Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say that I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one
How can I go forward when I don't know which way I'm facing?
How can I go forward when I don't know which way to turn?
How can I go forward into something I'm not sure of?
Oh no, oh no
How can I have feeling when I don't know if it's a feeling?
How can I feel something if I just don't know how to feel?
How can I have feelings when my feelings have always been denied?
Oh no, oh no
You know life can be long
And you got to be so strong
And the world is so tough
Sometimes I feel I've had enough
How can I give love when I don't know what it is I'm giving?
How can I give love when I just don't know how to give?
How can I give love when love is something I ain't never had?
Oh no, oh no
You know life can be long
You've got to be so strong
And the world she is tough
Sometimes I feel I've had enough
How can we go forward when we don't know which way we're facing?
How can we go forward when we don't know which way to turn?
How can we go forward into something we're not sure of?
Oh no, oh no
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Thursday, January 8, 2009
What if?
A friend of mine has suggested that if you want to save the world, ask a child. I know she's not the first. But really, why ask a child? What's so special and wise about someone who can't think for themselves? They haven't seen the world, so how can they fix it? Is the world even broken?
Yes, my friends, that and more. Ask a child because they do think for themselves. Ask a child because when you get an answer, they won't be thinking of themselves. Ask a child how to help a child. Ask a child how to help your againg parents. Ask a child about death when you're feeling down. Ask a child about pain when you're feeling cocky. If you're hot shit, why ask someone who sits in their own shit?
Why not?
The people who haven't decided that the world is normal and nothing can change, they're the people we need to have as advisors. Advisors should NOT be seen-and-not-heard. Advisors like these need to be given priority, and given an honest ear.
Young blood runs in the streets in Athens and Gaza and Mumbai. Young blood runs in the veins of the movers, the shakers, the visionaries and the revolutionaries. Tap the flow of the second to stem the flow of the first.
Ask anyone under three feet tall anything and you'l get an answer in Ifspeak. Why did we stop speaking Ifspeak? Ifspeak is the language of the people who advance our world. Can'tspeak is the language of the people that drain our world. What if we really could eliminate global hunger? We can't, you say? What if we just run the numbers. We can't redirect those resources anyway? Why not? Why should you be the one to say that ntohing can change. Push your pencil elsewhere, Jack, I'm pushing the truth.
Yes, my friends, that and more. Ask a child because they do think for themselves. Ask a child because when you get an answer, they won't be thinking of themselves. Ask a child how to help a child. Ask a child how to help your againg parents. Ask a child about death when you're feeling down. Ask a child about pain when you're feeling cocky. If you're hot shit, why ask someone who sits in their own shit?
Why not?
The people who haven't decided that the world is normal and nothing can change, they're the people we need to have as advisors. Advisors should NOT be seen-and-not-heard. Advisors like these need to be given priority, and given an honest ear.
Young blood runs in the streets in Athens and Gaza and Mumbai. Young blood runs in the veins of the movers, the shakers, the visionaries and the revolutionaries. Tap the flow of the second to stem the flow of the first.
Ask anyone under three feet tall anything and you'l get an answer in Ifspeak. Why did we stop speaking Ifspeak? Ifspeak is the language of the people who advance our world. Can'tspeak is the language of the people that drain our world. What if we really could eliminate global hunger? We can't, you say? What if we just run the numbers. We can't redirect those resources anyway? Why not? Why should you be the one to say that ntohing can change. Push your pencil elsewhere, Jack, I'm pushing the truth.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Beep... Beep... Beep...
We interrupt your regularly scheduled music and general piggishness to bring you yet another op-ed. This time about immigration.
I have a whole spiel about illegal immigration. This isn't it.
This is actually about legal immigration. Not so much of a hot-button topic, I know, but bear with me. It's usually the uninteresting things that are the most important. This is no exception.
As immigration law stands today, if you want to get permanent resident status and the opportunity to apply for citizenship, it's a hell of a lot easier if you're married to a U.S. citizen. You know where I'm going with this. What if you legally can't get married?
Well, HRC is having some sort of conference to talk about it. I've been to conferences like that for other issues. I'd rather put a new roof on the Death Valley ranger station in the middle of the day, then shove two pinecones up my nose before I go to another one. Despite their bad reputation, most business meetings aren't like the ones at Dilbert's company. Most meetings in most functional companies are useful, productive, and to the point. Most of the time, when trying to get something done, a good meeting is the best way to speed it along.
"Fact-finding" conferences like the one coming up don't fall under that category. Those conferences are just a circlejerk where all of the big decision makers get together, state the obvious, and beat around the bush. And in most cases, give bad powerpoints. They serve a purpose, in that once you get these conferences out of the way, you can actually do something useful.
Generally, HRC does a great job of organizing and soliciting action on issues that matter. They hire people who can do the Politician Two-Step and get some votes changed. But really, who gives a damn about this "education event?" Really, teach-ins only work if they're reaching an audience who didn't know. How many people are going to the immigration teach-in who might actually gain something from it? You can't give me enough light refreshments to listen to a bunch of lawyers talk about this topic. It's information I would like to have, but I'd like to not have my soul crushed in the process. Okay, so let's say fortune strikes and everyone finds the conference very useful. Now here's what I'd like to know. Who the fuck is going to do anything about it?
I have a whole spiel about illegal immigration. This isn't it.
This is actually about legal immigration. Not so much of a hot-button topic, I know, but bear with me. It's usually the uninteresting things that are the most important. This is no exception.
As immigration law stands today, if you want to get permanent resident status and the opportunity to apply for citizenship, it's a hell of a lot easier if you're married to a U.S. citizen. You know where I'm going with this. What if you legally can't get married?
Well, HRC is having some sort of conference to talk about it. I've been to conferences like that for other issues. I'd rather put a new roof on the Death Valley ranger station in the middle of the day, then shove two pinecones up my nose before I go to another one. Despite their bad reputation, most business meetings aren't like the ones at Dilbert's company. Most meetings in most functional companies are useful, productive, and to the point. Most of the time, when trying to get something done, a good meeting is the best way to speed it along.
"Fact-finding" conferences like the one coming up don't fall under that category. Those conferences are just a circlejerk where all of the big decision makers get together, state the obvious, and beat around the bush. And in most cases, give bad powerpoints. They serve a purpose, in that once you get these conferences out of the way, you can actually do something useful.
Generally, HRC does a great job of organizing and soliciting action on issues that matter. They hire people who can do the Politician Two-Step and get some votes changed. But really, who gives a damn about this "education event?" Really, teach-ins only work if they're reaching an audience who didn't know. How many people are going to the immigration teach-in who might actually gain something from it? You can't give me enough light refreshments to listen to a bunch of lawyers talk about this topic. It's information I would like to have, but I'd like to not have my soul crushed in the process. Okay, so let's say fortune strikes and everyone finds the conference very useful. Now here's what I'd like to know. Who the fuck is going to do anything about it?
Friday, July 4, 2008
Obama Girl
Let's talk about Obama Girl for a second, here. All ya'll know me, you know where I'm going with this. I can guarantee you, this will have absolutely NOTHING to do with politics.
Ever watch the Dukes of Hazzard? Remember Daisy Duke's shorts? Of course you do. Unfortunately, way too many people went out and bought cutoff denim shorts. People who shouldn't be wearing short shorts. But, boy howdy, is Obama Girl qualified.
I should probably metnion something about that song, other than the fact that it is now stuck in my head. From a musical standpoint, it's just a simple R&B formula, but there are enough layers to it to stay interesting. You know, a catchy chorus, some ambient background vocals, infectious, sultry rhythm, oh and did I mention the girl dancing to it?
I know what you're saying right now. It's really obvious that this whole "Obama Girl" thing was just a ploy for fame on Ms. Ettinger's part. I say yeah, so? It's actually relevant to politics in the same way that SNL and Jay Leno are. It's not that she was trying to influence votes or anything, just that she was trying to entertain the masses.
And she does it well. The video has good camerawork (obviously a red-blooded human being behind that camera).
So she's got some applicable, entertaining, lighthearted videos. She's got legs from here to the next county. And it's obvious that she's actually very intelligent and well-informed, with a wicked sense of timing. And she carries herself well, with that same air Daisy Duke had.
So really, why can't the line be "I've got a crush on Obama Girl"?
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
No Excuse
If I were the right age, I'd probably be in the Air Force right now.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90706543
Federal court rules against military gays policy
from The Associated Press
SEATTLE May 21, 2008, 10:49 pm ET · The military cannot automatically discharge people because they're gay, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday in the case of a decorated flight nurse who sued the Air Force over her dismissal.
The three judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not strike down the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. But they reinstated Maj. Margaret Witt's lawsuit, saying the Air Force must prove that her dismissal furthered the military's goals of troop readiness and unit cohesion.
The "don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue, don't harass" policy prohibits the military from asking about the sexual orientation of service members but requires discharge of those who acknowledge being gay or engaging in homosexual activity.
Wednesday's ruling led opponents of the policy to declare its days numbered. It is also the first appeals court ruling in the country that evaluated the policy through the lens of a 2003 Supreme Court decision that struck down a Texas ban on sodomy as an unconstitutional intrusion on privacy.
When gay service members have sued over their dismissals, courts historically have accepted the military's argument that having gays in the service is generally bad for morale and can lead to sexual tension.
But the Supreme Court's opinion in the Texas case changed the legal landscape, the judges said, and requires more scrutiny over whether "don't ask, don't tell" is constitutional as applied in individual cases.
Under Wednesday's ruling, military officials "need to prove that having this particular gay person in the unit really hurts morale, and the only way to improve morale is to discharge this person," said Aaron Caplan, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington state who worked on the case.
Witt, a flight nurse based at McChord Air Force Base near Tacoma, was suspended without pay in 2004 after the Air Force received a tip that she had been in a long-term relationship with a civilian woman. Witt was honorably discharged in October 2007 after having put in 18 years — two short of what she needed to receive retirement benefits.
She sued the Air Force in 2006, but U.S. District Judge Ronald B. Leighton dismissed her claims, saying the Supreme Court's ruling in Lawrence v. Texas did not change the legality of "don't ask, don't tell."
The appeals court judges disagreed.
"When the government attempts to intrude upon the personal and private lives of homosexuals, the government must advance an important governmental interest ... and the intrusion must be necessary to further that interest," wrote Judge Ronald M. Gould.
One of the judges, William C. Canby Jr., issued a partial dissent, saying that the ruling didn't go far enough. He argued that the Air Force should have to show that the policy itself "is necessary to serve a compelling governmental interest and that it sweeps no more broadly than necessary."
Gay service members who are discharged can sue in federal court, and if the military doesn't prove it had a good reason for the dismissal, the cases will go forward, Caplan said.
Another attorney for Witt, James Lobsenz, hailed the ruling as the beginning of the end for "don't ask, don't tell."
"If the various branches of the Armed Forces have to start proving each application of the policy makes sense, then it's not going to be only Maj. Witt who's going to win," Lobsenz said. "Eventually, they're going to say, 'This is dumb. ... It's time to scrap the policy.'"
An Air Force spokeswoman said she had no comment on the decision and directed inquiries to the Defense Department.
Lt. Col. Todd Vician, a Defense spokesman, said he did not know specifics of the case and could not comment beyond noting that "the DOD policy simply enacts the law as set forth by Congress."
Witt joined the Air Force in 1987 and switched from active duty to the reserves in 1995. She cared for injured patients on military flights and in operating rooms. She was promoted to major in 1999, and she deployed to Oman in 2003 in support of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.
A citation from President Bush that year said, "Her airmanship and courage directly contributed to the successful accomplishment of important missions under extremely hazardous conditions."
Her suspension and discharge came during a shortage of flight nurses and outraged many of her colleagues — one of whom, a sergeant, retired in protest.
"I am thrilled by the court's recognition that I can't be discharged without proving that I was harmful to morale," Witt said in a statement. "I am proud of my career and want to continue doing my job. Wounded people never asked me about my sexual orientation. They were just glad to see me there."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90706543
Federal court rules against military gays policy
from The Associated Press
SEATTLE May 21, 2008, 10:49 pm ET · The military cannot automatically discharge people because they're gay, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday in the case of a decorated flight nurse who sued the Air Force over her dismissal.
The three judges from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not strike down the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. But they reinstated Maj. Margaret Witt's lawsuit, saying the Air Force must prove that her dismissal furthered the military's goals of troop readiness and unit cohesion.
The "don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue, don't harass" policy prohibits the military from asking about the sexual orientation of service members but requires discharge of those who acknowledge being gay or engaging in homosexual activity.
Wednesday's ruling led opponents of the policy to declare its days numbered. It is also the first appeals court ruling in the country that evaluated the policy through the lens of a 2003 Supreme Court decision that struck down a Texas ban on sodomy as an unconstitutional intrusion on privacy.
When gay service members have sued over their dismissals, courts historically have accepted the military's argument that having gays in the service is generally bad for morale and can lead to sexual tension.
But the Supreme Court's opinion in the Texas case changed the legal landscape, the judges said, and requires more scrutiny over whether "don't ask, don't tell" is constitutional as applied in individual cases.
Under Wednesday's ruling, military officials "need to prove that having this particular gay person in the unit really hurts morale, and the only way to improve morale is to discharge this person," said Aaron Caplan, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington state who worked on the case.
Witt, a flight nurse based at McChord Air Force Base near Tacoma, was suspended without pay in 2004 after the Air Force received a tip that she had been in a long-term relationship with a civilian woman. Witt was honorably discharged in October 2007 after having put in 18 years — two short of what she needed to receive retirement benefits.
She sued the Air Force in 2006, but U.S. District Judge Ronald B. Leighton dismissed her claims, saying the Supreme Court's ruling in Lawrence v. Texas did not change the legality of "don't ask, don't tell."
The appeals court judges disagreed.
"When the government attempts to intrude upon the personal and private lives of homosexuals, the government must advance an important governmental interest ... and the intrusion must be necessary to further that interest," wrote Judge Ronald M. Gould.
One of the judges, William C. Canby Jr., issued a partial dissent, saying that the ruling didn't go far enough. He argued that the Air Force should have to show that the policy itself "is necessary to serve a compelling governmental interest and that it sweeps no more broadly than necessary."
Gay service members who are discharged can sue in federal court, and if the military doesn't prove it had a good reason for the dismissal, the cases will go forward, Caplan said.
Another attorney for Witt, James Lobsenz, hailed the ruling as the beginning of the end for "don't ask, don't tell."
"If the various branches of the Armed Forces have to start proving each application of the policy makes sense, then it's not going to be only Maj. Witt who's going to win," Lobsenz said. "Eventually, they're going to say, 'This is dumb. ... It's time to scrap the policy.'"
An Air Force spokeswoman said she had no comment on the decision and directed inquiries to the Defense Department.
Lt. Col. Todd Vician, a Defense spokesman, said he did not know specifics of the case and could not comment beyond noting that "the DOD policy simply enacts the law as set forth by Congress."
Witt joined the Air Force in 1987 and switched from active duty to the reserves in 1995. She cared for injured patients on military flights and in operating rooms. She was promoted to major in 1999, and she deployed to Oman in 2003 in support of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.
A citation from President Bush that year said, "Her airmanship and courage directly contributed to the successful accomplishment of important missions under extremely hazardous conditions."
Her suspension and discharge came during a shortage of flight nurses and outraged many of her colleagues — one of whom, a sergeant, retired in protest.
"I am thrilled by the court's recognition that I can't be discharged without proving that I was harmful to morale," Witt said in a statement. "I am proud of my career and want to continue doing my job. Wounded people never asked me about my sexual orientation. They were just glad to see me there."
Monday, May 5, 2008
Welcome: how's ya like it? (the rant)
As an aside from my main blog, Your Daily Redneck Moment, I will be putting in my two cents on political issues, doubletalk on both sides, and tossing in some philosophy just for good measure.
First of all, I would like to ask all three presidential candidates, as well as all of the news media, what the fuck? Seriously, I've been asking for clarification, telling you to shut up, or explaining why I don't even care about whatever you're freaking out about, but no matter how loud I talk to the TV, all ya'll don't listen. I know I haven't been the only one shouting at my TV during some of these televised events. On behalf of all of us, who do you think you are, and where do you get off telling us what to think?
Global warming: not a lie, but definitely bad science. In the past, higher CO2 has been because of increased solar heat, based on solar activity cycles and how close we are. Hotter = more plants, more plants = more carbon in the air as they decompose. You 'scientists' have decided that the cart is pushing the horse.
Life is resilient. It will survive an increse of 12 degrees at the pole and 1 degree at the equator. Extinction is natural. Life has survived asteroid impacts that would have destroyed the human race. The Ice Age caused millions of extinctions, but life survived. Calm down, people. This means we get NEW critters to eat.
KATRINA WAS NOT A PRODUCT OF GLOBAL WARMING. That disaster was product of idiotic planning. Seriously, have you ever tried to keep water out of the lowest point in your yard? It doesn't stay gone very long. Now imagine placing all of your electronics in that low spot and blaming the fact that it was THE WORST PLACE YOUR COULD POSSIBLY PUT THEM on illegal immigrants and bad sci-fi writers, and blame them for the fact that now, you have no TV, and your cell phone contains algae.
Sounds like drunk-idiot logic, doesn't it?
__________________________________
Danica Patrick's good or bad indy-car preformance is billed as the only be-all, end-all indicator of whether or not women can race. When AJ Allmandinger fails to qualify, nobody says, "Maybe men just can't make it in motorsports." They say, "AJ needs a better crew, more money to research, and most of all, give him time." We have one, count em, one, woman racing in indycar. Sometimes, its the person, or the other circumastances, that determines their performance. We need a larger sample size, and I will punch the next newscaster that says Danica's performance is an indicator of all women. Face or gut, buddy? Here, I'll even take off my rings, just to be nice.
One the same token, this is the first time that a woman has had a serious bid for the U.S. presidency. But when she doesn't get nominated, or somehow she IS nominated and loses the general election, let me tell you, it is because she is a calculating, double-talking politician, and we know it. I don't care if you're God incarnate, if you act like she has, I'm not voting for you.
(Alice Cooper for president)
Don't treat Hillary Clinton's performance as an indicator of whether women can get elected, treat it as an indicator of whether THAT woman can get elected. I say no, she can't.
Same with Barack Obama. He scares me. He scares me on a deep level, because he has such a following of impressionable, outspoken sheep. Really, that's what most of the young generation is, sheep. Obama's a great speaker. So was Hitler. So was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. They all have different adgendas. If JFK and Barack Obama somehow, with some kind of time-space anomaly, could switch bodies, it is likely that JFK-body/Obama-brain would not have won in 1960, and that Obama-body/JFK-brain would be nominated and elected this year. It's not just about someone's demographics, it's also about their beliefs. And it's about what they're going to do once they have power.
Maybe Obama honestly thinks he can be America's messiah. Whatever. Maybe he'd do precisely what I want him to do. Maybe he'd mean well and accidentally screw up our country more. He's naive. He also isn't specific. Please, anyone, tell me what SPECIFIC changes he'll give us, and how. Maybe he'd be shot before May. I don't know. But there are two many unkowns, and I'd rather have the devil I know than the devil I don't.
Which brings me to John McCain. The straight-talk-express is anything but, but the well-oiled neocon propaganda machine is predictable. Fox News has the most comprehensive news coverage because they try to preemp anyone else getting ahold of the story, and they put out the party line about whatever happened. By knowing what ACTUALLY happened and how they're trying to sell it (video and pictures vs. judgements, descriptions, and absolutes), one can tell what they're trying to cover up and why.
The propaganda machine is such that we can say with relative certainty what we'll get with a McCain presidency. Even if it's disturbing, curtails our freedoms more (and makes us WANT it; as the people did in Fahrenheit 451), and gives the appreance of improving our position while actually employing shortsighted policies to undermine it, we know what we'll get.
I don't believe any of the candidates will do the right thing for this country, and the more news bather I hear about it, the more I want to go postal. But the solution is to turn the TV off, tape all of the broadcasts for posterity, and just chill. Seriously, people, just chill. Local politics are much more important, and that's where democracy really works. one out of 300 million is not much, especially when your vote doens't actually count for much, but one out of 3 million is something. One out of 1 million even better. Local politics have low turnouts anyway. Improve your own communities, cities, and states, people.
_______________________
Let's talk about that buzzword of the day: terrorism. Terrorism is the use of violence to intimidate. Activism is the use of peace OR violence to affect and inspire change. Psychological terrorism is the continued repetition of the concept that we are ALWAYS in extreme danger from our enemy du jour. The man in the the cloak with the talisman can keep you safe.
Now let's distinguish violent activism and terrorism from another form of violence: the snap-and-shoot-up-a-mall-or-build-a-tank-and-rampage-through-a-small-Colorado-town. That has no adgenda but revenge. It is criminal, but not terrorism. School shootings are not terrorism-- they are terrible, but not terrorism.
Terrorism is raining napalm on people who may or may not be enemy combatants (but probably aren't.. or weren't until you napalmed them) in order to clear jungle and, primarily, instill fear and terror in those who want to fight you.
Terrorism is "shocking and awing" the enemy into blind submission. Terrorism is a point of view. Terrorism is training and arming people who hate the people they're suppost to keep peacful.
"Death solves all problems: No man, no problem." -- Joseph Stalin.
Terrorism is telling people that in order to keep them safe, one must search for and invent enemies among them.
Terrorism is what the government is doing right now.
Arrest them.
_________________________
Ethanol. Is tha tnot the most idiotic fuel you've ver heard of? Ask any distiller: You don't get that much ethanol from a given volume of corn. Even if we use OUR ENTIRE FOOD CROP to make fuel, we'll still need oil, and then we'll need foriegn food, too, which means we'd be subject to whatever country sold it. Think about that.
Methanol can be fermented out of and distilled from wood, which is why it's called wood alcohol. That's what Indy cars run on. Pikes Peak competitors like it, too. Per gallon, it has less energy than gas, but by distilling things that don't need oil-based fertilizers and would otherwise have been left to rot, we really would be getting a net energy GAIN from it. But corn's more glamorous than sawdust.
________________________
Isn't nuclear just stupid? It has a lower accident rate than coal, but when you have a coal accident, it doens't pollute rivers, kill thousands, and render an area uninhabitable. Accidents can, will, and HAVE happened. Plus, it's not zero-emmissions: we need to store all that radioactive poison somewhere. For longer than civilization has even esisted so far.
We'll eventually run out of uranium, too. It's just like oil: a finite naural resource. Dumbass.
And get this: now they want to ship all that spent fuel by highway and train THROUGH EVERY MAJOR CITY IN THE U.S. in order to stuff it in a Nevada mounatin and contaminate their drinking water. No more hanging out at the railyard. It starts in 2010. Allegedly. The containers are supposed to be unmarked. That semi in traffic that's tailgating you might be darrying enough poison to contaminate the s=whole city.
I know a guy that literally lives spitting distance from the train tracks. Think about that, nuclear waste going by right outside your house. Is that really safe?
I love eating at Giuseppe's Old Depot Restaurant in Colroado Springs. Best pizza in the whole state. I'm not sure I would ever be comfortable eating at the train depot with at least three trains going by during the meal, just feet away, some of which may be carrying unmarked nuclear waste.
Whoever decided this was a good idea, c'mere. I'll put my rings back on for you. Face or gut?
First of all, I would like to ask all three presidential candidates, as well as all of the news media, what the fuck? Seriously, I've been asking for clarification, telling you to shut up, or explaining why I don't even care about whatever you're freaking out about, but no matter how loud I talk to the TV, all ya'll don't listen. I know I haven't been the only one shouting at my TV during some of these televised events. On behalf of all of us, who do you think you are, and where do you get off telling us what to think?
Global warming: not a lie, but definitely bad science. In the past, higher CO2 has been because of increased solar heat, based on solar activity cycles and how close we are. Hotter = more plants, more plants = more carbon in the air as they decompose. You 'scientists' have decided that the cart is pushing the horse.
Life is resilient. It will survive an increse of 12 degrees at the pole and 1 degree at the equator. Extinction is natural. Life has survived asteroid impacts that would have destroyed the human race. The Ice Age caused millions of extinctions, but life survived. Calm down, people. This means we get NEW critters to eat.
KATRINA WAS NOT A PRODUCT OF GLOBAL WARMING. That disaster was product of idiotic planning. Seriously, have you ever tried to keep water out of the lowest point in your yard? It doesn't stay gone very long. Now imagine placing all of your electronics in that low spot and blaming the fact that it was THE WORST PLACE YOUR COULD POSSIBLY PUT THEM on illegal immigrants and bad sci-fi writers, and blame them for the fact that now, you have no TV, and your cell phone contains algae.
Sounds like drunk-idiot logic, doesn't it?
__________________________________
Danica Patrick's good or bad indy-car preformance is billed as the only be-all, end-all indicator of whether or not women can race. When AJ Allmandinger fails to qualify, nobody says, "Maybe men just can't make it in motorsports." They say, "AJ needs a better crew, more money to research, and most of all, give him time." We have one, count em, one, woman racing in indycar. Sometimes, its the person, or the other circumastances, that determines their performance. We need a larger sample size, and I will punch the next newscaster that says Danica's performance is an indicator of all women. Face or gut, buddy? Here, I'll even take off my rings, just to be nice.
One the same token, this is the first time that a woman has had a serious bid for the U.S. presidency. But when she doesn't get nominated, or somehow she IS nominated and loses the general election, let me tell you, it is because she is a calculating, double-talking politician, and we know it. I don't care if you're God incarnate, if you act like she has, I'm not voting for you.
(Alice Cooper for president)
Don't treat Hillary Clinton's performance as an indicator of whether women can get elected, treat it as an indicator of whether THAT woman can get elected. I say no, she can't.
Same with Barack Obama. He scares me. He scares me on a deep level, because he has such a following of impressionable, outspoken sheep. Really, that's what most of the young generation is, sheep. Obama's a great speaker. So was Hitler. So was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. They all have different adgendas. If JFK and Barack Obama somehow, with some kind of time-space anomaly, could switch bodies, it is likely that JFK-body/Obama-brain would not have won in 1960, and that Obama-body/JFK-brain would be nominated and elected this year. It's not just about someone's demographics, it's also about their beliefs. And it's about what they're going to do once they have power.
Maybe Obama honestly thinks he can be America's messiah. Whatever. Maybe he'd do precisely what I want him to do. Maybe he'd mean well and accidentally screw up our country more. He's naive. He also isn't specific. Please, anyone, tell me what SPECIFIC changes he'll give us, and how. Maybe he'd be shot before May. I don't know. But there are two many unkowns, and I'd rather have the devil I know than the devil I don't.
Which brings me to John McCain. The straight-talk-express is anything but, but the well-oiled neocon propaganda machine is predictable. Fox News has the most comprehensive news coverage because they try to preemp anyone else getting ahold of the story, and they put out the party line about whatever happened. By knowing what ACTUALLY happened and how they're trying to sell it (video and pictures vs. judgements, descriptions, and absolutes), one can tell what they're trying to cover up and why.
The propaganda machine is such that we can say with relative certainty what we'll get with a McCain presidency. Even if it's disturbing, curtails our freedoms more (and makes us WANT it; as the people did in Fahrenheit 451), and gives the appreance of improving our position while actually employing shortsighted policies to undermine it, we know what we'll get.
I don't believe any of the candidates will do the right thing for this country, and the more news bather I hear about it, the more I want to go postal. But the solution is to turn the TV off, tape all of the broadcasts for posterity, and just chill. Seriously, people, just chill. Local politics are much more important, and that's where democracy really works. one out of 300 million is not much, especially when your vote doens't actually count for much, but one out of 3 million is something. One out of 1 million even better. Local politics have low turnouts anyway. Improve your own communities, cities, and states, people.
_______________________
Let's talk about that buzzword of the day: terrorism. Terrorism is the use of violence to intimidate. Activism is the use of peace OR violence to affect and inspire change. Psychological terrorism is the continued repetition of the concept that we are ALWAYS in extreme danger from our enemy du jour. The man in the the cloak with the talisman can keep you safe.
Now let's distinguish violent activism and terrorism from another form of violence: the snap-and-shoot-up-a-mall-or-build-a-tank-and-rampage-through-a-small-Colorado-town. That has no adgenda but revenge. It is criminal, but not terrorism. School shootings are not terrorism-- they are terrible, but not terrorism.
Terrorism is raining napalm on people who may or may not be enemy combatants (but probably aren't.. or weren't until you napalmed them) in order to clear jungle and, primarily, instill fear and terror in those who want to fight you.
Terrorism is "shocking and awing" the enemy into blind submission. Terrorism is a point of view. Terrorism is training and arming people who hate the people they're suppost to keep peacful.
"Death solves all problems: No man, no problem." -- Joseph Stalin.
Terrorism is telling people that in order to keep them safe, one must search for and invent enemies among them.
Terrorism is what the government is doing right now.
Arrest them.
_________________________
Ethanol. Is tha tnot the most idiotic fuel you've ver heard of? Ask any distiller: You don't get that much ethanol from a given volume of corn. Even if we use OUR ENTIRE FOOD CROP to make fuel, we'll still need oil, and then we'll need foriegn food, too, which means we'd be subject to whatever country sold it. Think about that.
Methanol can be fermented out of and distilled from wood, which is why it's called wood alcohol. That's what Indy cars run on. Pikes Peak competitors like it, too. Per gallon, it has less energy than gas, but by distilling things that don't need oil-based fertilizers and would otherwise have been left to rot, we really would be getting a net energy GAIN from it. But corn's more glamorous than sawdust.
________________________
Isn't nuclear just stupid? It has a lower accident rate than coal, but when you have a coal accident, it doens't pollute rivers, kill thousands, and render an area uninhabitable. Accidents can, will, and HAVE happened. Plus, it's not zero-emmissions: we need to store all that radioactive poison somewhere. For longer than civilization has even esisted so far.
We'll eventually run out of uranium, too. It's just like oil: a finite naural resource. Dumbass.
And get this: now they want to ship all that spent fuel by highway and train THROUGH EVERY MAJOR CITY IN THE U.S. in order to stuff it in a Nevada mounatin and contaminate their drinking water. No more hanging out at the railyard. It starts in 2010. Allegedly. The containers are supposed to be unmarked. That semi in traffic that's tailgating you might be darrying enough poison to contaminate the s=whole city.
I know a guy that literally lives spitting distance from the train tracks. Think about that, nuclear waste going by right outside your house. Is that really safe?
I love eating at Giuseppe's Old Depot Restaurant in Colroado Springs. Best pizza in the whole state. I'm not sure I would ever be comfortable eating at the train depot with at least three trains going by during the meal, just feet away, some of which may be carrying unmarked nuclear waste.
Whoever decided this was a good idea, c'mere. I'll put my rings back on for you. Face or gut?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
