On The Atari Government, Violence and Grass

Again, in case anyone missed it, I am currently in Alaska, and this being the case it can be rather difficult to keep up on the news, though I get brief updates. However, I did listen to the news a bit today thanks to our XM radio. Of course, much of the news is still centered upon the bombing in Boston, and more specifically the backgrounds of those who are responsible. Chechnya is just north of the Caucasus and has a violent history. In the 90's, Chechnya, as I gather, tried to separate itself from its mother Russia, with violent results. Apparently Russia attacked, decimating the capital city of Chechnya. When Chechnya was finally granted independence this wasn't enough to stop the violence, and essentially two governments were formed, leading to more violence. As we have seen all over the world at various times and places, when a country is in such a divided state, factions can arise that may use terrorist tactics to wreak havoc on the public and those in power alike. It seems to be a common theme among separatist states. Such tactics aren't usually successful. In addition to being completely misguided, they can, in fact, backfire, causing these terrorists to become the villains themselves, even though they might seek to be heroes, patriots or revolutionaries in the public eye. This is obviously due to their complete disregard for human life. Indeed, the line of the innocent and whom they regard as guilty parties, or the enemy, becomes so blurred that it doesn't matter. Their cause is one that is sought by complete anarchy. There are many names such people or groups go by, like rebels, or separatists. In the case of the Boston bombers they have been labeled, "Islamic Separatists," a blend of both religious philosophy and political idealism. Such separatism is generally localized, where it is thought it will have the greatest effect. This violent faction doesn't go outside its boarders or apart from whom they have conflict with, and don't concern themselves with countries or people far removed internationally. Yet, there is another faction that seems to believe their cause has greater impact or chance of success when taken on a global scale, as might be the case with the Boston bombers. So even in cases of, "Islamic Separatists," you may very well have at least two different factions, one focused on immediate territory, while another is focused on the international community.In addition to all this it should be mentioned that after the 90's conflict, Chechnya became somewhat of a hub for Islam. Advisor Stephen Yates, said on Fox News, they had an influx of Islam and extremism after Russia's initial smothering of Chechnya's move to break off. I recall his words from memory, so my facts or quotes might be subject to a little error, but regardless it is interesting that such places in the world, those that are immersed in turmoil, often become centers for extremism. I find that it may be the case that such influx of extremism can be equated or illustrated in a smaller scale, like those of riots, or demonstrations which erupt into anarchy.In many of these, there are those individuals that use such gatherings as an excuse for violence, they themselves being prone to it. In fact, there are those when questioned about their motives during a hostile demonstration which have no idea what the underlying cause or motivations are, only that they can use it to enact and indulge in their own violent desires, while still being covered in the veil of some greater cause.This being said, and this obviously is just a hypothesis, perhaps these countries of turmoil attract such extremists, just in the same way demonstrations do, because it offers an excuse to display acts of violence, which they secretly desire. Thereby, instead of being a lone nutcase at least they can be seen by their cohorts as martyrs or hero's of the ideal with the violent acts they profess, carry out, and make evident in death or destruction.There is another distinction that I would like to make concerning those extremists who employ these acts of destruction and terror overseas. The reason why will become apparent. You've got ones who are lone, whom plan and carry out these acts of their own accord or volition, convinced that in some way progress is being made in the name of the cause. Then you have those who remain in contact with their leaders and planners who may fund and help organize an assault. According to the intelligence community within the government, many of these latter extremists communicate via the Internet.Yates stated that the internet has great power and is, "sovereign," and hinted at the dangers it poses to national security. Such talk I've learned to be weary of and in my mind it sets up a red flag, one which may precede a government "power grab." When we look at what the government is doing today, and has been doing, we see that they've been slowly taking away our rights as granted by our constitution. In fact, if our freedoms were represented by yellow pills, the government would be as Pac Man. All I hear lately when politicians speak is, "waga-waga-waga-waga-waga."Our rights have already been infringed upon post 9/11, and indeed before. Our privacy has been trespassed by our leaders who "represent" us, as well has our right to bear arms, and these have all been taken by means of utilizing fear and outrage the public justly feels after a terrible event. I am far from saying, of course, that a conspiracy is taking place, or that the government has a hand in all these disasters, I am only stating that the government uses these events as the means to their end, to gain more power over the people. This seems to be the case on both the right and the left and is not limited to just the USA.By Yates saying such things, I began to see a future a message out of Washington D.C., that they must monitor our Internet use for the sake of our protection. Many might respond to this with, "As long as we're safer," or, "I have nothing to hide." That may be so and I hope it is the case, but this would undermine what this fabulous country was founded upon, the right to be free. I would feel my freedoms slipping away even more then I already can, if my e-mail was read by a Washington think tank, or if they tracked my movements to such a degree they knew every little outfit I purchase for my cat, "Chief Tuckapaw." It's unfortunate but such concessions of freely handing our rights away is equitable to handing away our very country. On this point, let me just say that concerning these terrible events, I am very sorrowful and feel great compassion towards the victims and those who have lost loved ones. Furthermore, I in no way intend this entry to be a condemnation of people who are sympathetic and have heart felt emotions concerning such things and are willing to do anything to see that they don't happen again. I can both understand and relate to it. Yet, I pose the question, why should we let violent morons who don't give a damn about people's rights, even the most basic human right, the right to live, be the very reason we give up our rights? Why is it always seem to be the case that the victims and innocent have their rights revoked while they are passed on abundantly to the guilty? Maybe it's true. Maybe we have buckled under these sadistic losers and in the end gave them a power that even they couldn't have scarcely imagined.Such violent people(s) are of course not always backed by or take up some cause or goal, some just commit random acts of violence, which have no rhyme or reason, as most violence doesn't. It is only in the self delusion that violence leads to some goal, but again, there are those that need none. Two days ago on 4/20, the pot smokers holiday, there was a gathering in Colorado to celebrate. This gathering was estimated as possibly being attended by as many as 80,000 people. I don't know what the finally talley was, but this is beside the point. During sometime in the evening someone opened fire, shooting off a handgun. Nobody was hit, but panic soon erupted among the crowd. The suspect was allegedly caught on camera and the Colorado police are now searching for the perpetrator. Now I'm not a pot smoker and haven't been for a long, long time. Personally, I just don't like the feeling it gives me and I stay away from it. Yet, when it comes to pot legalization, I am for it. I am sick of my tax payer dollars going to incarcerating, in the grand scheme of things, small time "criminals," who just happened to be caught with a dime bag. Also, having done it myself, I feel it's not that bad, and there is a contradiction between allowing alcohol to be legal and making pot illegal. To me it doesn't make sense, but I will quickly state I'm not for drug legalization across the board. At any rate, this moron, instead of partaking in a celebration, which must have included plenty of candy, chips, ice cream, and soda, decided to ruin everyone's hazy gleeful time, by shooting a gun off. The backlash could be that the voters of Colorado might regret their decision. Assuming that this person smokes grass, weed, pot, herb, whatever, he is perhaps the biggest idiot in all the state of Colorado. Moron! What was the purpose, to see people panic? What if people were crushed in a horrible stampede? It takes a sick mind to get off on such things, and he should be nabbed immediately and investigated, for such minds are not usually content with one riotous act, and he may have committed crimes in his past. Of course, this will probably be on the news making it an argument for gun control as well as the revoking of the legalization of marijuana cigarettes and all forms it can take. Who would've though pot smokers could be so violent when you have shows like "Archer," to occupy their time.Another fascinating thing on the news is the charge that the FBI and law enforcement took too long in tracking down the Boston bombers. Here we go again with misdirected blame. You've got to wonder why people still get involved in law enforcement for they're more frequently blamed than the criminals, especially when it comes to high publicity, atrocious crimes like what happened in Boston. Even inanimate objects come into blame, like guns, or video games. It seems as though both the public and media has a need for the blame to be equivalent to the tragedy. That is, in short, the outrage at what occurred in Boston is too massive to project upon one individual, or a couple as the case may be, and in addition someone else needs to answer for the abomination. Many point to the fact that at least one of the brothers was investigated in 2011, and here it is nearly two years removed and people are pondering why anything wasn't done then, despite it being way prior to the actual bombing. In actuality, I can kind of understand it, but we forget that law enforcement is entangled in bureaucracy. This is why those people who commit the most heinous of crimes, at times, get off on a measly technicality, which is outrageous. This is a further example of how rights are taken from the victim or innocent and given unto the guilty. Thereby, it is no wonder that in such investigations no actions can be taken, especially when no crime has been committed. What kind of country would we live in when people are arrested just because they're suspected of being capable of some future crime, the nature of which would have to be theorized?I, in fact, applaud not only the people of Boston, but also law enforcement who was able to track these horrible people down in a matter of a few days. They even went as far as to shut down a whole city to get the perps, and the character and diligence of the people of Boston helped lead to the apprehension, especially concerning the individual who was observant enough to discover where the remaining suspect was hiding out. Since they don't hear it enough, I say good job Boston, and a great job to FBI and law enforcement. Despite all the critics and yes, there have been mistakes in the past, the law enforcement community did an amazing job in Boston, followed all leads, and communicated efficiently with the public and media to track the suspects. An example of how things need be handled indeed. Way to go. With the kind of people they apparently have in Boston, I just may need to move there or at the very least visit.

On The Genius of Hamas

I used to think Hamas wasn’t all bad, I mean it is named after pretty tasty dip, and the chickpeas are delicious! Yet, Hamas has really tumbled down hill since the good ol’ days when they resorted to suicide bombings to take out the infidels. Now, instead they resort to rockets and attacking over long distances with limited success. However, one long range attack is proving to be very effective and this is the one which rages on the hearts, minds and constitution of world-wide popular opinion.

Since it’s founding in the late 80’s, Hamas has been waging a war with Israel by formulating suicide bombings, rocket attacks, and along with their campaign of terror, organizing a campaign of propaganda for the purpose of enslaving the minds of the people living there and throughout the middle east. The depravity of such Palestinian groups knows no bounds as seen with the deployment of mentally handicapped women and children to set off suicide bombs, it no longer being a suicide, but rather murder of the most perverted kind. Words do not exist to properly articulate how disgusting such actions are.

Despite all this though, we see an increasing sympathy for Hamas, who has quickly put on the guise of victimhood to engage in this new kind of war, not by bombs and guns, but through TV screens, radio and other media. An outcry is being raised against Israel now, whose sovereign borders were encroached upon by attacks of violence, yet they are increasingly being seen not as a country defending itself, but as a country hell bent on war and the death of millions of people. An argument I have run across is that Israel is somehow at fault because their attack has caused the death of more people then Hamas’s “minor” mass murders.

Yet, this argument denotes all action would cease at this very hour, and no further acts of violence would be committed by either side after the war halted (we need to call it as it is, war, not some minor skirmish). I don’t think I need to go too far into it when I say this is a silly thing to presuppose. Hamas will rise up once again as soon as the fighting has ended and we all know it. Also, it is unreliable to base any ethical conclusion on mere statistical data such as this, for it doesn’t take into account, oh little things like, you know, right and wrong. It was the actions of Hamas themselves that determined how Israel is reacting. Would we ourselves want such groups attacking us to continue on unchecked? By no means! No being is outside the principle that our actions result in consequence. Hamas certainly isn’t exempt from it and they should not be treated like they are. The blame rests on Hamas’s shoulders and the blood of their very own people is on their hands.

I find myself frustrated at this increasingly contradictory message being expressed by Hamas. I don’t see how you can precipitate a violent situation by targeting innocent people and then turn around and play the victim. You can’t. Now, I am sympathetic to the innocent deaths of those in Gaza due to Israel’s defense, but what I would postulate is that it’s a reverberation of the initial actions of Hamas. Furthermore, their complete disregard for human life is apparent by the utilization of human shields around their biggest targets, which Israel would naturally want to target. They choose these places not to be in some far away compound, but instead in the middle of populated area’s and surrounded by women and children for a reason.

This is no accident; it’s a logical conclusion that Israel would attack these locales and they are using the very attack from Israel, against Israel, by use of this propaganda. It is working too, for demonstrations are happening all over the world for Israel’s supposed butchery; the most striking being right here in America. Terrorism is being supported on our own soil, which was, in 2001, drenched in the innocent blood of thousands of Americans due to it. That day Hamas celebrated in the streets, yet now reach out to the Western world to help their cause, while groups march waving the flag of Hamas within our cities. They are protected by the first amendment and their expression isn’t illegal, though I would be keeping a close eye on them if I were in a position to do so, but still, there is really only one flag they should be waving and that’s a flag that stands not for death, but for life. Not for violence, but for peace. Not for division, but unity. Finally, not for anarchy, but for democracy. They are not fit to be called American’s no matter what hyphenated title you want to give them.

On Recent Lapses in Judgment

The Bigfoot Conspirators


To call this a hoax, I think, is to give these guys too much credit. It was a lie plain and simple. A hoax would entail some sort of long term plan, perhaps some faked scientific evidence and some in depth thought behind the deception. This lacked all those things. Any reasonable person would have known beforehand the amount of scrutiny that they would endure at the hands of the media and internet and would have not gone through with it, for logically, it could only end badly.

The thing that gets me is the so called innocence of Tom Biscardi. Though true the initial discovery was made by Matthew Whitton and Rick Dyer, I believe Biscardi certainly had a hand in it. Not only, is he a Vegas Promoter by profession, but he also admitted during the press conference that it was he who had to talk Whitton and Dyer into releasing a additional sasquatch photo to the press, showing a supposed walking Bigfoot in the area where the discovery was made. Also, this isn’t the first time Biscardi has got caught in a Bigfoot hoax. This includes a 2005 scam where another supposed bigfoot body was recovered. At that time he also set up a website with around the clock pay-per-view Bigfoot surveillance. When it came to light that it was all a lie, Biscardi claimed he was “hoodwinked” and didn’t bother giving anyone their money back. In the most recent occurrence he was charging 2 dollars to view photo’s of Bigfoot on his website searchingforbigfoot.com.

Now there is the possibility that the men may be charged with fraud. Certainly there has been other fallout. Matthew Whitton, who was a cop was fired over the incident and for good reason. I would have been outraged if he wasn’t. That’s all we need is another cop having a history of showing lapses in judgment and lying to be patrolling the streets. The other, Rick Dyer is a former corrections officer and I hope these guys never find work in the law enforcement field ever again. In fact, it might not hurt to go over these guys work history just to see if anything odd stands out.

As for Biscardi, how much money does someone have to take from the public using fraudulent claims before they get hung out to dry? Was it worth it guys? I wonder if they would do it all over again?


The Fay Kiteboarder

I don’t make a habit of speaking ill of the seriously injured, but the famous Fay Kiteboarder, had to have one of the biggest brain farts in history. I have nothing against extreme sports, but feel if they are done utilizing the effects of a tropical storm and trespass across the border of common sense into stupidity, than you deserve to be mentioned in the Darwin awards. At any rate, I do hope the man a full recovery, and perhaps you think I am being too harsh, but I bet the first thing even his family and friends asked him when he came to was, “what the hell were you thinking?” This is what I want to know as well.

I mean, lets look at the variables, shall we? We have a tropical storm spawning gusts of wind up to 60 miles an hour at the time, tornados and waterspouts(one account says that a waterspout formed at the time of this incident), torrential downpours, the inability to let go thanks to a harness, nearby buildings and an adjacent highway to the beach. Which, just happens to be “A1A Beachfront avenue!” On a little side note, I have had “Ice, Ice Baby” stuck in my head ever since I learned that little tidbit. I’m sure the man will be sitting on ice for some time to come. Damn, that’s clever. If anyone has actually found the man’s name, please let me know so I can include it in this blog post and appear more educated as I take complete credit for it. Thank you.

Russia

You would think that a world superpower such as Russia, would know what the rest of the civilized world does: that camera’s easily catch someone in a lie. This includes when your troops are supposed to be pulling out, but aren’t. You have to either be a egotistical moronic dictator or just completely off your rocker. Or both. Whatever the cause, and how stupid they may be acting, I am glad I am actually getting some information from American news organizations now instead of relying on the BBC or SKY news. As a new cold war sits at our doorstep and Russia threatening Georgia, the US, Poland, the Ukraine it may be nice to hear a little bit about it. Fox News has definitely done the best job in American news concerning what is going on, I must say. Though, it does concern me that Georgian forces opened fire on Fox News reporters, and I think our government should look into why exactly that happened.

Russia isn’t exactly innocent as they nearly killed a group of Turkish reporters covering the skirmish. I just want to know what it would have meant if any of these reporters were killed? Would anything have been done, and why isn’t anything now?

It appears its just up to the USA to stand up against Russia because Europe is too afraid, due to Russia supplying the vast majority of oil to the European nations. Perhaps another reason why WE should start to drill.

On John McCain, Barack Obama and Rick Warren

At Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California on August 16th, both Presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain took questions from “The Purpose Driven Life,” author and pastor of Saddleback, Rick Warren. The questions were pre arranged and each candidate received the same ones, though Obama got one less due to the length of his answers. Obama was chosen to go first by a flip of a coin, and while he responded to the questions, McCain remained separated from the dialog. In fact, he did not arrive at the church till half an hour after the Obama interview started. The only information on the questions that the candidates had before hand was a very vague overview of what topics would be addressed.

Obama fronted his questions very articulately and I have to say I was impressed with him as he answered queries ranging from Christ, the existence of evil, and abortion. Through it all I do have a clearer understanding of where Obama does stand on issues that are important to me, though I still do have a lot of questions, which I hope Obama will address in the near future. However, in full disclosure, I have a few for McCain as well.

McCain was also very good, though less articulate then Obama and giving shorter answers, though he still gave plenty of anecdotes concerning his past and present life. Before this event, I have thought Barack Obama has been able to out inspire John McCain by his speech and demeanor. However, this wasn’t the case on the evening of the 16th and I found it to be John McCain’s night. He gave me a sense of hope, pride and of inspiration in America to the degree I haven’t felt in a long time when I watched him speak. One of McCain’s main points is found in “The Purpose Driven Life,” and he, rather eloquently, told the audience that in this current time, that there are causes that far surpass the individual and we need to see that there are greater issues at stake then just you, me, our comfort and are worth fighting for. He also added that this ideal was something this country has lost, which it once had in the past, though he makes it clear that he believes another golden age of the USA is still yet to come.

Now, of course, the controversy comes, which I find so ridiculous that I just wind up shaking my head. The first controversy, thus far, is that McCain was supposed to be in a sound proof booth, or as Warren said, referencing a device in “Get Smart”, a “cone of silence.” Now, I was disappointed that this, in fact did not turn out to be the case at all, but rather, as mentioned before, John McCain showed up a half hour after Obama started. So now people are arguing that McCain heard the questions to begin with, but this is a completely irrelevant argument that really gives credit to John McCain; that he did so good that they have to bring up stuff like this.

The irrelevancy comes into focus when you take a couple factors into account. First, the issues that would be covered were both given to McCain and Obama before either of them arrived at the church. So, even Obama knew to some degree as well; they just weren’t aware of the questions direct wording. Secondly, McCain didn’t say anything he hasn’t already said, and did not alter what his known views. He did not contradict himself, nor did he copy answers of Senator Obama. Even with a worse case scenario, that he did hear the questions, it’s not like the SAT. This is even something you see often in the debates, people not only overhearing questions, but the answers as well, but it never seems to be an issue there. It doesn’t logically hold up because what John McCain said, has already been stated during his time as a senator and during his bid for the White House.

The other controversy concerns a statement where he said that 5 Million dollars makes you rich. I agree, yes, you are rich if you have 5 million dollars, but to be fair the question was at what level are you rich? He made the joke that you aren’t rich unless you have 5 Million, which he immediately retracted. Even CNN’s ticker admitted it was a joke and right after McCain made the comment, he added, “I’m sure that comment will be distorted.” Sure enough he was right and it was jumped on right away by the media, who, oddly enough in some shows, decided to omit his comment following the statement. This is when I lose patience with Cable News, when information is omitted, so essentially it becomes not journalism anymore, but propaganda. Who am I to say what a network airs and don’t? It is up to them, but I feel if you put on the responsibility of being a news channel or program, you need to treat it as such and give the whole story no matter what.

I really hope people will see through this; it was McCain’s night and some people can’t even admit that he did very well and have to bring up superficial things like this to put him in a bad light. On a lighter note though, there was a brief moment during the evening where both Senators were on stage with each other and were very civil, shaking and clapping each other on the back in a way that looked completely sincere on both sides. That greatly impressed me, with both Obama and McCain. Also, both in their answers pushed the merits of politicians swallowing a little of their pride and going on both sides of the fence, moving past partisan politics for the good of the country and I couldn’t agree with the two more.

Truly, it was the prefect venue for such a message, even Warren himself being known for hosting a picnic at his church, which was attended by both Muslims and Christians. Warren did a great job, and by him reading off the questions and moderating, I feel he was more successful then even some of the current news journalists. There were times that were very moving when the candidates spoke, and also times that were rather funny. I am impressed at both men for agreeing to this venue to have such dialog, and in my eyes both are painted in a more positive light within my mind. Yet, much to my surprise, I believe that McCain did come out ahead at the end.

On Spitz, China and Speedo

It's wonderful to realize that the United States isn't the only world super power completely obsessed with image. China continually is showing to the world that it didn't deserve to hold the Olympic games. In my view at least. Besides Beijing shutting down its industry to help get rid of the smog, errr...mist, they are making police officers wear civilian clothing, and have moved onto editing video of fireworks displays. In addition, they are taking a lesson from Ashley Simpson; encouraging lip-synching and the slaughtering one little girls self esteem. All in the national interest of course. Funny, how all these things that are supposed to improve the image of China are actually doing the complete opposite. China is looking less and less grandiose in the eyes of the international community and more then a few are probably realizing Sydney, Australia would have been a safer bet. It should be noted, before I continue, that I am making a distinction between the government of China and the people of China.

I guess I can understand the Olympic committees decision, I mean sure, it seems that having the Olympic games in China would be a great way to encourage freedom, peace and harmony amongst the Chinese and the world. However, because China's government does not even respect its own people, I find the decision to be counter productive to such a goal. We should have seen such developments coming a mile away, and certainly many did. China's record for denying people their basic human rights is clearly documented, like barring an American President to go to church for instance (though a day or so later they reversed the decision) and I would argue to a degree that I would say the Olympics haven't been held in such a country since Berlin 1936, where Jesse Owens's embarrassment of the Third Reich still echos throughout the annals of history. At any rate, I believe an Olympic committee decision to not hold the games in such countries would be a much more effective means of pushing for freedom and peace in such regions of the world. Though, on the other hand, one could argue that the games have brought this issue to the forefront of the world community due to the extensive media coverage.

Certainly, one person who wishes he was there is Mark Spitz. Though I may get a couple E-Mails with what I am about to say, since Spitz is considered an american hero an everying since 1972. Indeed, his feats at the Olympics were legendary, but with his increase in age, has come his increase in ego. Spitz is raising a huge stink because he didn't get invited to the games, though if he was really that concerned about it, he could have went him damn self. I mean, I think those within the Olympic organization may have a lot more to worry about than sending out invites to all ex-olympians, but then again I don't exactly know what those who work within the Olympics duties entail. I guess, what really twists my anus is Spitz's attitude and the overbearing amount of unsportsmanlike pride he exhibits. As he has said concerning not going to the games on his own accord, "I never got invited. You don't go to the Olympics just to say, I am going to go. Especially because of who I am, I am going to sit there and watch Michael Phelps break my record anonymously? That's almost demeaning to me. It is not almost -- it is." It should be noted he attended the Olympic Games in Athens though.

For the ladies.

Humility Spitz. Look it up and practice it. Here is some more Spitz spitting and sputtering ego inflated quotes:

"I won seven events. If they had the 50m freestyle back then, which they do now, I probably would have won that too." It might be true, but they didn't so it is a non-issue. It looks like an attempt to put himself if not the same level as Michael Phelps, above him.

Concerning the games at Athens, "They did not once put my face on television," he recalled. "But as soon as the swimming was over, and Michael Phelps didn't break my record, every time I went to beach volley, they put my face on the volleyballs."

I guess he does give Phelps some credit when he addresses him here, but only within the context of himself: "He's almost identical to me. He's a world-record holder in all these events, so he is dominating the events just like I did," Spitz said. "He reminds me of myself."

To me he seems like a spoiled little brat who isn't acting his age of 58. To me I have no patience with such whiners who think the world revolves around them and look at things through superficial eyes. Then again maybe its just the "Sparks" talking. BTW, try drinking a couple and editing some HTML. My laptop has almost flew out the window 5 times.

Finally, I am wondering why people just seem to like to take a swing at America and the accomplishments of its citizens whenever it can. Now, a rather large american news organization, during its morning edition, said that what may be responsible for the american domination in swimming is not a hard work-out ethic, skill, perseverance or determination, but rather Speedo, whose new suit is "producing" greater athletes, perhaps giving them an unfair advantage. It is Speedo's LZR Racer that has come under fire. No, no, it's not the constant training or skill but its the suit. Now, I am one of those people who loved sports, but just wasn't good at any of them. I would have loved to have an excuse to blame a persons innate skill on their tee-shirt or briefs, but even me, not being blessed in an athletic way found it was an empty argument, yet some media outlets have ran with it. Furthermore, Speedo is being criticized, moron saying the suits lack modesty and shouldn't be allowed. I hope both arguments are not being taken seriously and I would like to just point out, before I sign off, the fact that in the original Olympic games the athletes competed in the nude. In compairson the Speedo is quite modest, I would say, but competing nude would silence all those complaining of the suits ability to make a person faster.

On Racist Global Warming

Is Global Warming Racist?

I am posting this, not because I think racism isn't a factor in social issues, but rather just to point out that this term seems to be being thrown about quite randomly recently. Now, I believe racism to exist most certainly, unfortunately, however when it is applied to subjects that it can not have any logical bearing on, it bears the question of why its even being theorized in the first place and more importantly, its implications on the racism that is a blot upon our nation, and the efforts to defeat it. The comments appear in a report by J. Andrew Hoerner and Nia Robinson that came out last month. The report is entitled A Climate of Change: African Americans, Global Warming, and a Just Climate Policy for the U.S. The report contains gems such as these:

"Racism, both institutionalized and individual, is a driver of sprawl, inefficient housing, and irrational transportation policy."

I won't say its not a factor, but we must remember that other factors play a role as well, such as personal productivity and opportunity for one may be the principle causes of people leaving heavily populated urban area's. This includes black people.

"Racism causes bad climate policy, the two problems can not be solved separately, but only together."

The implication that global climate issues wouldn't exist if it weren't for slavery, to me makes no sense. I think technology is a much bigger factor, for technology seems to be directly corollary and complementary to the output of pollution.

"Because of the United States’ historic legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, and institutional racism, African American families and communities are highly vulnerable to the whole range of problems caused by global warming including the potential for climate change policy that continues and extends this legacy."

Everyone is highly vulnerable to the range of problems caused by global warming. Global warming does not have the ability to pick and choose whom it effects. If this were the case it would cease to be called "global". We must also factor in a regions innate climate, that can contribute to what kind of effects global warming has on its populace.

"Institutional racism is a system under which white people—whether consciously or not—exercise power and privilege at the expense of people of color."

Consciously or not? So, whether you want to be or not, nor if you think you are or aren't, it really doesn't matter? If your just white; your racist? If this is the case, why address the issue at all, if apparently it cannot be changed? I one hundred percent disagree with this point. I don't think there is anything unconscious to racism. Racism can only be classified by observance of ones words and actions that another party deems to be racist in nature. Furthermore, these words and actions come directly from thought so we can clearly see that racism is clearly a conscious state of mind. Yes, a depraved state of mind, true, but a state of mind nonetheless.

"Urgent action is necessary to prevent dangerous climate change, and, because institutional racism imposes major barriers to a rational energy policy, global warming will not be solved without addressing these racial barriers directly. Institutionalized racism in the U.S. is an overarching institution of power that acts as a force for inertia, blocking progress on climate and many other urgent priorities. A joint attack on racism and climate change is therefore more likely to be effective than either effort pursued in isolation."

Well, according to their paper they can't be solved anyway due to the unconscious nature of racism. In addition, nor could they be held responsible for anything considered racist, for because its unconscious its beyond their control. No, what truly has a hand in blocking progress on climate, far surpassing racism, is lack of technology, or at least a lack of technology available to the public sector, greed and pride.

The purpose here is not to argue against the existence of "institutionalized racism," for I'm positive it does exist in some degree, rather what I am arguing against is the implication that global warming is some kind of conspiracy, a global phenomenon that effects everyone, including, but not limited to all flora, fauna, races, continents and oceans. All specifically designed and implicated for the specialized purpose of bringing down the black man? To me, despite the existence of racism, this makes no logical sense. In fact, I'm concerned that flawed charges of racism, such as the one below, could be counterproductive to the righteous cause of defeating it.

On Gas Prices And The NBC Spin

I have to say I'm really not a big fan of NBC, after they refused that non-profit organization to run an add on the network thanking the troops. Now they have given me something more to whine about. Turns out, they feel that high gas prices are good for the economy, although in the spirit of full disclosure I must add that it was actually on CNBC that this was said, but NBC just sounded better in the title. Right off the bat I must say the little micro-economy in my wallet is telling me otherwise. Now maybe I'm looking into things way too much, which I tend to do sometimes, but it came across as a ploy to aid Obama in his run for the presidency. I only say this because Obama's view on the economy, or rather oil specifically was effecting him in a negative way in the polls. What better way to remedy the situation by putting a positive spin on the high gas prices.

Their reasoning is this; that because of the high price of oil, corporate outsourcing is getting way too expensive for some companies and jobs are coming back, and are going to come back to the states. I have no problem with this and would encourage companies to do so (because I'm sure they care what I think) and it does appear to be sound reasoning. They say that more jobs here on american soil means less unemployment, which means more dollars being spent on all forms of goods and services, which is always a good thing. Again, very logical. However, they fail to take into account the large amount of lay-offs that companies have had to resort to, either here or abroad, due to souring fuel costs. Furthermore, if this was truly the case, that high gas prices are good for the economy and unemployment, we would see a decrease of unemployment and increase of spending that is directly corollary to the price of gas. This isn't the case, in fact figures show the exact opposite.

My theory that it was said to aid Obama is given further validation by their next statement that just Obama being elected into the White House would drop the price of a barrel of gas by 40 dollars. Though it should be said now that one of the panelist's there strongly disagreed, as do I. Again, perhaps I am looking into it too much, but I think it irresponsible of any news organization to be pushing any political viewpoint, by omitting facts, or falsifying data. Though I don't have proof this is what happened, and it really comes down to my perception of what was said and how it was delivered. Regardless, I feel its important that everyone take into consideration that someone may be trying to be pushing their own political viewpoint in their delivery of the news, compromising data, or, like I said, ignoring it all together. Therefore, it is extremely beneficial to get your news from many different sources and viewpoints that you may get all data and make an educated decision when you vote in November.

Now I think there is definitely something wrong about the political structure in this country when the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi can completely hijack congress and their sworn duties. She is blocking a vote on oil drilling from occurring, and in a democracy this seems completely absurd to me. Pass or not pass a vote should be allowed, or at least a date set where one would occur, so that if indeed people need time to research the issue there is time alloted. In a democracy she should not have the power to speak for everyone else in her party; each one should speak for themselves. Especially on such an important issue that is so vital to the american people. By Pelosi's decision it is not only congress that is held hostage, but we the people as well. A vote would at the very least portray to the american people, that yes, congress does indeed care about the american people. Instead they take a vacation.

However, some congressmen and congresswomen have stuck around. Mainly republicans and I do not know if any democrats have stayed to call for a vote. Now if those members of congress who have stuck behind, forsaking their recess, truly have pure motives for doing so, they should be commended. However, I can't help but think that there may be some that are using this situation to further their political career by sticking around while everyone else goes on vacation, thereby exalting themselves above those who have opted for the Outer Banks. If this is the case it is deplorable, but I think there are some who truly do care about the plight of the american people, for they share in it, and want to see the government working to resolve some of the hardship that John Q. Public may be experiencing. It is good to see that this energy crisis is bringing some republicans and democrats to forgo party boundaries, for the sake of the american people. I am afraid, however, that the same cannot be said for Nancy Pelosi. She needs to realize that she is a servant of the good of the nation and the people are greater then she is in our system of government. This needs to start being represented in her words and actions, and in fact, in all politicians.

In closing I would like to bring up one more thing that I find to be a large danger for our nation. That is concerning all the talk of Exxon and using some of their profits to give some relief to the American people. Though it may sound good, it is highly dangerous. I do agree that Exxon is milking people for money, for they have made record profits. However, it is the consumer that needs to take this into consideration with where they buy their oil. It is through competition that companies can be held accountable for such things, for if some of us choose not to encourage Exxon by buying their gas, then they will lose profits and have to adjust to please the consumer, for their buisness will go elsewhere. We should not let the government try and take care of this for us, because what it comes down to is the government controlling capital, which is a socialist system of government subscribes to and, furthermore, it is an easy transition from socialism into communism. Though we may not like the profits Exxon has made, there are far more important things at stake. The very freedoms which this country offers. We need to stop letting government use crisis as a means to take away our basic freedoms by putting it in the guise of being for our own protection or benefit, because in the long run it will become the anthesis of any promised blessing.