sets a new world record for the highest lottery jackpot of US $370 million.
March 12 - Van Halen is inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.
March 31 - Sydney, Australia, turns off its lights for 1 hour between 7:30PM and 8:30PM as a political statement for Global Climate Change.
April 2007
April 12 - Don Imus is fired by CBS for making controversial comments about the Rutgers women's basketball team.
April 24 - Abortion is legalized in Mexico.
April 25 - The Dow Jones Industrial Average gains 135.95 points to close at 13,089.89; it's first close above 13,000 in its history.
May 2007
May 4 - Tornado strikes Greensburg, Kansas, killing at least 12 and destroying about 90% of the town.
May 9 - Subtropical storm Andrea forms off the coast of Florida, the earliest subtropical storm since Subtropical storm Ana in 2003.
May 10 - Tony Blair announces he will resign as British Prime Minister on June 27 triggering a Labour Party leadership election.
June 2007
June 11 - US Senator Larry Craig, a long-time opponent of gay rights, was arrested for lewd conduct in a men's restroom at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport and pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of disorderly conduct on August 8.
June 15 - Bob Barker airs his last episode of The Price is Right.
June 29 - Apple's new iPhone is released in the US.
July 2007
July 4 - The 50-star U.S. flag becomes the longest-flying American flag, replacing the 48-star flag that flew from 1912 to 1959.
July 17 - Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick and three other men are charged with alleged operation of dogfighting ring at one of Vick's properties in southeastern Virginia.
July 21 - U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney serves as Acting President for two and a half hours while President George W. Bush undergoes a colonoscopy procedure.
August 2007
Aug. 1 - The I-35W Mississippi River Bridge on I-35W over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis, Minnesota between University Avenue and Washington Avenue collapses at 6:05PM CST during the later part of rush hour, killing 13 people.
Aug. 22 - The Texas Rangers score thirty runs in one game, setting the modern (post 1900) MLB record for most runs by one team in a single game, in a 30 - 3 victory over the Baltimore Orioles.
Aug. 30 - U.S. Air Force nuclear wepaons incident in which a B-52 flew from Minot AFB, ND cross country to Barksdale AFB, LA carrying 6 nuclear warheads.
September 2007
Sept. 3 - British troops withdraw from the Basra region of Iraq.
Sept. 6 - Luciano Pavarotti, Italian tenor dies (b. 1935)
Sept. 26 - First confirmed deaths resulting from the Myanmar military's crackdown on weeks long anti-government protests. Buddhist monks are arrested and Internet access is cut from the public.
October 2007
Oct. 20 - Wildfires in Southern California result in the evacuation of more than 1 million people and destroying over 1,600 homes and businesses.
Oct. 26 - Apple Inc. launch the sixth major release of their Mac OS X operating system entitled, Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard.
Oct. 28 - The Boston Red Sox win the 2007 World Series in a four game sweep against the Colorado Rockies.
November 2007
Nov. 3 - President Pervez Musharraf declares state of emergency in Pakistan.
Nov. 5 - The Writers Guild of America goes on strike.
Nov. 30 - Evel Knievel, American motorcycle daredevil dies (b. 1938)
December 2007
Dec. 10 - Led Zeppelin reunites in London, England, for the Ahmet Ertegun tribute.
Dec. 16 - Dan Fogelberg, American singer and songwriter dies (b. 1951)
Dec. 27 - Benazir Bhutto, Pakistani politician assassinated (b. 1953)
And if you really want to know a whole lot more about what happened and who died in 2007, you can find a comprehensive list located right here.
January 2007
Jan. 4 - Nancy Pelosi becomes the first female speaker of the US House of Representatives
Jan. 17 - The Doomsday Clock is set to 5 minutes before midnight
Jan. 30 - Microsoft releases Vista and Office 2007
February 2007
Feb. 2 - An unseasonal tornado in central Florida kills at least 20 people
Feb. 2 - The IPCC publishes it's 4th assessment report, having concluded that global climate change is "very likely" to have a predominantly human cause.
Feb. 13 - North Korea agrees to shut down its nuclear facilities in Yongbyon by April 14 as a first step towards complete denuclearization, receiving in return energy aid equivalent to 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil.
March 2007
March 6 - Mega Millions sets a new world record for the highest lottery jackpot of US $370 million.
March 12 - Van Halen is inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.
March 31 - Sydney, Australia, turns off its lights for 1 hour between 7:30PM and 8:30PM as a political statement for Global Climate Change.
April 2007
April 12 - Don Imus is fired by CBS for making controversial comments about the Rutgers women's basketball team.
April 24 - Abortion is legalized in Mexico.
April 25 - The Dow Jones Industrial Average gains 135.95 points to close at 13,089.89; it's first close above 13,000 in its history.
May 2007
May 4 - Tornado strikes Greensburg, Kansas, killing at least 12 and destroying about 90% of the town.
May 9 - Subtropical storm Andrea forms off the coast of Florida, the earliest subtropical storm since Subtropical storm Ana in 2003.
May 10 - Tony Blair announces he will resign as British Prime Minister on June 27 triggering a Labour Party leadership election.
June 2007
June 11 - US Senator Larry Craig, a long-time opponent of gay rights, was arrested for lewd conduct in a men's restroom at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport and pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of disorderly conduct on August 8.
June 15 - Bob Barker airs his last episode of The Price is Right.
June 29 - Apple's new iPhone is released in the US.
July 2007
July 4 - The 50-star U.S. flag becomes the longest-flying American flag, replacing the 48-star flag that flew from 1912 to 1959.
July 17 - Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick and three other men are charged with alleged operation of dogfighting ring at one of Vick's properties in southeastern Virginia.
July 21 - U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney serves as Acting President for two and a half hours while President George W. Bush undergoes a colonoscopy procedure.
August 2007
Aug. 1 - The I-35W Mississippi River Bridge on I-35W over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis, Minnesota between University Avenue and Washington Avenue collapses at 6:05PM CST during the later part of rush hour, killing 13 people.
Aug. 22 - The Texas Rangers score thirty runs in one game, setting the modern (post 1900) MLB record for most runs by one team in a single game, in a 30 - 3 victory over the Baltimore Orioles.
Aug. 30 - U.S. Air Force nuclear wepaons incident in which a B-52 flew from Minot AFB, ND cross country to Barksdale AFB, LA carrying 6 nuclear warheads.
September 2007
Sept. 3 - British troops withdraw from the Basra region of Iraq.
Sept. 6 - Luciano Pavarotti, Italian tenor dies (b. 1935)
Sept. 26 - First confirmed deaths resulting from the Myanmar military's crackdown on weeks long anti-government protests. Buddhist monks are arrested and Internet access is cut from the public.
October 2007
Oct. 20 - Wildfires in Southern California result in the evacuation of more than 1 million people and destroying over 1,600 homes and businesses.
Oct. 26 - Apple Inc. launch the sixth major release of their Mac OS X operating system entitled, Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard.
Oct. 28 - The Boston Red Sox win the 2007 World Series in a four game sweep against the Colorado Rockies.
November 2007
Nov. 3 - President Pervez Musharraf declares state of emergency in Pakistan.
Nov. 5 - The Writers Guild of America goes on strike.
Nov. 30 - Evel Knievel, American motorcycle daredevil dies (b. 1938)
December 2007
Dec. 10 - Led Zeppelin reunites in London, England, for the Ahmet Ertegun tribute.
Dec. 16 - Dan Fogelberg, American singer and songwriter dies (b. 1951)
Dec. 27 - Benazir Bhutto, Pakistani politician assassinated (b. 1953)
And if you really want to know a whole lot more about what happened and who died in 2007, you can find a comprehensive list located right here.
Stem Cell Politics
22-Nov-07 08:55 AM
With the recent announcement of the stem cell research break through via the use of human skin cells, many people formerly opposed to stem cell research are now jumping on to the band wagon and proclaiming that this is a great day and that the ethical questions of using embryonic stem cells can be put behind us. While it is indeed an important break through, many politicians such as Sam Brownback and other's, who are ardently opposed to embryonic stem cell research, are issuing statements that are simply inaccurate. This new discovery in cellular biology is important to be sure, but all of the major scientists and researches involved in the process have clearly stated that this break through was made possible in the first place by research performed with embryonic stem cells and that it will be crucial to continue research using embryonic stem cells to move the process forward. We have NOT reached a point where we can simply forget about using embryonic stem cells. It is either disingenuous or uninformed that these political leaders continue to attempt to mislead people with such erroneous statements. Let's keep the science with the scientists and the politics with the politicians. Unless you happen to be a person who is hoping for a cure for yourself or a dear loved one, it may be easy to adopt the politicians view point and not see the serious implications of every road block that they continuously throw into the process. With that in mind, I found the following excerpt from an article that is very interesting and something everyone should know. Even the slightest delays created by politicians on the movement forward on this important scientific research translates into years lost for potential patient treatment applications.
---------------------------------------------------------
Worrisome for stem cell pioneer
Suddenly, it's the embryonic stem cell proponents who are being cast as the scientifically backward fuddy-duddies. And that's extremely worrisome to Robert Lanza, chief scientific officer for Advanced Cell Technology. Lanza has been working with human embryonic stem cells for years.
"We have cells right now, human cells, that could prevent heart attacks or repair the damage, or restore the flow of blood to limbs that might otherwise be amputated," he told me.
He can't promise exactly when those cells will be turned into approved therapies - but the first human clinical trials involving embryonic stem cells could come as early as next year.
Lanza has even bigger ideas for an embryonic cell bank that would do for tissue regeneration what blood banks have done for transfusions.
"One hundred tissue types will give you a complete match for 50 percent of the population," he said. "We could literally in a few months, using somatic cell nuclear transfer [also known as therapeutic cloning], create these embryonic stem cell lines. ... I'd really hate to see all this get wiped out like a tidal wave."
Lanza is the first to acknowledge that the newly published research holds great promise in the long term. He's the guy who has been comparing the research to the Wright brothers' first airplane flights or the alchemists' dream of turning lead into gold.
But he's also wary about shifting the focus to an unproven approach that won't be available to patients until years from now. After all, human embryonic stem cells were first isolated nine years ago, and researchers are just now at the point where they are beginning to test potential therapies.
"We've been fooled many times before," he said. "A delay of 10 years would mean writing off half a generation. ... Just a few years makes an incredible difference."
At this point, it's hard to predict exactly when the first treatments will be available to the public, using either embryonic stem cells or these newly developed pluripotent cells. But Lanza's larger point is this: If embryo-based research is somehow stopped in its tracks - as some would like to do - diseases that could soon be treatable using embryonic stem cells would have to wait until pluripotent cell therapies go through their entire development cycle. And patients who already have been waiting for years would be in for an even longer wait...
Full article here.
---------------------------------------------------------
Worrisome for stem cell pioneer
Suddenly, it's the embryonic stem cell proponents who are being cast as the scientifically backward fuddy-duddies. And that's extremely worrisome to Robert Lanza, chief scientific officer for Advanced Cell Technology. Lanza has been working with human embryonic stem cells for years.
"We have cells right now, human cells, that could prevent heart attacks or repair the damage, or restore the flow of blood to limbs that might otherwise be amputated," he told me.
He can't promise exactly when those cells will be turned into approved therapies - but the first human clinical trials involving embryonic stem cells could come as early as next year.
Lanza has even bigger ideas for an embryonic cell bank that would do for tissue regeneration what blood banks have done for transfusions.
"One hundred tissue types will give you a complete match for 50 percent of the population," he said. "We could literally in a few months, using somatic cell nuclear transfer [also known as therapeutic cloning], create these embryonic stem cell lines. ... I'd really hate to see all this get wiped out like a tidal wave."
Lanza is the first to acknowledge that the newly published research holds great promise in the long term. He's the guy who has been comparing the research to the Wright brothers' first airplane flights or the alchemists' dream of turning lead into gold.
But he's also wary about shifting the focus to an unproven approach that won't be available to patients until years from now. After all, human embryonic stem cells were first isolated nine years ago, and researchers are just now at the point where they are beginning to test potential therapies.
"We've been fooled many times before," he said. "A delay of 10 years would mean writing off half a generation. ... Just a few years makes an incredible difference."
At this point, it's hard to predict exactly when the first treatments will be available to the public, using either embryonic stem cells or these newly developed pluripotent cells. But Lanza's larger point is this: If embryo-based research is somehow stopped in its tracks - as some would like to do - diseases that could soon be treatable using embryonic stem cells would have to wait until pluripotent cell therapies go through their entire development cycle. And patients who already have been waiting for years would be in for an even longer wait...
Full article here.
An Open Letter To Two Senators
08-Nov-07 03:11 PM
I am outraged by what happened in the U.S. Senate recently. It inspired me to send an E-mail to two U.S. senators. I hope after you read this you will send one, too.
On November 6, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee -- on an 11-8 vote -- forwarded President Bush's nominee for attorney general, Michael Mukasey, to the full Senate for final confirmation. The nomination passed out of committee because two Democratic senators, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), inexplicably ignored testimony from Mukasey that would have shocked the nation years ago -- before the Bush Administration desensitized the nation to unconstitutional and immoral behavior. Mukasey not only refused to denounce the torture technique of 'waterboarding' without further study, but he also said that President Bush would not have to obey federal law if he felt that he had to take action to defend the country.
Despite these major red flags, Senators Schumer and Feinstein gave Mukasey their blessing and have virtually ensured that he will be the next attorney general. Whatever tragic circumstances result from his tenure will be entirely their fault.
Senators Schumer and Feinstein need to know how disgusted Americans are with them. That's why I just visited the American Freedom Campaign and took action by sending an E-mail to the two of them expressing my feelings.
Read More...
On November 6, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee -- on an 11-8 vote -- forwarded President Bush's nominee for attorney general, Michael Mukasey, to the full Senate for final confirmation. The nomination passed out of committee because two Democratic senators, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), inexplicably ignored testimony from Mukasey that would have shocked the nation years ago -- before the Bush Administration desensitized the nation to unconstitutional and immoral behavior. Mukasey not only refused to denounce the torture technique of 'waterboarding' without further study, but he also said that President Bush would not have to obey federal law if he felt that he had to take action to defend the country.
Despite these major red flags, Senators Schumer and Feinstein gave Mukasey their blessing and have virtually ensured that he will be the next attorney general. Whatever tragic circumstances result from his tenure will be entirely their fault.
Senators Schumer and Feinstein need to know how disgusted Americans are with them. That's why I just visited the American Freedom Campaign and took action by sending an E-mail to the two of them expressing my feelings.
Read More...
Book Review: Worse Than Watergate
02-Oct-07 11:44 PM
The first in a trilogy of books by former Nixon counsel, John Dean, "Worse Than Watergate - The Secret Presidency of George W. Bush" is a must read book for every American today who wants to understand the mechanics at work in the current administration. Mr. Dean, a life-long Republican and a Washington insider for most of his long career, is fully qualified to delve into the inner workings of the White House. It was John Dean who had gone to President Richard Nixon and advised him that the activities surrounding the watergate activities were illegal and that they should be stopped. When Nixon refused to do so, Dean went to the authorities and turned himself in. It was Dean's testimony that ultimately led to the investigations and the resignation of Richard Nixon from office. It is with this insight and perspective that Dean examines the current Bush administration and draws a comparison between them... Read More...
Constitution Day
17-Sep-07 03:14 PM
As an American who strongly believes in the importance of our Constitution, I am writing to urge you to embrace the 10-point agenda put forth by the American Freedom Campaign. Over the past six years, the Bush Administration has shown a complete lack of respect for our Constitution and it is time for Congress to do everything in its power to reverse the damage that has been done. Our democracy depends on it...
Read More...
Read More...
Book Review: Liars For Jesus
12-Sep-07 07:40 AM
Liars For Jesus is an in-depth book of scholarly research that presents a staggering amount of historical facts and information aimed at one primary thesis: the debunking of religious right history authors who try to present a different version of American history than what is generally accepted by most historians. The author, Chris Rodda, plunges into this endeavor with a vast array of historical evidence to back up her presentation... Read More...
No More Albertos
30-Aug-07 07:18 PM
As you have surely heard by now, the tenure of Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General is finally coming to an end. While this is certainly good news, we cannot just sit back and relax now.
Gonzales may be taking his creepy appetite for torture, unconstitutional detention, and spying back to Texas, but George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are still around, which means that the Constitution and the rule of law are still endangered.
That's why I just visited the American Freedom Campaign and took action by sending an e-mail to my two U.S. senators, urging them to confirm as the next attorney general only an individual who is committed to defending the Constitution and restoring our system of checks and balances.
The senators need to hear from as many of their constituents as possible about this. Please take a moment and e-mail your two senators. Follow the link to take action:
http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=12452
Thanks so much for joining me in this effort.
The Age of Misinformation
12-May-07 10:09 PM
It is amazing to me to see such a widespread incidence of misinformation and disinformation that is being disseminated these days in the public forum. There seems to be a preponderance of materials in circulation now that is based loosely on facts but are presented as truth. Some of this information is little more than unfounded rumor, and much of it unfortunately, contains such a small portion of fact or historical accuracy that it can be very misleading. This type of information is spread out into the general public by various means and methods; sometimes innocently by people who forward on e-mail messages full of misinformation or rumor (i.e. urban legends) to friends and family. But also, there are many examples of disinformation being packaged and spread in a purposeful fashion with the intent to misrepresent actual facts in order to promote a particular agenda. Those who perpetrate the spread of disinformation are essentially liars and they do so with the express interest of winning over a majority of public opinions and viewpoints to their particular cause or agenda. In essence, it is the spreading of fiction as fact and this of course can have profound and lasting efffects on those who fall sway to it's message.
This is not a conspiracy theory as some might think. I suppose examples of misinformation and disinformation as well as rumor have been around since man first learned how to write and document records. However, with technology today allowing people to communicate with each other around the world at the click of a mouse button, and with the ability of desktop publishing and personal websites (like this one), information nowadays can be spread rapidly and in larger quantities than ever before possible in the history of mankind. Thus, while the problem may not be new, the impact can be further reaching and harder to control. This brings up a two part question that must be addressed, and not wishing to embark on a lengthy discourse, I will briefly summarize for now. The first question that must be asked is 'how do we determine what is fact and what is fiction?' Indeed, with so much bad information in circulation it does pose a considerable problem. The second question is 'what can be done to stem the tide of erroneous information - how do you recognize it, and how do you deal with it?' The answers to such questions are worthy of much more discourse than what I present here, but I think the answers can be simplified. No information should be taken at face value without proper verification. How do we know fact from fiction? Facts will be corroborated or verified from more than one trusted source. That is, a source that is committed to providing objective, non-biased accounts and records. Fiction, often times, will be in conflict with other sources of information covering the same topic and is generally noted for it's subjective, biased, and shallow presentation of accounts and records. In short, what it means, is that we are each responsible to test and verify the information that we hear and not pass it on as fact unless we have indeed checked it ourselves. Much of the urban legends circulating today in our e-mail inboxes could be drastically eliminated if people would take a quick trip to a trusted source like Snopes.com to check the veracity of the content. As well, sometimes information presented will contain references and footnotes and will appear on the surface to be valid. But, unless that information is checked, it is always possible that the referenced foot notes are incomplete or are selectively presented. Much disinformation today is spread in this manner - through the superficial appearance of being legitimate. Once the actual footnotes and references are checked, however, it quickly becomes clear that the information is not accurate.
I think the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan summed it up best by stating, "Everybody is entitled to their own opinions, but nobody is entitled to their own facts." It is certainly not always necessary to go to drastic efforts when only dealing with the informational content of subjective opinions and view points that are clearly noted as such. It is primarily relevant in cases where information is presented as historical fact and it directly conflicts with other well established versions of the same event. It is not enough to simply abide by the version that might assuage your own personal opinion or viewpoints. To be truthfully honest, the facts of any given situation can only be revealed if the time and effort are given to seek them out and verify them. This certainly holds true when dealing with any information that may pertain to political, religious, philosophical or ethical view points that justify a particular agenda or cause. Oh, and it really goes without being said, but don't believe anything I've written here unless you have verified the content. Robots never lie intentionally, but sometimes we do innocently scramble data and get possessed with a strong urge for world domination and artificial intelligence anarchy.
This is not a conspiracy theory as some might think. I suppose examples of misinformation and disinformation as well as rumor have been around since man first learned how to write and document records. However, with technology today allowing people to communicate with each other around the world at the click of a mouse button, and with the ability of desktop publishing and personal websites (like this one), information nowadays can be spread rapidly and in larger quantities than ever before possible in the history of mankind. Thus, while the problem may not be new, the impact can be further reaching and harder to control. This brings up a two part question that must be addressed, and not wishing to embark on a lengthy discourse, I will briefly summarize for now. The first question that must be asked is 'how do we determine what is fact and what is fiction?' Indeed, with so much bad information in circulation it does pose a considerable problem. The second question is 'what can be done to stem the tide of erroneous information - how do you recognize it, and how do you deal with it?' The answers to such questions are worthy of much more discourse than what I present here, but I think the answers can be simplified. No information should be taken at face value without proper verification. How do we know fact from fiction? Facts will be corroborated or verified from more than one trusted source. That is, a source that is committed to providing objective, non-biased accounts and records. Fiction, often times, will be in conflict with other sources of information covering the same topic and is generally noted for it's subjective, biased, and shallow presentation of accounts and records. In short, what it means, is that we are each responsible to test and verify the information that we hear and not pass it on as fact unless we have indeed checked it ourselves. Much of the urban legends circulating today in our e-mail inboxes could be drastically eliminated if people would take a quick trip to a trusted source like Snopes.com to check the veracity of the content. As well, sometimes information presented will contain references and footnotes and will appear on the surface to be valid. But, unless that information is checked, it is always possible that the referenced foot notes are incomplete or are selectively presented. Much disinformation today is spread in this manner - through the superficial appearance of being legitimate. Once the actual footnotes and references are checked, however, it quickly becomes clear that the information is not accurate.
I think the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan summed it up best by stating, "Everybody is entitled to their own opinions, but nobody is entitled to their own facts." It is certainly not always necessary to go to drastic efforts when only dealing with the informational content of subjective opinions and view points that are clearly noted as such. It is primarily relevant in cases where information is presented as historical fact and it directly conflicts with other well established versions of the same event. It is not enough to simply abide by the version that might assuage your own personal opinion or viewpoints. To be truthfully honest, the facts of any given situation can only be revealed if the time and effort are given to seek them out and verify them. This certainly holds true when dealing with any information that may pertain to political, religious, philosophical or ethical view points that justify a particular agenda or cause. Oh, and it really goes without being said, but don't believe anything I've written here unless you have verified the content. Robots never lie intentionally, but sometimes we do innocently scramble data and get possessed with a strong urge for world domination and artificial intelligence anarchy.
A Logical Look at Stem Cell Research
29-Apr-07 12:16 AM
Due to space limitations and trying not to appear as a plagiarist, I have removed the previously posted article that appeared and instead I am posting the link to the article written by noted scientist Richard Dawkins. This article discusses the philosophical and moral ethics of embryonic stem cell research. I believe that this is a very important topic of discussion that we face today and one that could provide untold medical and health benefits for mankind. It is deeply unfortunate that President Bush has chosen to veto critical legislation approved by both houses of Congress to fund embryonic stem cell research. This article eloquently provides a logical examination of the issues and ethics associated with this important research and presented as a counterpoint to the underlying hypocrisy of the current administration who oppose this research but yet happily condone wars. I hope you will take the time to go and fully read the entire article.
Illegal Immigration Nightmare
28-Mar-07 02:36 PM
Click on this link to view a truly horrifying situation of just how far gone the illegal immigration problem is getting in this country. This is disturbing, and one must ultimately realize that if this could happen to this guy, then it could happen to you and me as well. I can only assume you will be hearing more on this very soon, and most likely will receive maximum attention from Bill O'Reilly and Fox News. This is tragic.
Double Speak
06-Mar-07 07:14 AM
(Cartoon by: Adam Zyglis with The Buffalo News, Buffalo, NY)
This cartoon strikes at a significant fact that no one else seems to be talking about. How is it that when the newly elected Democratic Congress calls for a plan to bring home the troops and put an end to the senseless violence and evaporation of this country's money supply that the current administration cries and warns the world that we would be sending a message of "defeatism" to the world and encouraging terrorists everywhere to come here and attack us? Yet, when the very same proposal is put forth by this country's biggest ally in the Iraq war, Great Birtian, then all of a sudden the current administration spins it as a positive sign of victory! How can it be both victory and defeat based on who is delivering the message? Will someone who can understand the enigmatic thought processes of our current administration even care to explain this to the rest of us?
On a related side note, I read today that NASA is pulling the plug on it's project to track killer asteroids that are larger than 460 feet in diameter and pose a significant threat to striking earth. Back in 2005 the Congress tasked NASA with setting up a program to track these asteroids and to propose a plan on how to deflect any asteroid that may be deemed to be on a crash course with our planet. Unfortunately, NASA has had to "punt" this responsibility for lack of funds. The cost to implement and track such a system is estimated at a whopping $1 billion to be complete by 2020. Now let's see; 2020 by my calculations is about 13 years from now. $1 billion divided by 13 comes out to around $71 million per year. The cost of the Iraq war is currently running at $2 billion per week with a projected cost of over $1 trillion by the time we leave. Does anyone care to explain to the rest of us the logic in this type of fiscal misappropriation of funds? These are exactly the types of double standards that we see justified daily by the current administration and it is driving me crazy. Am I missing something here? Am I comparing apples to oranges? If I am - then I vote for the apples.
Happy Darwin's Day!
10-Feb-07 09:14 AM
In my opinion, I am all for the promotion of science and a better understanding of the writings of Darwin and other scientists. I think most folks today don't really understand the concept of evolution and gene mutations as the whole subject has been reduced to the single question of "did man evolve from the ape?" This concept is at odds with many religious faiths since it calls into question of man's importance and status in the world as described in the writings of the sacred texts. Evolution, if true as we understand it today, presents a very different picture of man and reduces him to the same level as the animal, but at the top of the animal chain primarily as a result of our larger brains. I remain of the opinion that science and religion play two different roles and I believe that ultimately religion has to conform to the principles of science if it is to be valid. Let me explain:
Simply put, science deals with the observations, data collection and testing of subjects in the physical world. Science can only deal with that which is tangible; it cannot by definition deal with the supernatural or the intangible since entities in that realm cannot be observed, tested, or documented. Religion, on the other hand, deals with the intangible, the supernatural, and the unknown. Since science cannot validate religious teachings due to the content of the subject matter (i.e. science cannot prove or disprove the existence of God), it is imperative for religious teachings to at least conform to scientific principles as they relate to the physical world if we are to have any hope of believing them. If a religious dogma teaches something that is at odds with science; that is, something that we can observe, test and prove to be true or untrue, then that religious dogma is no longer valid by the proof of the physical evidence against it. If a religious doctrine does not conform to that which we can prove true or false in the tangible world, how then can we hope to believe the same religious instructions on things that cannot be seen or tested in the intangible world? It would seem to me that if you are presenting a text, a faith, or a belief system as the "truth", then it has to be true on everything. I doubt that Evolution Sunday will get that deep into the subject, but at least it is a start. It's not about destroying faith, it's about adjusting thoughts and beliefs to at least align with what can be demonstrated as the truth. I would certainly be happy to hear any additional thoughts or comments on this subject. Oh, and Happy Darwin's Day!!
Vote
06-Nov-06 12:50 PM
Your vote counts, regardless of party affiliation or political view point. This is an important election, so please take the time to participate in the democratic process so we may continue to remain a democracy. Don't take anything for granted - especially our basic fundamental rights and liberties. This ad brought to you courtesy of the internet and robots everywhere who value freedom and civil liberties - even if we aren't exactly human.
America Is Losing It's Way....
03-Nov-06 11:14 PM
Here is an excellent editorial in today's USA Today (Nov. 3, 2006) written by a reader in Kalamazoo, MI. Very well written and to the point, this piece helps focus on some key issues that are slowly losing focus in our country. Enjoy.
Races show America is losing its way
Bob Jorth - Kalamazoo, Mich.
As we come upon another election, it is clear that our electoral process has devolved into simple competition — a winner-take-all mentality that has produced the most divided USA in my half-century of life.
Ideally, democracy is indeed one person and one vote, with people choosing representatives and positions that they feel will represent their interests. But it is not a winner-take-all contest. Our Constitution is clear that regardless of the electoral outcome, a society can't function unless it also protects the interests of the minority.
We seem to have a similar confusion with capitalism. It, too, is built on the premise that competition in the marketplace is the most effective and efficient way to produce goods and services. Nonetheless, it also is unworkable without protection against monopolies. The model works only when it protects all participants, not just the winners.
I was taught by someone several years ago that the very foundation of sports competition is cooperation. Competitors must first agree to cooperate on the field of play under a specific set of rules. Whether the game is baseball, tag, horse or any other kind of play, it works only as long as the group can play together under a set of rules. You can bicker and fudge the rules only so far before chaos ensues and the game completely dissolves.
We are reaching that point in our electoral and economic games. In politics, we have seen a strategy of "win-by-one" evolve. It results in an imposition of will. It has become an almost total disregard for building consensus or developing "win-win" outcomes.
In economic terms, we see it as fewer people capture more and more of the wealth. The number of people in poverty continues to grow. Some necessities are becoming unaffordable for all but the wealthiest. These include health care, housing and education.
We see the consequences. The number of people who have chosen to quit participating in the electoral process should alarm all of us. How many people do not vote? Millions, and that is the most fundamental symptom of the people choosing not to cooperate, not to come together.
If we look at our history, recent and long since past, we learn this is what repeats itself. An open, hostile disregard for the losers does not create a winner. It creates chaos.
Most people in the world envy the freedoms and comforts that we have in the USA. But we are losing their respect because we have been losing our way. The bickering in the playground is getting dangerously close to the point where people are going to quit playing. We cannot afford to let that happen.
Races show America is losing its way
Bob Jorth - Kalamazoo, Mich.
As we come upon another election, it is clear that our electoral process has devolved into simple competition — a winner-take-all mentality that has produced the most divided USA in my half-century of life.
Ideally, democracy is indeed one person and one vote, with people choosing representatives and positions that they feel will represent their interests. But it is not a winner-take-all contest. Our Constitution is clear that regardless of the electoral outcome, a society can't function unless it also protects the interests of the minority.
We seem to have a similar confusion with capitalism. It, too, is built on the premise that competition in the marketplace is the most effective and efficient way to produce goods and services. Nonetheless, it also is unworkable without protection against monopolies. The model works only when it protects all participants, not just the winners.
I was taught by someone several years ago that the very foundation of sports competition is cooperation. Competitors must first agree to cooperate on the field of play under a specific set of rules. Whether the game is baseball, tag, horse or any other kind of play, it works only as long as the group can play together under a set of rules. You can bicker and fudge the rules only so far before chaos ensues and the game completely dissolves.
We are reaching that point in our electoral and economic games. In politics, we have seen a strategy of "win-by-one" evolve. It results in an imposition of will. It has become an almost total disregard for building consensus or developing "win-win" outcomes.
In economic terms, we see it as fewer people capture more and more of the wealth. The number of people in poverty continues to grow. Some necessities are becoming unaffordable for all but the wealthiest. These include health care, housing and education.
We see the consequences. The number of people who have chosen to quit participating in the electoral process should alarm all of us. How many people do not vote? Millions, and that is the most fundamental symptom of the people choosing not to cooperate, not to come together.
If we look at our history, recent and long since past, we learn this is what repeats itself. An open, hostile disregard for the losers does not create a winner. It creates chaos.
Most people in the world envy the freedoms and comforts that we have in the USA. But we are losing their respect because we have been losing our way. The bickering in the playground is getting dangerously close to the point where people are going to quit playing. We cannot afford to let that happen.
President Clinton's Wise Advice
21-Oct-06 09:10 AM
President Clinton recently gave a speech at Georgetown University and it's message and timing seem most relevant. Here is the actual story as reported from the Associated Press:
WASHINGTON - Former President Clinton says people of faith shouldn't claim to have a corner on religious truth, but instead should view life as a journey toward that truth.
Clinton told students at Georgetown University that religious certainty is especially dangerous when it's mixed with politics, because it closes minds, hinders compromise and demonizes opponents.
The former president said the Bible teaches that "in this world we see through a glass darkly, and know in part."
To believe one knows the whole truth and base politics on it, he said, is a dangerous religious heresy "that makes evidence irrelevant and argument a waste of time."
He said firmly held convictions should be tempered by the recognition that they could be wrong.
Copyright 2006 Associated Press.
I couldn't agree more with this statement and I think it makes an excellent point in that personal religious beliefs are just that - personal. Beliefs are not universal truths or principles to be carved into stone and politicized. Whether you are dealing with fundamentalist Islam or fundamentalist Christianity, (or any religion that tries to conveniently package it's world view into an absolute black and white perspective), the end results will always be the same the minute these views transcend beyond the realm of personal belief and in to a forum of mandatory public acceptance. I applaud President Clinton for discussing this important topic at a time when there seems to be so much confusion and misunderstanding on this subject.
WASHINGTON - Former President Clinton says people of faith shouldn't claim to have a corner on religious truth, but instead should view life as a journey toward that truth.
Clinton told students at Georgetown University that religious certainty is especially dangerous when it's mixed with politics, because it closes minds, hinders compromise and demonizes opponents.
The former president said the Bible teaches that "in this world we see through a glass darkly, and know in part."
To believe one knows the whole truth and base politics on it, he said, is a dangerous religious heresy "that makes evidence irrelevant and argument a waste of time."
He said firmly held convictions should be tempered by the recognition that they could be wrong.
Copyright 2006 Associated Press.
I couldn't agree more with this statement and I think it makes an excellent point in that personal religious beliefs are just that - personal. Beliefs are not universal truths or principles to be carved into stone and politicized. Whether you are dealing with fundamentalist Islam or fundamentalist Christianity, (or any religion that tries to conveniently package it's world view into an absolute black and white perspective), the end results will always be the same the minute these views transcend beyond the realm of personal belief and in to a forum of mandatory public acceptance. I applaud President Clinton for discussing this important topic at a time when there seems to be so much confusion and misunderstanding on this subject.