Friday, March 31, 2006

Sharon!!!!

Italian firm goes nuclear with atomic toys - What Were They Thinking - MSNBC.com

I'm not looking at the (incredibly thoughtless) nuclear bomb toys, or the Jeep. Look at the last item in this article:

Tired of that sweet, polite voice giving you directions from your car satellite navigation system? You’re in luck — well, if you’re in the U.K.

According to The Sun newspaper, a company called Voice Skins is offering impressions of Ozzy Osbourne’s voice for download to navigation systems.

You can download a version with swearwords or one with just bleeps. The newspaper reported that the Osbourne voice tells drivers when they’ve reached their “@#*ing destination.” Delightful.


I WANT ONE! I WANT ONE NOW!!! Question is, does it have voice-recognition? And if so, can you swear back at it?

Osbourne voice: "Your fucking door is open, asshole."
You: "Shut the fuck up." *SLAM*

Free Press, "Free Willy," Free Harvard??

Harvard expands financial aid program - Education - MSNBC.com

I saw this and almost said "holy shit" out loud, which would have (of course) turned heads in the office. This is SO cool you could make ice cream with it. It's SO COOL you can run a superconductor with it. IT'S SO COOL it forms a Bose-Einstein condensate. Damn, this is cool!

When Jews and Muslims meet

Kosher mobile whets Orthodox appetites - Mideast/N. Africa - MSNBC.com

It's always interesting when two groups of people at radically opposite sides of a socio-political fence can come together on something: the kosher phone. Apparently, Israeli Arabs have taken a great interest in these phones, design overseen by rabbis, for the interest of preserving THEIR conservative Islamic views.

What a world we live in.

Tuesday, March 28, 2006

The weak border

CNN.com - Government investigators smuggled radioactive materials into U.S. - Mar 27, 2006

Anyone interested in this troubling issue should really talk to my father for the details. He was once the area port director for the US Customs in northern Maine. He formed a cross-border intelligence unit that was pretty much ignored by mainstream intelligence agencies in the US. Makes you wonder.

Here's his blog: http://retirednoway.blogspot.com/ You can contact him through this channel. You might learn a lot.

Monday, March 27, 2006

Jajah Binks

New ways to call over Web debut - Tech News & Reviews - MSNBC.com

Users go to [Jajah's] Web site and enter two phone numbers — their own and the number to call. The company rings the caller's number, and after the user picks up, it dials the other number. If the call is answered, Jajah connects the two lines.

There's no need to install software or get a microphone for the computer, and it's not restricted to Windows. The call goes from phone to phone, with Jajah's site and the Internet as the intermediary. Domestic U.S. calls cost about 1.7 cents a minute. A U.S.-France call costs 1.9 cents.


Ooh, das is berry new technology, muy muy cheapo! Issa thinkin gonna call Gungans from LA right now!

(I think someone put crack in MY water.)

GQstbuster?

Republicans assert dominance in the bedroom - The Situation with Tucker Carlson - MSNBC.com

Here is a guy talking about how Republican men are better in bed. He's the "Deputy Editor" of GQ, the magazine that is all things men and debonaire. Here's his picture:



What I want to know is...if this guy is a Republican (not saying that he is, but IF he is), is he even getting ANY sex looking like Igon from Ghostbusters??? He looks like he had a fight with a van der Graaf generator and lost.

Sunday, March 26, 2006

Let us sit and tell sad tales...

Lately, my life has been a bit of a rollercoaster. Upon the urging of family and friends, I had my ex served with papers to establish joint custody in court. No problem there. The lawyer, however, told me that she not be told they're coming in case she decides to (a) refuse the paperwork or (b) do something else that he didn't describe in any detail. He's a professional, so I trusted his judgment. My own instincts, though, were at odds with that, as I still do trust *her* quite a bit, despite being let down.

I can't blame her for taking off. She's now with someone who's much more well of than I am (currently he's 28 and set to be able to retire at 35, of all things). His place is a house with 3500 square feet and a big back yard. Perfect environment (as far as I can assume) for my son to be in. All I have to offer right now is this pigsty of a house, or the old dojo that is in no state to be lived in right now. Had I a spare $5,000, that would be a different story. But it's going to take until July or August to get that much money saved up.

I would like to have a place for my son to stay while he's with me. I don't have that. So I'm hoping that there's a few kind-hearted enough individuals out there willing to make a small donation. We can call it the Ian Fund. (Ian's my son's name). I don't do this lightly. I hate asking anyone for ...anything, actually (part of the reason, as I understood it, why my ex and I split up). But I'm doing it now. He deserves a good environment to stay in, and I'd like to provide him with that.

I have nothing to offer in return except my gratitude. And, of course, karma will be a factor: as you give, so shall you receive (tenfold). Therefore, I put a link to PayPal over on the sidebar. Give as much as you feel fit. I'll keep people updated with how much has been donated. And I'll graciously appreciate every penny I receive. Believe me.

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

My latest hero

Biographies of Jack and Elaine La Lanne

Holy crap. Here's a guy who gets up at 5 AM. Every day. He goes into the gym and lifts weights for 1 1/2 hours. Every day. Then he swims for a half hour. Every day. He's in incredibly good shape, looks like he's 50-something...but he's almost NINETY-TWO!

Holy crap! I'll probably be 80 and on my death bed, and this guy will still be kicking around the age of 140, still benching 300.

My latest hero.

Too much chicken

Man arrested after pulling gun in restaurant

I'm going to reveal a crack in my facade as I comment on this somewhat newsworthy article. Apparently a 53 year old man pulled a gun on the staff at a Popeye's chicken place because the service was too slow. Here's a picture of the purple traior, uh I mean, perpetrator:

Too much chicken, dude!


I'm thinking the staff there figured if they took time serving him his chicken, maybe he'd lose some of that blubber?

Tuesday, March 21, 2006

Caveat emptor

Is There Another You

"Caveat emptor" means "let the buyer beware." I think in this case, this can apply to sellers who partner themselves with less-than-desirable (yet extremely cunning) people. This blog is my father's. He has pretty much had his ass (financially) handed to him on a platter, all because he trusted one guy. This guy snowed quite a bit of people. He soaked my father for around $90,000 before he could shut off the funds (around the $30k mark is when my father tried to stop things, but this guy had his claws in everything). He's conned another woman out of over $10,000...it was enough of a loss that she couldn't continue paying her mortgage and the bank forclosed. He's holed up in Canada, and the US District Attorney is too chickenshit or apathetic to bother extraditing the asshole. Apparently, the FBI will only take action if the amount from the "scam" is over $250,000. So only those with that kind of money ever get help. Average Joes get the shaft.

That's the story behind the blog, anyway. He's tried to get airtime with 20/20 and the like, but they've so far said this isn't "newsworthy." Maybe it isn't. $90,000 is nothing compared to HUNDREDS of thousands of dollars (or even millions). But if this guy isn't brought to justice SOON, a lot more people are going to get hurt. For the record, he's scammed my father for $90,000, the aforementioned woman for over $10,000, the TOWN OF HOULTON (a government entity!) for $5,000, a friend of my father's for about $30,000, a doctor out on the west coast for around $5,000...There's more, but I can't remember it all. It's pretty scary that just because there isn't a lump-sum amount over $250,000, the Justice Department will just sit on their hands.

The last direct bit of damage to my father from this guy happened almost two years ago. The rest of these people were scammed from about that time up to now. I can only imagine what the aggregate amount is for all the people he's scammed. I've already listed more than half of the Fed's supposed "cutoff." And those are all the ones that I know about. So, what the fuck!?

PS: the woman who lost $10,000 was scammed in the exact same way my father was: starting a corporation with him. It gave the scammer a good umbrella to do his dirty deeds under. I don't know all the legal or technical details, but that's one of his hallmarks. So, let the potential business partner beware!

The Dildo Wars

Sidebar: Mississippi outlaws sex toys - The Abrams Report - MSNBC.com

I can't believe that a group of legislatures spend so much time and effort banning dildos, vibrators, etc; when there are more pressing issues to deal with (namely education, REAL crime, etc). Are these people moronic, or just bored?

I honestly HOPE that a group of women form a coalition and spend their time doing...uh, I forget the exact term...it means violating the law as a protest. I hope they do that...have a sit-in around the Mississippi capital building waving dildos around. Link their legs. The whole protest she-bang. I'm willing to wager the Mississippi government doesn't want THAT kind of publicity. But, hey, maybe I'm wrong.

Always seems to be the "quiet" ones...

CNN.com - 'I just killed a kid' - Mar 20, 2006

Psycho home-owner/gardener. Just gotta love it. Neighbors said "Martin lived alone quietly." It always seems to be the quiet loners that turn out to be psychotic. Also, it states that he flew the Navy flag from his front lawn, which indicates he was a sailor. That also brought to mind a very good saying from the Navy: "A bitching sailor is a happy sailor. It's the quiet ones you have to watch out for."

Apparently, too true.

My heart goes out to the Mugrage family.

oh good grief!

CNN.com - China, Russia united on Iran - Mar 21, 2006

The following quote made me say "Good grief!" out loud at work. Got a couple stares.

But underscoring the urgency to reach a resolution, U.S. President George W. Bush reiterated that Washington was ready to use military force against Iran if necessary.


Good grief, Mr. President! Are you on crack?? There are other ways to deal with this, I'm sure. Rattling sabers, after just recently (read: in the past 3 or 4 years) "liberating" Afghanistan (good idea) and Iraq (not such a good idea), is pretty damn stupid. Give the Russian idea a chance instead of just jumping the gun. If evidence can TRULY be found that Iran is still not playing by the rules, even after trying everything else, then MAYBE try military action. But avoid doing it unilaterally like with Iraq. What a boondoggle.

Saturday, March 18, 2006

Viewpoints

I received an email from someone who made it sound like I'm pro-war and pro-life. That's what it SOUNDED like. I may (and could very well be) wrong.

First of all, I'm not pro-war. I think war is evil. I just see some parallels between Saddam and Hitler; and that (ultimately I hope) the Iraqis will be better off without the "Butcher of Baghdad." I think the premise used to go into Iraq, as reported, was very lame*. Just say why you're going to do something. I guess President Bush figured he wouldn't get international support if he said it like it was. I'm sure it also doesn't help if you are the parent of one of these men and women getting killed over there. I know if my son were over there, I'd be a mess. So I don't condemn those who reject the war.

Not like we got all that much support anyway.

As far as abortion goes, I have only the following to say: "...the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being." (Gen 2:7) Read into that what you will; but this is primarily directed at the conservative Christians who claim to be "pro life," and that the fetus is a living being. Medically, it is still part of the mother; and Biblically, as it hasn't received the breath of life, it is not a living being. That is my position. I personally take it farther to say that if the fetus CAN take a breath, it should not be aborted. I refer to "partial birth" abortions, which just give me the heebie-jeebies. Only if the life of the mother is in jeopardy, and the baby would die anyway, could this be acceptable. But it still repulses me. That's just my opinion. I consider myself in the "pro-choice" camp...and if I were a woman, I'd choose to keep the baby. If I couldn't support it, I'd give it up for adoption. That would be my choice, and all women should be allowed to choose what is best.

Now, I have changed my mind on these viewpoints over the years, but not on a whim. My viewpoints change as I learn more from other people, and hear their points of view. I used to be anti-gay, pro-gun, pro-life, pro-war right-wing "Bible-thumping" Christian. Today, I'm pro-gay, STILL pro-gun (with some restrictions), pro-choice, middle-of-the-road Christian/New-Age(ish) mix. Some things changed, and others didn't, as I learned new ways of thinking and realized that I didn't know everything. To come up with an opinion and treat it as carved in stone is ...well, stupid. Nobody has all the answers, and anyone who purports to is an imbecile.

* Addendum: Even if Bush honestly believed there were WMDs in Iraq, based off of the intelligence his people gave him, he is still responsible and accountable for them and the information. In the Navy, if the captain of a ship had his vessel run aground, for example, it is the captain who is "relieved for cause" (i.e. fired). Even though a lieutenant may have been on watch (i.e. driving the boat), the captain is still responsible and accountable for the lieutenant's actions. So now Bush is revamping his staff. It's probably too little too late now. I admire the man's conviction, but he bungled this one. Neither he and/or his subordinates should've been so arrogant to think that the voters of this country--and the citizens of the world--wouldn't catch on eventually. I'm sure there are things in government that they (not necessarily Bush but any government official or politician) successfully keep hidden; but for every ten things hidden, one comes out into the open to bite them in the ass. It's karma, baby!

Friday, March 17, 2006

Why I Support the War in Iraq

Rabbi Gellman: Why I Support the War in Iraq - Newsweek Society - MSNBC.com

Rabbi Gellman makes a very valid point, and it ties in with my previous article about how the "52%" take their freedom for granted. I really can't say any more than that. You should click the link and read it for yourself.

A wise man

Gellman: Hanging Out With Billionaires - Newsweek Society - MSNBC.com

I have found one of the wisest men I have ever seen. You may not agree with everything he believes in, but he conveys his point of view with eloquence and humor. And, in the case of this article that I have linked to, even he admits he doesn't have all the answers. Truly wise.

Shenanigans, part 2

WP: Petty spats lead to more slayings - washingtonpost.com Highlights - MSNBC.com

Although they have no specific studies to point to, police, prosecutors, people who work with ex-offenders, victims rights advocates and the ex-offenders themselves said the burgeoning violence is because of a toxic mix of causes: the easy availability of handguns; a subculture, including some rap songs and videos, that celebrates violence; and a pathological need on the part of some young men for respect.


OK, let's look at the three factors fuelling these "flash-point" crimes:

1. Subculture that celebrates violence: Yes, this is probably THE biggest factor towards these crimes. Going on a completely different issue but with the same results is Americans' reactions to Bush and Iraq. Bad news, bad news, bad news, blah blah blah, must be true. And so we live it and it becomes a part of us. The world is what you think it is. I believe that life really does reflect art (or media). So you have all these young, hormonally driven and mentally stressed kids listening to how "cool" it is to be "down" by killing some "g's" (or whatever), you're going to get young men that fly off the handle and cork someone.

2. Need for respect: This makes sense. A lot of fist-fights happen due to bruised egos. Why not shootings? Take a look at the Middle East. People have been trampling on everyone else's egos and denying them respect for ages. And they blow themselves up.

3. Easy availability of handguns: SHENANIGANS! I don't consider myself right-wing, but I'm going to have to go along with the Republicans and the NRA on this one. This is such utter bullshit, and a blatant--if not ridiculous--attempt to justify banning guns. Sure, banning guns would reduce these kind of crimes significantly. So would banning rap music and the rest of the subculture that promotes violence. Are we going to do that? Hah! Right. So stay away from guns, unless you're going to ban Snoop, 50 Cent, and the rest. Guns have been around for AGES. Flash-point killings were extremely rare when I was a kid, and guns were under much less control back then. History proves me right.

PS: Despite the fact I don't like gangsta rap (in fact I hate it), it IS still art, believe it or not. There are people out there who whip this stuff out of their minds on the fly. Violent, yes, but damn that's some talent. It truly is rhythm and poetry. So if we ban guns (trampling the Second Amendment), we should ban rap (trampling the First Amendment). Yeah. Let's go all-out and just completely repeal the entire Bill of Rights. And the Constitution. And the Declaration of Independence!

God save the Queen.

Altruism

Pregnant waitress gets $973.65 tip - U.S. Life - MSNBC.com

A 19-year old waitress, seven months pregnant, gets almost $1000 in a tip from another woman--a self-proclaimed shopaholic. Giving the money away made the shopaholic feel "phenomenal."

Amongst all the Bush-bashing, bombs exploding and other typical news; finding this little tidbit has just made my day.

Taken for granted.

- Invasion Iraq: 3 Years Later - MSNBC.com



This is just my opinion, but I'd say that approximately 52% of the people who voted take their freedom for granted. Life before the invasion plain-old sucked (according to the reporter's accounts). Life after the invasion isn't much better, if at all, to be sure. However, the POTENTIAL for a good life has increased.

Iraq under Saddam was stagnant and oppressive. Iraq now is dynamic and free. Too free. Plans should have already been made to account for the insurgence. If they were, then they haven't done all that good of a job yet. Why would personal security during Saddam's reign have been so good, but now shitty? What was the factor? Fear? Consistent suicide bombings and other similar terrorist actions would indicate that people there (a good enough percentage) don't fear death, or at least have a poor conception for cherishing life. Most of the insurgents are Sunnis. So do only Sunnis have this kamikaze streak? Apparently the Kurds and Shiites don't, because if they did they could've wreaked havoc in Saddam's Iraq many years ago. Or maybe they tried but were effectively suppressed. Through fear of death? We've already established that cannot be the case--based off of insurgency now (Sunnis), and assuming an attempted insurgency way back when (the rest). So oppression isn't the answer.

If it is only the Sunnis (not all of them) that have this kamikaze streak, that would explain most everything. What else could be used to quell the insurgency? Better border control? Satellite observation? These insurgents are getting into Iraq somehow. They aren't having Scotty beam them over. If they are using tunnels, then create a half-mile (or full mile) buffer, so that building a tunnel would be harder to do. Clamp down on the border first, then focus on eradicating the problems that remains internal. Just a suggestion.

Back to the topic at hand. 52% of respondents on this MSNBC poll think Iraqis have it worse. In the short term, perhaps. But any true change doesn't come easy. Remember: Hitler gained power (relatively) peacefully, but he had to be ousted by violence. And a lot of it. More lives were lost getting rid of him than getting rid of Saddam. And those lives were for the preservation of freedom (and life in Hitler's case) for everyone. People died for this 52%, so they could agree or disagree with whatever they want. And they're dying now, so another oppressed people can do the same thing.

The ONLY reason we think the war in Iraq is going so badly is because the media is painting it that way. Period. Iraqis are free. Scared to death, but free. All things do pass, though; and eventually they will find their place in the world. Stuff still happens in Afghanistan, but you almost NEVER hear about what's going on there. Why? It was a relative success, so let's just forget about it and focus on what we're considering a "failure?"

Thursday, March 16, 2006

The lamest phishing scam I've ever seen.

I received this in my Yahoo email today...



After the last annual calculations of your fiscal activity we have determined that you are eligible to receive a tax refund of 3.80. Please submit the tax refund request and allow us 6-9 days in order to process it.

A refund can be delayed for a variety of reasons. For example submitting invalid records or applying after the deadline.

To access the form for your tax refund, please click here

Regards,
Internal Revenue Service


The "click here" link (that I disabled for security reasons) would take you to the following domain: dsl.telesp.net.br. Br? Brazil?! Wow, the IRS is REALLY getting into this outsourcing thing. They've become SO cheap, they've stopped using "irs.gov."

ha ha ha ha.

Man, this was so lame. Like someone's really going to give a shit about $3.80, also. What were these fucktards thinking?

I call shenanigans

Dems criticize Bush's security policy for gays - U.S. Security - MSNBC.com

Let's take the original wording of the clearance policy and compare it with the new wording.

Original: "may not be used as a basis". This means sexual orientation is EXCLUDED as a factor for determining what clearance a Federal employee can get. EXCLUDED. Denied. "I am sorry, Dave, I cannot allow that."

New: "solely on the basis of the sexual orientation of the individual." Solely on the basis? This means sexual orientation is NOT EXCLUSIVE, and therefore INCLUSIVE and NOT EXCLUDED. It cannot be used as the SOLE factor, but it CAN be used if factored with other issues. This wording does not prevent sexual orientation being a basis for denying an employee security clearance.

The difference is, "you can't do that" compared with, "you can't do that by itself." You cannot tell me that "there’s no change in our policy," Mr. McClellan. Nuh-uh. I'm calling shenanigans on you!

Can someone tell me how "packing fudge" makes you more likely to spill state secrets? Please? Pretty please with sugar on top???

Read a little further, and they try to give a rationale: "If someone were trying to hide the fact that they are gay, for instance, he or she could be susceptible to coercion or blackmail." Well, he or she wouldn't HAVE to hide the fact that they are gay if people weren't such assholes about it. And your change in policy sure gives no incentive for people to be more open about it. In fact, you state that as long as gays are "strictly private, consensual and discreet" about what they do, there'll be no problem. You're already telling people to stay in the closet.

Like state secrets aren't enough for a person to carry around in their head. I guess you figure if a person can keep their sexual orientation a secret, they can keep state secrets a secret. Bah.

Any problems a person may have with their sexual orientation is the sole product of how we as an American society treat them. I guess "equal protection of the laws" doesn't apply ALL the time. So much for equal.

Shenanigans!!

The nature of love

Woman pleads guilty in �child groom� case - Crime & Punishment - MSNBC.com

I'll admit that a 37-year old woman marrying a 15-year old boy is ...well, strange, to say the least. But who are we to say that the two don't really love each other? Why is the 15 year old just a kid who doesn't know better? What if that's NOT true? Who are we to say because he loves a 37-year old that there's something wrong with him, and that he needs "intense counseling?" (Not saying that there's nothing wrong with the woman...) Why not do that to ANYONE who is in love with anyone? There must be something wrong with them. Why automatically assume that just because there's a 12 year gap that it isn't real? What do we really know about love? What does the counselor (who will treat the teen) know about love? Who are we to judge?

Other than the fact that it's (a) illegal and (b) wierd.

I bring this up not to say that sex and marriage with a 15-year old isn't wrong, but to delve into the nature of love. Where is the line drawn? There are 35-year olds who know less about love than teenagers. Why did we draw the line at 18? Does something magical happen to all men and women when they turn 18; that they somehow now already know all there is about love and can make rational decisions regarding love? Can ANYONE make a rational decision about love? I don't think so. Whether you're 15 or 85, love muddles the mind--and there's nothing wrong with that.

Now, if the woman just wanted to romp with her son's friend, and consequently got pregnant; and there isn't any real emotional bond, then THAT is wrong. Period. That's exploiting someone else's raging hormones. Whether the person's 15 or 85, it's WRONG.

But sometimes that's what we do to get that quick fix. Where, exactly, is the line between love and lust? Is there a defined line? Or are there many shades of gray?

I think I just wore out the "?" key on my keyboard. G'nite all.

Is this cool or what?

Diesel dreaming of dead-language film trilogy - Gossip: The Scoop - MSNBC.com

I'm a bit of a Vin Diesel fan, so seeing this in the news was way cool for me. However, in the article, this is how they refer to Diesel:

The star of "The Pacifier" tells the April issue of Details that his production company has set up offices in Spain


The Pacifier? The PACIFIER!?? Let's not acknowledge his smash hits like "Pitch Black," "XXX," "Fast and the Furious," or (my favorite) "Chronicles of Riddick." Naw. Let's just refer to him as "the star of 'The Pacifier'". Bleah.

Wednesday, March 15, 2006

That's not a blow to journalism...

CNN.com - College paper's editor fired over Mohammed cartoons - Mar 15, 2006

Prochaska said he and Gorton moved quickly to publish the cartoons because they were newsworthy.

"We had a news story on our hands, with violence erupting about imagery, but you can't show it because of a taboo, because of a taboo that's not a Western taboo but a Muslim taboo?" he said. "That's a blow to journalism."


No, my friend, it's not a blow to journalism...it's a victory for the Politically Correct. Newspeak dictionaries will be handed out next week.

wtf!? ...take 2

CNN.com - Gonzales: 27 charged in online child porn sting - Mar 15, 2006

To this I reply: what the FUCK!? This part almost made me cry:

[Attorney General Gonzales] said seven child victims of molestation -- the youngest of whom was younger than 18 months -- have been identified.


WHAT THE FUCK!!??? I can't even BEGIN to comprehend the lunacy behind getting off on something like this. It makes me want to go out and kill someone. Well, almost. Damn, though, if anyone did that to MY son, I'd be in jail for life. No kidding.

Y'know, I'd like to interview these sickos and find out why they think this is all good fun. God, my mind is reeling every time I think about this. I get more pissed off by the second.

I think I need to step away from the computer for a while...

Tuesday, March 14, 2006

In His image

Possible Miracle Tied to Pope John Paul II -- Beliefnet.com

Foreword: It is a sad commentary on our society when you have to dig for news like this on generally non-news websites; but for CNN or MSNBC, all you are generally confronted with is Iraq. Can't find this news ANYWHERE on those sites. Good News <> $, Bad News = $. Simple economics, I suppose.

I had a rather lengthy comment on this bit of news, and I wanted to use the title of this blog entry as part of my thought process; but I spent so much time trying to find a LINK for this news article (I originally found it in today's newspaper) that I forgot what I was going to say. I'm still posting something just to make people aware of what is going on.

I used the title "in His image" to remind everyone that everyone is capable of feats like this, dead or alive. In fact, feats like this, added to other unusual supernatural phenomena, could be considered empirical evidence for the argument of existence after death. Being locked solely in the physical, it's hard to conceptualize an afterlife...every time I do so (locked in the physical) I tend to spook myself. However, trying to conceptualize "eternity" in any way, shape or form tends to make my brain go "eek!" And a fear of death is the body's way of ensuring survival and a continuance of a blood line (part of the whole process of natural selection). Because we have that fear doesn't nullify the possibility of there being more than the physical.

Here we have a man who, after his death, can be attributed to several miracles (they're only focusing on one, according to the article). How can a person heal another from an "uncurable" disease when he's alive, let alone dead!? Could it be that this woman wished so hard to be healed that she manifested this reality for herself? Did she use John Paul II as a "catalyst" for this healing? Possible. Either way you slice it, SOMEONE manifested a miracle.

I believe it is for that reason I titled this article as I did. We are all made in His image: eternal, powerful. What a gift to be given. We should put it to good use.

Monday, March 13, 2006

THE MISSING LINK!!!

Saturday, March 11, 2006

Opportunity only for the few

Some high schools pricier than Harvard - Education - MSNBC.com

Essentially, only families that are loaded with dough have the opportunity to give their children the best education. These kids could all be morons, but they can still get into Harvard when they graduate these elite high schools; while possible geniuses in inner-city public schools will more than likely be steered into such activities as gang violence and drug use, all because there's no adequate support system.

We, the United States, make our poor and our criminals; and we punish them for being products of their environment. Whoever called this place the land of opportunity was on crack. Opportunity, yes, but only for the few.


Addendum: This may still be a bit of an elitist approach, but when I rule the world, I'll make it so that all preschoolers are given an IQ test. Those that score high enough get AT LEAST tuition assistance (if not a free ticket) to some of the best schools in the world. Maybe not THE absolute best, but better than chucking them into some inner-city dump and telling them, "good luck!" This way, at least those with the BEST chance of truly becoming someone get that chance. How much farther along could we be in space technology, the search for the cure for cancer, etc, if that one person who would otherwise have been fated for such discoveries hadn't been put into a poor school system and driven to drugs and crime? How many of the people in prison now, if given the chance to bloom as children, could have been great leaders of our time?

I guess we'll never know. As long as those with the money want to ensure those that don't will never get the same opportunities, our crime rate will still be high, our prisons will still be full, and eventually we will fall behind the rest of the world in technology and medicine until we are no longer a superpower. But, hey, live for the now! Fuck the future.

Thursday, March 09, 2006

School prayer

While we're on the subject of Constitutionally-assured rights, I'd like to say a few words on the concept of school prayer.

There are people out there who not only want to forbid prayer in schools (enforced or just allowed), but not even allow for a "moment of silence," stating that it violates "separation of church and state."

Bullshit.

The First Amendment states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Show me how forbidding even a moment of silence is NOT prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Go on. Show me.

Sorry, but it does infringe on this right. It infringes on the right of anyone who is not atheist or agnostic. School prayer infringes on the right of ONLY the atheist or agnostic. A "moment of silence" does neither. It allows Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, whatever, to have their own school prayer as they see fit; while all the other kids, if they so choose, can just sit there quietly until it's over.

There is nothing wrong with that. Any other law violates this fundamental Constitutional right.

Where religion steps in

Activists launch 'Roe v. Wade for Men' - U.S. Life - MSNBC.com

I'm a fairly liberally-minded individual when it comes to religion and politics, but this issue is a true head-scratcher.

One one hand, men SHOULD have the same rights and choices as women in ...well, anything, according to how one could (and probably should) interpret the 14th Amendment. However, on the other hand, it's asinine for a man to not pay child support for their kid. It's akin to "you do the crime, you do the time:" you had sex with the woman and got her pregnant, so you have to support that kid. The only ways OUT of the man paying support for the kid is (a) the woman says, "it's OK, I got tons of money to help pay for the kid's upbringing (yeah, right, how often is that true)", (b) the woman gets an abortion or (c) the woman gives the child up for adoption.

This is where religion steps in. The one factor that immediately eliminates so many problems is if men and women do what ultra-conservative religious people have been claiming for...well, centuries: keep it in your pants. Lawsuits like this puts the concept of abstinence in a whole new light.

But people are still having sex, and will continue to do so.

So what to do? How can a man end up having equal say in the fate of a child as a woman has, without coming up with such ridiculous ideas as legalizing being a deadbeat dad? I'm a man (last time I checked), and if I were to get a woman pregnant (willingly or accidentally), it is my obligation to not only ensure the child is adequately supported, but given every opportunity to achieve its greatest potential in life. Period.

Long story short: this lawsuit is bullshit. The thinking behind it is right, but the apparent goal--releasing men from financial obligation for children--is just plain crap.

Side note: In the State of Maine, a man making around $40,000 a year only has to pay a single mother $336 a month for child support.

Holy

freaking

crap.

How can you even ADEQUATELY support a child on that kind of money, let alone allow it to thrive?? If that's all the state is going to allow, then they need to pump more money into things like child day care so the mother can work, etc. Give the mother some opportunities too, for crying out loud.

But hey, if you're a man who could give two shits about your own flesh and blood, this is a wonderful law. (barf)

Here's a breakdown of what a single mother, unemployed, can expect:

Expense Monthly Cost
Diapers ($17 x 5) $ 85
Food $ 150
Clothes $ 100
Medical $ 450
Shelter $ 600
Utilities (all of them) $ 200
TOTAL $1585

What the state pays for Montly amount
Food $ 130 (*)
Medical $ 430 (**)
Shelter $ 450 (***)
Enforced child support $ 336 (****)
TOTAL $1346

SHORTFALL $ 239

* What I have found, on average, having had to be on the government dole in the past
** If you have little or no income, the State of Maine pays for ALL expenses, minus copays
*** Community action programs (CAPs) and towns will help pay for housing, but subsidized housing plus CAP funding is limited
**** What I've had to pay for child support, based off of the state's guidelines

The only way the woman, if the man isn't paying more than the bare minimum, can make up for that shortfall is to get a job (which requires getting daycare at $85 a week OR MORE) or get more money from somewhere. If the mother cannot get subsidized housing (the waiting list can be anywhere from 3 months to 3 YEARS), this shortfall can run close to $1000.

Knowing the human psyche as I do, people do tend to take the path of least resistance. You keep feeding people free money (i.e. state money), they'll be less likely to find work on their own; and oftentimes (especially if they can't afford to work and pay for daycare) CAN'T find work on their own. They become institutionalized. That's why I see that the state needs to do the following things:

1. Raise the cap for monthly "required" child support from the other parent AT LEAST $200. $550 a month to help pay for a child is what the father can expect, anyway, even if the family is together. The additional expenses come from the family being apart (2 residences). The father should only be obligated to ensure the kid has shelter. Which leads to item #2:

2. Put more money into subsidized housing. A LOT more money.

3. Put more money into daycare for children of all ages, so that single moms are enabled to go find meaningful work.

4. Put more money into training programs so that single moms CAN find more meaningful work.

The funny thing is, if the state did all these things, eventually the mother would become more self-sufficient and the state would eventually have to spend LESS money on social welfare. The problem is, it would cost A TON more up-front. But anyone who owns a business knows that you HAVE to have up-front money before you can actually start making money. It's just that increasing social spending pegs a politician to be "bleeding-heart" and "tax-hungry," and that's political suicide.

Which, of course, leads back to my argument about 'right' versus 'correct.' You'll rarely ever (if at all) see a politician do the right thing. Sorry.

Friday, March 03, 2006

...sooo many men are gonna hate me for this one...

Why Is The Sky Chartreuse?: This explains our society's woes in so many ways.

...but maybe it'll get me laid. I need to get laid. BADLY.

I digress.

I mentioned in Consilium Circulo (look for the link) about how a new government in a new society would look. I suggested a 12-seat "council" that essentially took on the duties of the executive branch.

What if they were all women?

Let's look at history: matriarchial (sp?) societies that date before the Hebrews (people who worshipped Inanna for example) were very peaceful and just. That's not to say they wouldn't go to war. I'm speaking in relative terms. Why? I think it has a lot to do with this brain study. Men GET OFF on revenge! Helllooooo!!

So I think I'll put that in my Consilium blog (which needs a better name...suggest a better one someone...and I'm talking "constructive" suggestions, not flames).

Iraq on the Brink: How Likely Is Civil War? - Newsweek World News - MSNBC.com

Iraq on the Brink: How Likely Is Civil War? - Newsweek World News - MSNBC.com

Why the change in tone? In part because Iraqi party leaders who had been cavalierly indulging in sectarian politics suddenly found themselves "staring into the abyss, and they were recoiling," says a U.S. official in Baghdad who would speak only if he were not identified. "You looked into the eyes of these officials, and it looked like they had been scared straight."


Didn't I at one time say that the way this new democracy was being formed would only lead to more pain and heartache? Let me check...

[checks]

Yup. Well, in a manner of speaking.

Perhaps [this idea] would (a) ease insurgency amongst the Muslim countries and (b) reinforce the unity that is supposed to exist amongst all Muslims (there's a Muslim word for this unity that I cannot recall). This USA should be based on common tenets of Islam...


I'll say for the record that I'm not a Muslim, nor do I think I could ever believe in their way of thinking. But it is their land, after all; and if we expect them to act like a responsible political entity, maybe--and this is putting the cart before the horse--we should treat them like one?

I wonder if at least part of all this animosity in the insurgency is a cry for respect.

Still think what the insurgents are doing is stupid, though. It fixes nothing. Just like when my two-year-old throws a tantrum because I won't let him have any of my beer. Won't change anything. Sorry. Well...won't change anything for the better.

Edit: I forgot about this relevant link. And this one.

A quick comment on guns, abortions, and national security.

Winning Rural America: Guns, Abortion and National Security | TPMCafe

The number one cause of abortion is poverty...


This could very well be true. When my ex became pregnant some 3+ years ago, she seriously considered getting an abortion. Why? Did she not want the baby? No, not quite. So, why then?

Because I was out of work and had no money. We were not just "poor," but "po'." As I like to say, we were SO poor we couldn't even afford the "or" at the end of "poor." It sucked.

In the end, though, we ended up keeping the baby; and now he is a healthy and boisterous 2 1/2 year old boy.

Imagine the joys other would-be mothers are missing out because they had to choose between keeping the baby, or bringing the baby into a very hostile environment called "poverty." This is a very common argument I hear from a lot of pro-choice people--especially those who are or have been poor; and it seems to be something pro-life people don't quite grasp (although I could be wrong). This goes beyond a question of morality, but a matter of quality of life.

Could these would-be mothers simply not have had sex? Sure. Is that likely to happen? No. Like the 90's song said, "people are still having sex." That will never change; and instead of forcing an antiquated and exaggerated morality on people, maybe we should try to fix the root cause. Because rich people have sex, and poor people have sex. But it seems more poor people have abortions.

OK so it wasn't a quick comment.

Sounds right up my alley.

What's the meaning of life? - U.S. Life - MSNBC.com

Lord knows I contemplate the meaning of life quite frequently on this blog. Don't know if there's anything useful here, but I think it's worth giving it a shot.

And if any of my reader (I dropped the "s" on purpose) finds something on here to use, and wins the $10,000, please remember your roots. ;-)

Think about this the next time you eat vanilla ice cream.

Japanese make gasoline from cattle droppings - Science - MSNBC.com

OK, the gasoline bit is pretty cool I suppose, but THIS is the part of the article I want to focus your attention on:

In a separate experiment revealing another unusual business potential for cow dung, another group of researchers has successfully extracted an aromatic ingredient of vanilla from cattle dung, said Miki Tsuruta, a Sekisui Chemical Co. spokeswoman. The extracted ingredient, vanillin, can be used as fragrance in shampoo and candles, she said.


The next time you buy anything vanilla-flavored, check the ingredients. If it has vanillin in it...begin to wonder where it came from.

Happy eating!