NASA released a shocking report on intoxicated astronauts being allowed to go on shuttle missions, despite objections from fellow astronauts and flight controllers.
Oh, hell's bells!
The report mentions two incidents: one aboard a space shuttle, another aboard the International Space Station/Soyuz launch. It is unknown if these were isolated incidents, or an indicator of a major problem, and how long it's been going on.
The last thing we need is an intoxicated pilot or co-pilot at the control stick of a shuttle when a major malfunction occurs. Shuttle flights should be postponed if ANYONE in the crew shows up intoxicated, and the offending crew member removed from the mission.
If it's discovered that alcohol played ANY part in the destruction of either the Challenger or the Columbia, there will be hell to pay at NASA. There's no indication of anything like that occurring, but if it did...
What kind of operation are they running down there? Allowing drunk people to fly aboard one of the fastest and most powerful airborne non-nuclear bombs in existence? What were they thinking?
Friday, July 27, 2007
Obama-Clinton War of Words: Much as I Hate to Say It, Clinton's Right
During the recent CNN/Youtube-sponsored Democratic Presidential debate, one of the questions asked was whether the candidates would meet with certain nations within one year of being elected. Here are the questions and how Clinton and Obama answered the question:
I loathe to admit it, but on this question, Clinton is absolutely correct. Obama screwed up and is now making more mistakes to cover his original mistake. His statement was hopelessly naive; one could almost hear his advisers groaning from backstage and his spin doctors going into damage control mode.
Clinton's statement was that she didn't want a visit to be used as a propaganda tool by those nations mentioned, who are notorious for doing precisely that kind of thing. She was correct that the groundwork needs to be done first before a Presidential visit could occur.
Diplomacy SHOULD resume with those nations, with a goal of eventual high-level talks and visits. But Obama's approach came across as having an American President crawling on hands and knees to that commie runt in North Korea, or the Mouth of the South, or Iran's hostage-taking president to ask them to please talk to us.
We ought to kick a few of them IN the mouth before we talk to them, just so they're paying attention.
Obama ought to admit the error, then move on.
I loathe to admit it, but on this question, Clinton is absolutely correct. Obama screwed up and is now making more mistakes to cover his original mistake. His statement was hopelessly naive; one could almost hear his advisers groaning from backstage and his spin doctors going into damage control mode.
Clinton's statement was that she didn't want a visit to be used as a propaganda tool by those nations mentioned, who are notorious for doing precisely that kind of thing. She was correct that the groundwork needs to be done first before a Presidential visit could occur.
Diplomacy SHOULD resume with those nations, with a goal of eventual high-level talks and visits. But Obama's approach came across as having an American President crawling on hands and knees to that commie runt in North Korea, or the Mouth of the South, or Iran's hostage-taking president to ask them to please talk to us.
We ought to kick a few of them IN the mouth before we talk to them, just so they're paying attention.
Obama ought to admit the error, then move on.
Harry Potter Synopsis Posted to Wikipedia Before New Book Went on Sale Across U.S.: Wikipedian Locked Article to Prevent Deletion/Alteration by Fans
This post contains no spoilers.
Someone spilled the beans on what happens in the new Harry Potter book (Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows) in a clever way: they posted a chapter-by-chapter synopsis to Wikipedia, then locked it to prevent changes or deletion. It was posted before the book went on sale one week ago at 12:01am local time across the U.S.
The explicit curses found in various chat rooms about the Wikipedian responsible were hilarious, and unsettling at the same time. Lots of screaming about the book's contents being spoiled and the ending being given away by those fans stupid enough to read the Wikipedia entry before reading the book.
It's their own damned fault.
I think that someone in Europe posted the information to Wikipedia as they had hours to read the book and post the article to Wikipedia before the book went on sale over here. Hey, don't look at me, I didn't do it. I read the Wikipedia entry at 12:05am EST.
Hope the Wikipedian covered his exterior posterior because some Potter fans are looking for someone to throttle. Morons.
Someone spilled the beans on what happens in the new Harry Potter book (Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows) in a clever way: they posted a chapter-by-chapter synopsis to Wikipedia, then locked it to prevent changes or deletion. It was posted before the book went on sale one week ago at 12:01am local time across the U.S.
The explicit curses found in various chat rooms about the Wikipedian responsible were hilarious, and unsettling at the same time. Lots of screaming about the book's contents being spoiled and the ending being given away by those fans stupid enough to read the Wikipedia entry before reading the book.
It's their own damned fault.
I think that someone in Europe posted the information to Wikipedia as they had hours to read the book and post the article to Wikipedia before the book went on sale over here. Hey, don't look at me, I didn't do it. I read the Wikipedia entry at 12:05am EST.
Hope the Wikipedian covered his exterior posterior because some Potter fans are looking for someone to throttle. Morons.
More Drug Problems at Tour de France: Riders Lead Away by Police, Others Fired by Their Teams, or Kicked Out by Tour Officials
Well, isn't this pretty?The Tour de France (aka Tour de Farce) continued with more drug scandals this week, with two riders being kicked out of the tour after testing positive for blood doping, and the Tour leader being kicked out by his own team for suspicion of doing the same thing. One of the riders was lead away by French police for questioning (seen above).
The Tour is a joke. In fact, the joke the other day was that the only thing that the Tour is peddling is drugs. That's really sad for a sport whose worldwide popularity has increased in recent years.
And what's really sad is that Tour athletes will continue doping up as their colleagues and competitors get caught every day around them. It's utter madness!
Executive Privilege vs. Congressional Subpoenas: Separation of Powers Weakens Every Time Congress and President Clash Over This
Watching the President and Congress clash over subpoenas and Executive Privilege is like watching a chess match. Move. Counter move. Counter-counter move. Check. Counter move.
The firings of eight U.S. attorneys set off this high-stakes game of chess. It goes thus:
Attorney General Gonzales fires eight federal attorneys; no reason is given. Congress demands explanations; Justice declines; Congress subpoenas documents and people; White House asserts Executive Privilege; Congress threatens contempt of Congress charges against anyone refusing to testify; White House says "so?"; Congress again threatens contempt charges; White House orders federal prosecutors not to comply with Congressional contempt citations; Congress threatens to charge Gonzales with perjury.
There seems to be a great deal of confusion as to where Congressional authority ends and Presidential authority begins--and vice versa.
And we have a sitting Congress and President who don't mind intruding on one another's territory, which makes this question even more difficult to resolve. And they've both tried to shred parts of the Constitution that deals with the other.
This is not the first time that a President and Congress have clashed over Executive Privilege; Nixon asserted ExecPriv over his Watergate recordings; the Supreme Court ruled against him. A lower Federal court also ruled against Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal when his aides were ordered to testify before the Starr commission.
Presidents need to pick and choose which battles need to be fought to preserve the separation of powers, not to cover their behinds. And Congress needs to pick and choose which fights really need to be fought and make sure that they're not crossing the line between Congressional powers and Presidential ones.
We are not a parliamentary democracy. The President is NOT a member of Congress as the British Prime Minister is of the British Parliament (as are most of his/her ministers). We are a federal republic with three branches of government, complete with a system of checks and balances to prevent one branch from gaining supremacy over all others.
President Bush and Congress are trying to gain supremacy over the other, and the third branch may be required to step in to put a stop to it. It's only a matter of time now before this is referred to the courts. They've locked us into this course.
What a sorry state of affairs.
The firings of eight U.S. attorneys set off this high-stakes game of chess. It goes thus:
Attorney General Gonzales fires eight federal attorneys; no reason is given. Congress demands explanations; Justice declines; Congress subpoenas documents and people; White House asserts Executive Privilege; Congress threatens contempt of Congress charges against anyone refusing to testify; White House says "so?"; Congress again threatens contempt charges; White House orders federal prosecutors not to comply with Congressional contempt citations; Congress threatens to charge Gonzales with perjury.
There seems to be a great deal of confusion as to where Congressional authority ends and Presidential authority begins--and vice versa.
And we have a sitting Congress and President who don't mind intruding on one another's territory, which makes this question even more difficult to resolve. And they've both tried to shred parts of the Constitution that deals with the other.
This is not the first time that a President and Congress have clashed over Executive Privilege; Nixon asserted ExecPriv over his Watergate recordings; the Supreme Court ruled against him. A lower Federal court also ruled against Clinton during the Lewinsky scandal when his aides were ordered to testify before the Starr commission.
Presidents need to pick and choose which battles need to be fought to preserve the separation of powers, not to cover their behinds. And Congress needs to pick and choose which fights really need to be fought and make sure that they're not crossing the line between Congressional powers and Presidential ones.
We are not a parliamentary democracy. The President is NOT a member of Congress as the British Prime Minister is of the British Parliament (as are most of his/her ministers). We are a federal republic with three branches of government, complete with a system of checks and balances to prevent one branch from gaining supremacy over all others.
President Bush and Congress are trying to gain supremacy over the other, and the third branch may be required to step in to put a stop to it. It's only a matter of time now before this is referred to the courts. They've locked us into this course.
What a sorry state of affairs.
Youtube/CNN Debate Was Interesting: I Hope This Format is Done Again
I watched the CNN/Youtube-sponsored Democratic debate a few nights ago and came away impressed with the format. Having people send in video questions and comments is a great idea.
The fellows from Tennessee were great with their comment on this:
The snowman was idiotic (and I thought the answer was a bit of a stretch):
I thought the liberals up on the stage were going to have a heart attack with this question on gun control (and the "prop" used by the person asking the question!)
Thirty-nine questions were asked on all kinds of issues that were important to the Democratic base as well as the viewing public. I do hope they do this kind of debate with the eventual nominees from both parties. Trying to question eight or nine candidates was unwieldy, but they pulled it off.
Someone had a real good idea.
The fellows from Tennessee were great with their comment on this:
The snowman was idiotic (and I thought the answer was a bit of a stretch):
I thought the liberals up on the stage were going to have a heart attack with this question on gun control (and the "prop" used by the person asking the question!)
Thirty-nine questions were asked on all kinds of issues that were important to the Democratic base as well as the viewing public. I do hope they do this kind of debate with the eventual nominees from both parties. Trying to question eight or nine candidates was unwieldy, but they pulled it off.
Someone had a real good idea.
Iraqi Prime Minister's Statement That Iraq Can Take Care of Itself Should the Americans Leave Suddenly: Bravado or Reality?
The Iraqi Prime Minister recently made some eyebrow-raising statements concerning political upheaval in Washington that could lead to a sudden pull-out of the U.S. military from Iraq. Said he: "...American troops can leave anytime they want." He also said that Iraqi troops are capable of taking over.
Really? Since when, exactly?
That sounds like bravado backed up by facts not in evidence. I would think that we've heard enough bravado in this war to make everyone uneasy over his choice of words. I believe al-Maliki misspoke and hurt his own cause.
It smells of someone else standing on the deck of a U.S. aircraft carrier with a "Mission Accomplished" banner over his shoulder, stating that major combat operations in Iraq were at an end, or that same person's declaration that he didn't care if bin-Laden was brought in, "dead or alive."
Politicians are the same the world over.
Really? Since when, exactly?
That sounds like bravado backed up by facts not in evidence. I would think that we've heard enough bravado in this war to make everyone uneasy over his choice of words. I believe al-Maliki misspoke and hurt his own cause.
It smells of someone else standing on the deck of a U.S. aircraft carrier with a "Mission Accomplished" banner over his shoulder, stating that major combat operations in Iraq were at an end, or that same person's declaration that he didn't care if bin-Laden was brought in, "dead or alive."
Politicians are the same the world over.
President and Congress Are Out of Touch With American Public: They Aren't Listening and Don't Care
I am of the opinion that this Administration and Congress are the worst that I have ever seen.
Some of us were waiting for President Bush to become the leader we had hoped he would be, but it hasn't happened, and it's too late now.
The Democrats aren't going to listen to him; they'd rather investigate him. And President Bush is facing a revolt in his own party in Congress. When he has to join forces with the most liberal Democrats in Congress to pass immigration amnesty over the objections of his own party, it's clear that this Administration is crippled beyond repair.
And Congress is worse than that. Both parties are fractured, and there's little consensus on Iraq, immigration, stem cell research, Gonzales, the wiretapping thing, the fired federal prosecutors, and concern about protecting the Constitution AS IT IS. They're busy attempting to shred parts of the Constitution that are inconvenient to them.
In fact, both the President and Congress have taken steps to invade and supplant one another's Constitutional authority. Witness the President's military tribunals, and Congress's foray into foreign policy with Nancy Pelosi attempting to establish a shadow foreign policy, and insulting Israel in the process (and making a fool out of herself.) We won't even go into executive privilege vs. Congressional subpoena powers here.
I think the entire slate of people in Congress need to be overturned by the voters and new people elected in at the earliest possible opportunity. This Congress is blowing it big time.
Also, I am opposed to every candidate vying for the Presidency that the Democrats and Republicans have in the field. I think both parties can do better than who they've got in the race at present.
There are also too many people running at this point on both the Democratic and Republican sides. They're all attempting to say the same things differently and it's getting real old real fast.
Some of us were waiting for President Bush to become the leader we had hoped he would be, but it hasn't happened, and it's too late now.
The Democrats aren't going to listen to him; they'd rather investigate him. And President Bush is facing a revolt in his own party in Congress. When he has to join forces with the most liberal Democrats in Congress to pass immigration amnesty over the objections of his own party, it's clear that this Administration is crippled beyond repair.
And Congress is worse than that. Both parties are fractured, and there's little consensus on Iraq, immigration, stem cell research, Gonzales, the wiretapping thing, the fired federal prosecutors, and concern about protecting the Constitution AS IT IS. They're busy attempting to shred parts of the Constitution that are inconvenient to them.
In fact, both the President and Congress have taken steps to invade and supplant one another's Constitutional authority. Witness the President's military tribunals, and Congress's foray into foreign policy with Nancy Pelosi attempting to establish a shadow foreign policy, and insulting Israel in the process (and making a fool out of herself.) We won't even go into executive privilege vs. Congressional subpoena powers here.
I think the entire slate of people in Congress need to be overturned by the voters and new people elected in at the earliest possible opportunity. This Congress is blowing it big time.
Also, I am opposed to every candidate vying for the Presidency that the Democrats and Republicans have in the field. I think both parties can do better than who they've got in the race at present.
There are also too many people running at this point on both the Democratic and Republican sides. They're all attempting to say the same things differently and it's getting real old real fast.
Government Should Take Steps to Reduce Heavy Debt Load: $9 Trillion and Rising
The Bush Administration's rationale for debt spending during wartime is unnecessary and unwise. The price tag that came along with this decision is a staggering $9 trillion. That's too much for any one nation to carry.
Congressional pork barrel projects aren't helping either. They are a percentage of the overall budget, but they are adding more to the problem and not to the solution, especially since the government is already overspending. Congress adds insult to injury every time they use federal money to pay for peanut storage in their home states. Or other stupid earmarks.
A $9 trillion debt is the pinnacle of absurdity.
That debt should be paid down 10% every four years until it's a fraction of the federal budget, with no new additions to the debt. Every Administration--starting with the new one that will take office in January 2009--until the debt is nearly retired around the year 2058.
If the government can't fit a program into a balanced budget, then the program should be postponed or canceled.
The military does this all the time. If a weapons system is no longer cost-effective, or is too expensive to build, or is obsolete, they put it out to pasture. The rest of the government should be made to do the same thing.
I think that the government should have the ability to exceed it's budget, but that ability should be used ONLY in times of dire national emergencies, not in everyday situations, as the nation currently is. Yes, the country is at war, but not total war as it was during World War II.
Radical changes need to be made in Washington, and soon. Otherwise, the debt will get so huge that we'll never be able to pay it down.
Congressional pork barrel projects aren't helping either. They are a percentage of the overall budget, but they are adding more to the problem and not to the solution, especially since the government is already overspending. Congress adds insult to injury every time they use federal money to pay for peanut storage in their home states. Or other stupid earmarks.
A $9 trillion debt is the pinnacle of absurdity.
That debt should be paid down 10% every four years until it's a fraction of the federal budget, with no new additions to the debt. Every Administration--starting with the new one that will take office in January 2009--until the debt is nearly retired around the year 2058.
If the government can't fit a program into a balanced budget, then the program should be postponed or canceled.
The military does this all the time. If a weapons system is no longer cost-effective, or is too expensive to build, or is obsolete, they put it out to pasture. The rest of the government should be made to do the same thing.
I think that the government should have the ability to exceed it's budget, but that ability should be used ONLY in times of dire national emergencies, not in everyday situations, as the nation currently is. Yes, the country is at war, but not total war as it was during World War II.
Radical changes need to be made in Washington, and soon. Otherwise, the debt will get so huge that we'll never be able to pay it down.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Barry Bonds Home Run Situation: A View From Someone Who Doesn't Care about 756*
The baseball world has been talking for quite some time about the fact that Barry Bonds is within striking distance of breaking Hank Aaron's career home run record of 755. Bonds is currently sitting pretty on 753 with the rest of the baseball season to go.
However, Bonds has been dogged by accusations of steroid usage. He has not tested positive for any banned substances, leading to charges of racism and another Lance Armstrong-type situation, where someone has been accused without solid proof.
It started in 2003, when Bonds' trainer (and the company he worked for) were charged with distributing anabolic steroids to athletes, including major league baseball players. Bonds was not accused of any crimes, though a federal grand jury investigated him (for charges unrelated to any drug use). They declined to charge him with anything.
Few points about the alleged drug use from someone who doesn't care if Bonds hits 755 or not:
Unless there are positive tests, or Bonds admits to using something, or he gets caught with something on him, everything being said about him with regards to the drug use is hearsay. Fans should get used to that idea.
Both baseball and the media should put up or shut up as far as their accusations go. He's innocent until proven guilty and they should remember that. The court of public opinion doesn't matter if there is no evidence of wrongdoing.
However, Bonds has been dogged by accusations of steroid usage. He has not tested positive for any banned substances, leading to charges of racism and another Lance Armstrong-type situation, where someone has been accused without solid proof.
It started in 2003, when Bonds' trainer (and the company he worked for) were charged with distributing anabolic steroids to athletes, including major league baseball players. Bonds was not accused of any crimes, though a federal grand jury investigated him (for charges unrelated to any drug use). They declined to charge him with anything.
Few points about the alleged drug use from someone who doesn't care if Bonds hits 755 or not:
Unless there are positive tests, or Bonds admits to using something, or he gets caught with something on him, everything being said about him with regards to the drug use is hearsay. Fans should get used to that idea.
Both baseball and the media should put up or shut up as far as their accusations go. He's innocent until proven guilty and they should remember that. The court of public opinion doesn't matter if there is no evidence of wrongdoing.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
McCain's Own Campaign Finance Laws are Hurting Him Now: Perhaps He Should Think These Things Through Before Enacting Laws That Affect Others Too
John McCain's presidential campaign appears to be melting down. In recent weeks he's laid off workers, others have quit, he's shut down campaign offices and doesn't have enough money to keep his campaign afloat.
While his staff's quitting is being caused by conflict inside the campaign as well as the money problems, McCain's problems are due in part to his own McCain-Feingold laws which place strict limits on campaign financing, limits what can be donated to campaigns, and restricts candidate spending if they accept federal matching funds.
I'm not saying that his law is good or bad--I'm neutral on that point--but the irony of this is decidedly delicious. We have a politician being screwed by his own law.
Am I the only one enjoying this situation?
While his staff's quitting is being caused by conflict inside the campaign as well as the money problems, McCain's problems are due in part to his own McCain-Feingold laws which place strict limits on campaign financing, limits what can be donated to campaigns, and restricts candidate spending if they accept federal matching funds.
I'm not saying that his law is good or bad--I'm neutral on that point--but the irony of this is decidedly delicious. We have a politician being screwed by his own law.
Am I the only one enjoying this situation?
Congress's Withdrawal Timetable is Unrealistic: The U.S. Military Can't Pack Up and Move Out of Iraq Like a Boy Scout Troop on a Camp-Out
As I had feared in my May 14th entry, the Pentagon and other military planners do not have a plan for a full withdrawal yet. In fact, the challenges ahead of them are huge. But they are working on the problem.
According to military logistics officials, it would take 10,000 flatbed trucks and one year to move out--and that's just to withdraw the twenty combat brigades currently deployed in Iraq. For a full pullout, it would take twenty months or more to get the troops and all equipment out of Iraq.
Congress's timetable is unrealistic. They are TOTALLY out of their minds!
This entire withdrawal debate needs to be re-cast with more realistic timetables. Vietnam withdrawal planning took two years to complete, and the draw down took place between 1969-1973.
If the Pentagon needs to take two years to plan it out, that puts the timetable to begin withdrawing somewhere around 2009 or 2010. And then a minimum of twenty months to get all troops and equipment out, which puts the complete withdrawal date anywhere from late 2012 to somewhere around 2015.
Congress must not screw this up! They're going to get a lot of people killed if they insist on this cockamamie plan to complete the withdrawal by April 2008. This is a force of 200,000 people with many thousands of tons of equipment, not a Boy Scout troop packing up to go home after a camp-out.
Congress needs to get it's head out of the sand and get with the program.
According to military logistics officials, it would take 10,000 flatbed trucks and one year to move out--and that's just to withdraw the twenty combat brigades currently deployed in Iraq. For a full pullout, it would take twenty months or more to get the troops and all equipment out of Iraq.
Congress's timetable is unrealistic. They are TOTALLY out of their minds!
This entire withdrawal debate needs to be re-cast with more realistic timetables. Vietnam withdrawal planning took two years to complete, and the draw down took place between 1969-1973.
If the Pentagon needs to take two years to plan it out, that puts the timetable to begin withdrawing somewhere around 2009 or 2010. And then a minimum of twenty months to get all troops and equipment out, which puts the complete withdrawal date anywhere from late 2012 to somewhere around 2015.
Congress must not screw this up! They're going to get a lot of people killed if they insist on this cockamamie plan to complete the withdrawal by April 2008. This is a force of 200,000 people with many thousands of tons of equipment, not a Boy Scout troop packing up to go home after a camp-out.
Congress needs to get it's head out of the sand and get with the program.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Harry Potter Series Ended with "Half-Blood Prince" As Far As I'm Concerned: Blatant Satanism Does It In
When "Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" was released in bookstores four years ago, I raised objections to the blatant Satanism found in the book and some of the topics that were touched upon. I won't go into the minor issues.
My major objection (on religious grounds) in "Order of the Phoenix" was the demonic possession of Harry by Lord Voldemort during the battle between the Death Eaters and the Order of the Phoenix at the Ministry of Magic. I just cannot get past this blatant Satanism. I was very offended by this turn of events.
On my web site, I was willing to overlook some of the minor religious issues in the first three books. My perception changed at the end of the fourth book, "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire", when Wormtail chopped off his own hand, desecrated the grave of Voldemort's father, then drew Harry's blood to allow the dark lord's body to be regenerated. This was preceded by the murder of Cedric Diggory. My reaction was "uh oh."
I had hoped that J.K. Rowling wouldn't return to this kind of stuff, but she not only returned to it, but escalated it in "Phoenix". Then "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" was released two years ago and the soul ripping and the raising of the dead for evil killed the series for me.
I will not read the last book. It's a dead series as far as I'm concerned.
Only God can raise the dead.
My major objection (on religious grounds) in "Order of the Phoenix" was the demonic possession of Harry by Lord Voldemort during the battle between the Death Eaters and the Order of the Phoenix at the Ministry of Magic. I just cannot get past this blatant Satanism. I was very offended by this turn of events.
On my web site, I was willing to overlook some of the minor religious issues in the first three books. My perception changed at the end of the fourth book, "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire", when Wormtail chopped off his own hand, desecrated the grave of Voldemort's father, then drew Harry's blood to allow the dark lord's body to be regenerated. This was preceded by the murder of Cedric Diggory. My reaction was "uh oh."
I had hoped that J.K. Rowling wouldn't return to this kind of stuff, but she not only returned to it, but escalated it in "Phoenix". Then "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" was released two years ago and the soul ripping and the raising of the dead for evil killed the series for me.
I will not read the last book. It's a dead series as far as I'm concerned.
Only God can raise the dead.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Democrats Tack on Withdrawal Date to Military Spending Bill Again: Bush May Not Be Given Time for Surge to Work
Senator Levin tacked on an amendment to a new military spending bill that features a withdrawal date for troops from Iraq.
Here we go again.
This time, however, the Democrats may have support from GOP Senators Lugar, Warner and Voinovich, as well as several other GOP senators. They have said that the Administration's plan isn't working and a change in direction was needed.
It appears that Congress isn't going to wait for General Petraeus's report in September to decide what's working and what isn't. The House has already voted to withdraw troops next year.
And President Bush isn't gaining any new allies in Congress; he's losing the allies he's already got. Looks like things are going to get really nasty.
Here we go again.
This time, however, the Democrats may have support from GOP Senators Lugar, Warner and Voinovich, as well as several other GOP senators. They have said that the Administration's plan isn't working and a change in direction was needed.
It appears that Congress isn't going to wait for General Petraeus's report in September to decide what's working and what isn't. The House has already voted to withdraw troops next year.
And President Bush isn't gaining any new allies in Congress; he's losing the allies he's already got. Looks like things are going to get really nasty.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Burying the "N" Word: Symbolic Move Won't Stop Rappers, Racists or Drunks from Using Racial Slur
The symbolic burial of the "n" word in various cities around the country won't change a thing.
Rappers, racists and drunks will continue to use the divisive term at will and with relish. Upset comics and various celebrities will, too, as we've already seen. The mock burials should not be seen as anything but symbolic, until public perceptions of the damage the word does becomes much more widespread. We're only hearing this from one part of the population, and stunts like this do nothing to change the perception that this is a problem for our entire society, and not just the African-American communities.
Eliminating this vulgar term from entertainment alone is nothing but window dressing which covers up a much bigger problem. Racism doesn't reside in entertainment alone; and the NAACP has unwisely focused too much of it's attention there, and on this one word.
Many words can be put together to describe someone based on their skin color, religious belief, and other things which set people apart from one another that are just as harmful as the "n" word. Consider Don Imus's words. I had to look up part of the term he used to understand what he meant.
Racism is more than words, and affects more than one group of people. Burying one word won't do anything to change it.
Rappers, racists and drunks will continue to use the divisive term at will and with relish. Upset comics and various celebrities will, too, as we've already seen. The mock burials should not be seen as anything but symbolic, until public perceptions of the damage the word does becomes much more widespread. We're only hearing this from one part of the population, and stunts like this do nothing to change the perception that this is a problem for our entire society, and not just the African-American communities.
Eliminating this vulgar term from entertainment alone is nothing but window dressing which covers up a much bigger problem. Racism doesn't reside in entertainment alone; and the NAACP has unwisely focused too much of it's attention there, and on this one word.
Many words can be put together to describe someone based on their skin color, religious belief, and other things which set people apart from one another that are just as harmful as the "n" word. Consider Don Imus's words. I had to look up part of the term he used to understand what he meant.
Racism is more than words, and affects more than one group of people. Burying one word won't do anything to change it.
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Pelosi Laments Lack of Progress in Congress: That's What Happens When the "No" Party Replaces Something With Nothing
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that she was disappointed with Congress's lack of progress on high-priority issues--namely immigration, the Iraq War, stem cell research, and other hot topics.
HELLO!
What did she think was going to happen when her special interest-dominated party took the reins of power? That she'd actually be able to hold the coalition together once an issue came up that the special interests were opposed to one another on, such as Iraq funding?
For years they've been "no to this," "no to that," "no to George Bush's illegal war," "no to neo-cons," "no no no no no!"---while offering no alternatives. They were silent.
Then they came to power because voters were expressing their displeasure with the Republican-dominated House and Senate and especially with President Bush. And the only way to do that was to vote for the other candidate.
Nancy Pelosi blaming Senate Republicans for her lack of control over her own party is both amusing and a sign of desperation. She'll say or do anything to get her dissenting membership to agree with her. She's clearly hoping she can end the public meltdown of Democratic unity.
She's giving the united Republicans more credit than they've earned in this matter; it's not Republican opposition that's responsible for 51% of her problems; it's defections from her party when the time comes to vote on these bills that are most responsible for her control issues.
Republicans are veering away from President Bush's positions on Iraq and immigration; yet Pelosi can't take advantage of that because the special interests are pulling her own party apart at the seams, wanting differing things on how to deal with the Iraq question and how to cater to potential new immigrant voters.
The next election will be interesting.
HELLO!
What did she think was going to happen when her special interest-dominated party took the reins of power? That she'd actually be able to hold the coalition together once an issue came up that the special interests were opposed to one another on, such as Iraq funding?
For years they've been "no to this," "no to that," "no to George Bush's illegal war," "no to neo-cons," "no no no no no!"---while offering no alternatives. They were silent.
Then they came to power because voters were expressing their displeasure with the Republican-dominated House and Senate and especially with President Bush. And the only way to do that was to vote for the other candidate.
Nancy Pelosi blaming Senate Republicans for her lack of control over her own party is both amusing and a sign of desperation. She'll say or do anything to get her dissenting membership to agree with her. She's clearly hoping she can end the public meltdown of Democratic unity.
She's giving the united Republicans more credit than they've earned in this matter; it's not Republican opposition that's responsible for 51% of her problems; it's defections from her party when the time comes to vote on these bills that are most responsible for her control issues.
Republicans are veering away from President Bush's positions on Iraq and immigration; yet Pelosi can't take advantage of that because the special interests are pulling her own party apart at the seams, wanting differing things on how to deal with the Iraq question and how to cater to potential new immigrant voters.
The next election will be interesting.
Monday, July 02, 2007
Police Seize Computer Belonging to Wikipedian Who Posted News of Chris Benoit's Wife's Death 14 Hours Before Bodies Were Found
Police seized a computer belonging to a Wikipedian who posted news of the death of Nancy Benoit, wife of former World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) wrestler Chris Benoit, fourteen hours before police found the bodies of the Benoit family in Atlanta.
They're trying to figure out if the posting was an incredible coincidence, or if there's another angle to the double-murder/suicide that has been in the headlines for a week now.
The Wikipedian posted a follow-up message on Wikipedia a couple of days later, apologizing for posting unconfirmed information and saying that he heard a rumor of what had happened and posted it as fact.
The name of the author of the post has not been released, but his IP address put him in Stamford, Connecticut, where WWE's headquarters and corporate offices are located. The police in Georgia who are investigating the case are not happy, saying that this phase of the investigation is a huge distraction.
They're trying to figure out if the posting was an incredible coincidence, or if there's another angle to the double-murder/suicide that has been in the headlines for a week now.
The Wikipedian posted a follow-up message on Wikipedia a couple of days later, apologizing for posting unconfirmed information and saying that he heard a rumor of what had happened and posted it as fact.
The name of the author of the post has not been released, but his IP address put him in Stamford, Connecticut, where WWE's headquarters and corporate offices are located. The police in Georgia who are investigating the case are not happy, saying that this phase of the investigation is a huge distraction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)