HA! I feel safer!!

The recent assassination of the Hamas founder has made Me feel SO MUCH SAFER....... (not)

Exactly how in the hell does this make the world a safer place?? You just made him a martyr, and we want to be crazy enough to think that the Palestinians and Muslims are just going to "pack it in and go home??" Consider that the current war we are facing is going to make Vietnam look like a game of dodge ball..........

Do the math: population of America = 290 million, population of Islam = 1.1 BILLION .... outnumbered just under 4 times..

Safer world?? How about more complex.. Piss of a bear, it's going to bite.. It's not going to think twice - it doesn't blink - doesn't worry about the repercussions - it reacts... That's what we can expect from the Palestinians.. Israel better be on high alert -- it's going to get ugly.....

Maher's Season is ending

Much to our chagrin, Bill Maher's season ended this week.. But I was very impressed with the articulate nature of Gore Vidal.. One of the other guests was a former Bush speech writer.. *laughs* Um, what's even more scary is that this guy thought he was being cute and smart.. One of our favorite comedians was also a guest: Eddie Izzard.. Darby made the comment that she wished that Eddie and Gore weren't on the same episode.. As always, a lot of good debate.. Gore stole the show though.. I'll have to do some follow-up reading on him......

Okay, okay, okay

I get the fact he's a war time President..

I realize that many conservative types think we need Bush to stay in office because he's done "such a good job at thwarting terrorism across the globe.." He hasn't.. It's not getting better.. It's getting worse.. The attacks continue.. But I do agree that we need to put an end to it NOW.. Not by Bush's timetable - because we're too busy setting up governments in other parts of the world.. We are NOT an incubator for evolving countries.. No one assigned us this role.. No one invited us to do this role.. This administration decided a long time ago - that this was what they were going to do.. Very little foresight in what comes "after" such a process, let's just go in with guns blazing and then let their people deal with the aftermath..

The world is not a safer place.. It's going to happen again, we've stirred up the hornets nest, and every conservative pundit that wants to tell me that Bush is the right man for the job -- let's not forget something else ....... if (and more likely when he wins in November) he's term limited.. That's it.. Even the conservatives are thinking "we don't have a plan after 2008.. Swell.. That gives the Dubya 4 years to clean up terrorism.. Yeah, right.. And all we hear about is how Clinton left Bush with a recession.. At least the country's security wasn't at stake.. I'll take a fucking recession any day...........

On the eve of Bin Laden's 2nd in command being nabbed -- I have to say again, the world is *not* a safer place.. I dismiss every comment about how horrible the Iraqi gas chambers and rape rooms are.. Why?? Because if this is the CAUSE of the United States, then we better be knocking on every country's door and say "we want to inspect how you're doing things around here.." Oops, capital punishment isn't a very Christian ideology.........

Oh wait -- let's not forget that we are being led by a former governor of Texas who has put more people to death than any other governor..........

Carrying such big rocks near glass houses can be dangerous, Dubya......

Somehow

...I don't feel all that safe under Bush's watch.. For that matter, I don't think the world feels any safer either.. 2900+ dead on 9/11, now add another 200+ on 3/11 and the endless losses we continue to amass while in Iraq.. What about all of this security and intelligence that was suppose to thwart all of these attacks?? I think Miss Cleo could've done a better job predicting the Spain attacks.. :(

Q: have the attacks against the US in Iraq decreased since Saddam's capture??
A: No, not really..

Q: has the invasion/liberation/occupation of Iraq slowed terrorism across the world??
A: No, not really..

Q: are we a stronger nation than we were 9/10??
A: No, not really..

Q: does Kerry have a snowball's chance in hell in winning this November??
A: No, not really..

*sighs*

I'm Sorry, I Just Don't Feel Sorry For Her....

The recent Martha Stewart trial and tribulations have really grated on my nerves..

She knows she did wrong.. She lied to investigators about specific facts..

Therefore, she should pay for what she done.. A plea bargain was attempted - she scoffed..

She has a past which includes stockbroker trading.. She's done it before.. She knows the rules.. If she didn't know, then ignorance still is not a defense.. Ignorance may be a mitigator, but it cannot completely absolve anyone of any crime they commit..

She stepped down from her top post in Martha Stewart Living.. No big surprise.. She's a convicted felon.. Her image is about as low as you can get.. I don't feel sorry for her.. I see this kind of shit every day in "every-day-land.." People and families interrupted by bad things.. It happens.. Get over it.. It'll happen again.. You don't need to be a freak to get caught by the law.. Martha isn't a God.. Nor should she try to place herself above the law.. Anyone who is a citizen in this country should be under the same scrutiny.. No favors, no back-door handshakes, no "I'll let this slide..."

No, Martha got caught with her hand in the cookie jar.. She should pay.. So should every other questionable business practice like the Haliburton saga, et. al.. It's not a political statement - it's a judicial observation: everyone breaking the laws should be held accountable regardless if they are man, woman, gay, hetero, black, white, brown, blue, democrat, republican, rich, poor, blind, dumb, smart, famous, or unknown..

It ... just ... doesn't ... matter...

The Tangled Web

Ahhhh yes, the tangled web we all weave..

Howard Stern has been at war with his radio show program.. I'm not sure how I feel about it -- on one hand, I tend to agree that any company should have the freedom to put whatever content they see fit on the radio.. The Howard Stern situation isn't new by any means.. In fact - it happens all the time as radio stations across the country change formats, personalities and it's all in the name of profit.. In our little poe-dunk town, we get a lot of country western programming.. It fits because we're a rural community.. The college balances that out by playing a wide assortment of hip hop and current top 40 material.. Colleges can get away with that, privately owned radio stations don't have that luxury..

Okay..

That said - I'm a little sick and tired of the government deciding what's obscene and indecent for me.. It's not their position or their "right" to make such a determination.. I'm an adult.. I pay my taxes.. I abide by the laws of the land (except those which entail driving sometimes....) -- so why should I kow-tow to a more conservative way of thinking?? The backlash of the boob - is really getting blown out of proportion..

First off, there was a violation.. The response?? Put a 5-second delay in broadcasting.. I consider this to be a very reasonable remedy.. That way if a boob pops out again - everyone will be ready.. Hit delete and move on.. Every talk show has this capability.. Why Stern's monitors didn't catch it - is beyond me.. He should face the music for it.. Not just by hanging up on the caller, but there was NO MONITORING.. Okay - I agree that Stern should receive some sort of fine or disciplinary action until he can prove that his radio show can stop something like that from happening again..

So, I'm back to the decision by Clear Talk.. If they were looking for a reason to can Stern, they got it.. If he had been in their scope for awhile, then there's not much else he could've done about what happened.. But from what accounts I've read so far, it looks like Clear Talk got hit with fines thanks in part to Howard's program.. Although I'm still not sure that's the case.. However, if an employee is costing me money because of not being responsible and operating within the rules that are out there.. But I also think it's apparent that the Clear Talk brass had enough of his show..

Now.. Onto another slightly related topic

There's a lot of talk by the FCC about clamping down on some of the material that is on the radio and on TV.. Now before we start with this whole "community standards crap" (a new catch phrase I just picked up after watching CourtTV), I totally understand what this means.. The government wants stricter control and punishment for violators.......

Okay - slight problem..

The "n" word..

Howard Stern got in trouble because a caller used the "n" word.. Someone at the Howard Stern show - hung up on the caller, not giving them anymore air time or attention - went on to something else.. (this is what I hear, I don't know this for certain as we don't get the Howard Stern show out here, this is what I understand from the news reports..) I still believe Howard's crew should've been more attentive to their responsibilities for airing stuff - if in fact this was the reason why his show was canned.. But he didn't highlight, overreact to, or bring anymore attention to the person who called in..

I don't listen to a lot of rap, but in this example, I'm thinking of several rap songs that use the "n" word and other vulgarities - just like it was nothing.. If the FCC wants to stop the use of the "n" word on the Stern show - or if Clear Talk wants to prohibit their programs from using the "n" word -- then what about the rap songs done by artists and aired out there?? There's the whole First Amendment and artistic expression argument that comes blushing out.. Should rappers and artists using the "n" word be able to use it freely?? Yes, they should if they choose.. However, why does the word itself become the focus of the double standard?? If it's okay for a rapper or artist, but is not okay in other situations - exactly how do we police that??

I'm not trying to suggest the word should be protected or not.. But I've always considered the "n" word offensive, very negative, and racially charged reference to African Americans and other people of color.. It does offend me when I hear it - only because I realize the racial sensitivity of the word itself.. However, a lot of rappers use it all the time.. Has the "n" word become the next taboo word that is slowly working its way through society?? Remember the day you couldn't say FUCK?? Can you believe that the same FCC that is in charge of booby-gate and vows to clean up the tv and radio - actually justified use of the word FUCK and did not penalize the broadcasters, Bono, or anyone because he was using the word FUCK to describe the situation... "How FUCKING wonderful was that??" Wow.. FUCK suddenly got chic..

But that's only the tip of the iceberg..

How far down does the FCC want to go?? Why stop with obvious words and wanton displays.. Even el-Rush-bo recognizes that CONTENT could also be fair game some day.. If we start clamping down on what can be said, then aren't we on the verge of total censorship??

As if this was any doubt.....

Your position on the political spectrum...

Liberal - You believe that some things in society could definitely stand to be improved, and you view social progress as the key. You admirably manage to hold that view without becoming rabid about it, which ironically shows you as having far more genuine tolerance for differing views then your Far-Left-Liberal cousins.

(See Jim, there's hope for us) =)

Where do you fall on the liberal - conservative political spectrum? (United States)
brought to you by Quizilla

Hannity

In Bill Maher's most recent episode, he pulls out the book by Sean Hannity - a talk show and tv personality recently wrote a book: Deliver Us From Evil

Easy enough..

Oops, except for the bottom excerpt: "Defeating Terrorism, Despotism, and Liberalism..."

Lovely..

I guess Darby and I are now considered in the same light as terrorists.. After all, we are liberal and what not.... *shudders in fear* Time to go to France??

Wait, wait, whoa, hold on a second..

If democrats are liberal, then is Sean advocating eliminating the two-party system?? If you hear him enough on the radio, he comes right out and says no.. He's adamant about that, yet he wants to go ahead and consider Liberals in the same light as Terrorists and Despots.. ::rolls His eyes::

(btw - nice "patriotic" fake photo of the Statue of Liberty behind him....)

The whole AWOL issue -- Bush's commercials about 9/11 -- Statesman

I'm not sure what concern I have over Bush's AWOL issue.. His alleged absence has been explained by paperwork that confirms he was in the guard at the time of his apparent "AWOL.." In most circles, being able to provide documentation is enough, but I don't understand why this remains an issue.. Just because no one can remember Me when I was in high school doesn't mean I didn't go.. If there's something I'm missing regarding the AWOL issue, I'd like to know..

++++++

I'm disappointed that Bush chose to use the 9/11 attacks as a springboard for his campaign.. If the situations were reversed and Al Gore was in office - I would feel the same disappointment.. I was reading an article a day or so ago that had advice for Bush to "not go to ground zero" because it's a sacred place.. The article continued to say that the backlash would be incredible if Bush did go to the place where the towers collapsed.. I don't know if I agree with that totally.. He still *is* the President of the United States - and even though 9/11 happened on his watch, he's entitled to visit ground zero like any of us really.....

I totally understand that some families think that Bush is using 9/11 as a springboard - and how that cheapens what actually happened on 9/11.. I can see their point.. I don't think anyone should be able to capitalize on a tragedy like that.. On the other hand, you want to tell the American people that the country is a safer place since 9/11.. That message, however, is something I really do take to task.. Because I do not feel that the country or the world for that matter is a safer place since 9/11.. I don't like Bush's foreign policy.. I don't like this renegade type mentality when it comes to going someplace and bombing the hell out of them.. When you stir up the hornets nest, you're going to get stung a few times.. And that's what Bush is doing.. He's getting stung repeatedly.. Even if Bin Laden is caught, I really don't think that's going to make a snowball's difference in hell.. Because you can see that the blood shed in Iraq is just as much as it was before since Saddam's capture.. If we're naive enough to think that all we need to do is get Bin Laden and things will end - think hard and serious.. Granted, even Bush said this is a war that will last several years.. I'm glad he even has the foresight to say such a thing, but I don't feel any safer than I did 9/12.. In fact, the longer we go without some sort of attack, the more brutal I see the next attack being..

++++++

A talk show this week labeled Bush as a "statesman..." I almost got into a car accident at that point, because there's a lot of Presidents I would call a statesman, but Bush is not one of them.. A statesman has foresight.. Bush's foresight goes about as far as stubbing your toe on a door and then responding by sawing the door off......

Reagan was a statesman.. Clinton was a statesman (among other things ;) ), JFK, Roosevelt, and even Ike were statesmen.. Statesmen don't use war as a prelude to peace.. Statesmen are diplomatic.. Statesmen defined as "a political leader regarded as a disinterested promoter of the public good" or someone who "is a respected leader in a given field.." Neither of which Bush qualifies for.. He has several "interests" in going to war in Iraq, none of which was for the public good.. If he were a respected leader in a given field, don't you think the other nations would be bowing down to his greatness?? (that's not happening either..)

There's a tremendous stress in Iraq right now to get their government up and running.. What I fear the most is that this new Iraqi government will not last long.. Remember what happened down in Haiti this past couple of weeks.. Rebels over threw the government.. Are we so sure that Bremmer over there is looking out for the "public good??" Or are we putting in an American-friendly government to help foster future relations?? Let's also not forget that we actually put Saddam in power way back when.. We not only encouraged it, we endorsed it, recognized it and supported it.. We kinda screwed that one up royally, don't you think??

What is sin??

The state of California is in the news again.. This time the California Supreme Court ruled that they must provide health coverage for birth control pills: in complete defiance of what the church believes (obviously..) As I continued to read the article, it brought up the whole morality thing again - but what covers "sin??" Think about it.. There's a LOT of sin out there.. Most of which, we really don't care about.. We have a sin tax to cover things like cigarettes, alcohol and other vice related things..

Wait, let's go back and read that again:

WE HAVE A SIN TAX.........

Meaning, not only does the government not really have an issue with "sin" in general, they want to capitalize in that tax base

Now, a long time ago, in a galaxy not that far away, there was an amendment in the law of the land prohibiting the use of alcohol (aka prohibition...) Many people don't realize that the church was largely responsible for the law to be made in the first place.. It was designed to strengthen our values and make us a more moral society.. Prohibition was eventually repealed and the drinks poured once again..

With all of this talk about morality made me see a lot of different things.. Not withstanding how our "collective moralists" believe that they know what is best for all of the rest of us.. I do find a problem with that since it was one of the major reasons why we came across the big pond, away from Britain to begin with.. But I have significant problems with the level in which our "collective moralists" decide what is sin and what's not.. I have issues with all of this because it's impossible for us to live in a moral society unless ALL of us vowed to be better people..

When we have corruption in the places we expect to have the deepest trust - then I do not feel comfortable having these people "guide me" to a better way of life..

So......

Should the government be able to dictate how the church administers their health insurance coverage?? Now ponder that a bit.. If the church asks the courts to intervene for gay marriages, shouldn't it be responsible for upholding its share of the law of the land?? If not, then why not?? Certainly we believe that any church must reside within the confines of our laws.. To say they don't would create even more chaos.. As it is, many states are trying to repeal the tax break churches get from putting temples and other places of worship in communities.. Churches get a real huge tax break when it comes to it.. Why does government want to get involved?? Because some churches look a lot nicer than most government buildings.. The argument "well now, if you have so much extra money, why not spread the wealth??"

If the church wishes to direct law policy across America, then why shouldn't they be responsible for living within those confines as well??

Just because they may not agree with birth control, doesn't exclude them from the responsibilities included when they hire someone.. Laws are laws, right?? Isn't that we keep getting told?? There's a LOT of laws I don't agree with, but I abide by these rules to peacefully coexist in this society.. If I make the choice and violate those rules, then society will punish me.. Cause and effect.. A defense of "I disagree with this particular law" does not bode well in front of a Judge.. Because most, if not all Judges will get this look on their faces as though you're nothing more than a rodent that just came into their courtroom..

So, no, I don't think the church should get out of their duty just because they have personal issues with birth control and contraceptives.. If we start giving passes like this one, it's going to be the start of even more chaos.. No problem with that?? Okie dokie.. I'll just stop paying my taxes, go and take out money from banks just because I need an extra thou or two.. Am I a little over the top?? Well, a lot of talk shows are exactly the same way in a lot of respects.. Just because something doesn't happen to agree with their agenda, all of a sudden the crash of the free world us upon us...... We're facing an internal implosion and the world is going to die a horrible death..... (If I didn't know any better, it's sweeps month for these talk shows.....)

Sorry churches, if I gotta abide by these rules, so do you..