Back in a time when the National Basketball Association consisted of the best basketball players in the land...Translation...Back when the NBA was fun to watch...there was a guy by the name of Red Auerbach, and he was the coach/general manager of the team in Boston called "The Celtics"."
In a time - the 1960's - in our country, Red Auerbach was willing to put 5 black men on the court when no one else was. He won 9 straight NBA championships.
In the 1980's, he was courageous enough to put 5 white guys on the court, when no one else was. He ended up winning 7 more NBA championships.
Red Auerbach had passion and the courage of his convictions. On October 28th 2006, Red Auerbach died at the age of 89.
America has lost another person who stood for what he believed in, and was a success because of it.
Is there anyone out there like him? Please step forward, now.
Saturday, October 28, 2006
Rick Santorum
There is a man in Pennsylvania by the name of Rick Santorum. He has been a State Senator there since 1994, and rarely has one person elicited so much national attention as a junior Senator from a State like Pennsylvania. Not that I have anything against Pennsylvania, but on the national attention meter, it doesn't exactly ring the bell like California, Florida, Texas, Massachusetts, New York, etc.
Rick Santorum is a conservative Republican, and it looks right now as if he is probably going to lose his seat in the Senate, partly because of the backlash voting that everyone is predicting, and partly because of Senator Santorum himself. You see, Rick Santorum says what he believes, and stands for what he stands for, regardless of whether that is going to cost him his job. This past Monday, he said as much during a campaign speech he was giving. He told prospective voters that he "was not going to say to them what they wanted to hear just to get re-elected." He followed that with the daring statement, "and I'm ok with the fact you may not vote for me because of it."
Hmmmm. Interesting.
Rick Santorum believes in traditional marriage and family, and he said so several months back. He also made a strategic - and admittedly stupid blunder - by saying homosexuality is destroying the moral fabric and fiber of our society. Say goodbye to any possibles you may have had with that statement, Rick. The truth of the matter is homosexuality probably does not tear down the moral fiber of America, but plenty of other stuff does. We do just fine jacking things around all by ourselves, and one more thing isn't necessarily going to make it worse. But he said it, and now he has to live with it. And to his credit, he does.
In the same speech, Senator Santorum voiced his position that he was and still is in favor of the War in Iraq and the battles against terrorism in general. This of course is political suicide of the highest magnitude these days. Gay bashing and war supporting is not in the best interests of any candidate right now. In the speech, the Senator noted the following:
Since 2003, 4,500 schools have been reopened or built by coalition forces, and stocked with over 8 million text books. This number is up from less than 1000 schools during the Saddam regime.
Since 2003, 98% of the children of Iraq have been given the basic imunizations that we here in America get. That 98% is up from 1% during Saddam's time.
Prior to 2003, there was a cell phone or PC for 1 person out of every 1 million. Since 2003, 5 million cells are in use, and over 3.5 million Iraqi's own PC's.
There were 2 television stations from 1979 to 2003. They were silently dubbed "Saddam TV." Since 2003, there are now 150 local and satellite stations available, many of which openly talk and debate politics...something that would have earned a citizen a bullet in the head in another time.
Of the 18 provinces of Iraq, 12 or 13 of them are secure and peaceful. Strides are being made, and yes, lives are being lost in making those strides.
He said a lot more...which included his acknowledgement that there have been political and military blunders in Iraq as well... and he was roundly booed during the speech. Senator Santorum says what is on his mind, and that is where he declared he won't change his mind, his Senatorial duties, or his principles, for a vote. He was again booed.
I don't know about you, but I'm damn sure glad we are getting ready to boot this guy. Imagine what might happen to this country if we had a whole barrel full of politicians who said what they believed and stuck by their principles...regardless of which side they stood on?
Show me another liberal or conservative anywhere who has not caved to money or special interest groups. Show me another - again, liberal or conservative - who has not changed their mind and their statements when the situation fit.
In a few years, Pennsylvanian's are going to be kicking themselves for being blinded by anger. Perhaps luck will turn it around, and the entire nation will prosper from Pennsylvania's error in a couple of years.
Perhaps...
Rick Santorum is a conservative Republican, and it looks right now as if he is probably going to lose his seat in the Senate, partly because of the backlash voting that everyone is predicting, and partly because of Senator Santorum himself. You see, Rick Santorum says what he believes, and stands for what he stands for, regardless of whether that is going to cost him his job. This past Monday, he said as much during a campaign speech he was giving. He told prospective voters that he "was not going to say to them what they wanted to hear just to get re-elected." He followed that with the daring statement, "and I'm ok with the fact you may not vote for me because of it."
Hmmmm. Interesting.
Rick Santorum believes in traditional marriage and family, and he said so several months back. He also made a strategic - and admittedly stupid blunder - by saying homosexuality is destroying the moral fabric and fiber of our society. Say goodbye to any possibles you may have had with that statement, Rick. The truth of the matter is homosexuality probably does not tear down the moral fiber of America, but plenty of other stuff does. We do just fine jacking things around all by ourselves, and one more thing isn't necessarily going to make it worse. But he said it, and now he has to live with it. And to his credit, he does.
In the same speech, Senator Santorum voiced his position that he was and still is in favor of the War in Iraq and the battles against terrorism in general. This of course is political suicide of the highest magnitude these days. Gay bashing and war supporting is not in the best interests of any candidate right now. In the speech, the Senator noted the following:
Since 2003, 4,500 schools have been reopened or built by coalition forces, and stocked with over 8 million text books. This number is up from less than 1000 schools during the Saddam regime.
Since 2003, 98% of the children of Iraq have been given the basic imunizations that we here in America get. That 98% is up from 1% during Saddam's time.
Prior to 2003, there was a cell phone or PC for 1 person out of every 1 million. Since 2003, 5 million cells are in use, and over 3.5 million Iraqi's own PC's.
There were 2 television stations from 1979 to 2003. They were silently dubbed "Saddam TV." Since 2003, there are now 150 local and satellite stations available, many of which openly talk and debate politics...something that would have earned a citizen a bullet in the head in another time.
Of the 18 provinces of Iraq, 12 or 13 of them are secure and peaceful. Strides are being made, and yes, lives are being lost in making those strides.
He said a lot more...which included his acknowledgement that there have been political and military blunders in Iraq as well... and he was roundly booed during the speech. Senator Santorum says what is on his mind, and that is where he declared he won't change his mind, his Senatorial duties, or his principles, for a vote. He was again booed.
I don't know about you, but I'm damn sure glad we are getting ready to boot this guy. Imagine what might happen to this country if we had a whole barrel full of politicians who said what they believed and stuck by their principles...regardless of which side they stood on?
Show me another liberal or conservative anywhere who has not caved to money or special interest groups. Show me another - again, liberal or conservative - who has not changed their mind and their statements when the situation fit.
In a few years, Pennsylvanian's are going to be kicking themselves for being blinded by anger. Perhaps luck will turn it around, and the entire nation will prosper from Pennsylvania's error in a couple of years.
Perhaps...
Friday, October 13, 2006
Since when is criticism against the law?
From an on-line publication called "THE PROGRESSIVE":
Liberal columnist Steve Howards says he used to fantasize about what he'd say to President Bush or Vice President Cheney if he ever got the chance.
That opportunity arrived on June 16, the same day he says he read about U.S. fatalities in Iraq reaching 2,500.
"Initially, I walked past him. Then I said to myself, I can't in good conscience let this opportunity pass by. So I approached him, I got about two feet away, and I said in a very calm tone of voice, 'Your policies in Iraq are reprehensible."
Howards says he was taking two of his kids to their Suzuki piano camp in Beaver Creek, Colorado. They were walking across the outdoor public mall area when all of a sudden he saw Cheney there.
"I didn't even know he was in town," Howards says. "He was walking through the area shaking hands. Initially, I walked past him. Then I said to myself, 'I can't in good conscience let this opportunity pass by. So I approached him, I got about two feet away, and I said in a very calm tone of voice, 'Your policies in Iraq are reprehensible.' And then I walked away."
Howards says he knew the Administration has a history of making problems for people who protest its policies, so he wanted to leave off at that.
But the Secret Service did not take kindly to his comment. "About ten minutes later, I came back through the mall with my eight-year-old son in tow," Howards recalls, "and this Secret Service man came out of the shadows, and his exact words were, 'Did you assault the Vice President?'
Here's how Howards says he responded: "No, but I did tell Mr. Cheney the way I felt about the war in Iraq, and if Mr. Cheney wants to be shielded from public criticism, he should avoid public places. If exercising my constitutional rights to free speech is against the law, then you should arrest me."
Which is just what the agent, Virgil D. Gus Reichle Jr, proceeded to do.
"He grabbed me and cuffed my hands behind my back in the presence of my eight-year-old son and told me I was being charged with assault of the Vice President,"Howards recalls.
He says he told the agent, "I can't abandon my eight-year-old son in a public mall."
According to Howards, Reichle responded: "We'll call Social Services." "Before that could happen, however, my son ran away and found my wife, who was nearby," Howards says.
"First of all, I was scared,"Howard recalls. "hey wouldn't tell my wife where they were taking me. Second of all, I was incredulous this could be happening in the United States of America. This is what I read about happening in Tiananmen Square. They hauled me away to Eagle County jail and kept me with my hands cuffed behind my back for three hours."
At the jail, the charge against him was reduced to harassment, he says, and he was released on $500 bond. The Eagle County DA's office eventually dropped that charge.
On October 3, Howards sued Reichle for depriving him of his First Amendment right of free speech and his Fourth Amendment right to be protected from illegal seizure.
Howards and his attorney, David Lane, have not demanded a specific dollar amount.
"We will go to trial and let a Colorado jury decide what type of damages are appropriate," says Howards. "This isn't about anything I did. This about what I said. There is a frontal assault occurring on our constitutional right to free speech. We brought this suit because of our belief that this Administration's attempt to suppress free speech is a greater threat to the long-term integrity of this nation than ten Osama bin Ladens."
Reichle did not return my call for comment. Nor did he respond to The New York Times in its article on this incident.
Lon Garner, special agent in charge at the Secret Service's Denver office, says he has "no reaction to the lawsuit. It's in litigation," he says. "We have no comment."
Before his encounter with Cheney, Howards says he had a clean record.
"I was never arrested before," he says. "I don't have so much as a speeding ticket."
If Mr. Howards' story is in fact 100% correct, I gotta go with "Lefty" on this one. It is not against our Constitutional rights to criticize, even in an off-hand way in a public setting. "Lefty" is correct on this one when he said, "If you don't want public criticism, don't go to public places."
Would I myself say something to someone like Nancy Pelosi? Probably not.
I believe ignoring those you think are stupid is the adult thing to do. However, we do live in the United States, and with that citizenship comes a certain amount of latitude...latitude provided by men far smarter than Vice President Cheney over 2 centuries ago.
With that said, don't any of you who've actually read my stuff think I'm jumping the fence - because I'm not. There was an incident in 1995 when President Clinton was shaking hands at a democratic fund-raiser in Louisiana, and one of the people in line refused. When President Clinton asked the gentleman why, he responded with, "Because I don't like your ass." Several minutes later, a Secret Service Agent warned the man that "one more derogatory comment will get you a pair of handcuffs and a trip to the county jail."
Soooooo, I guess the point here is this: If an American citizen - ANY American citizen - is not free to publicly criticize the highest officers in this country, I think it's high time you let us all know that. I do believe 99.9% of us had no idea speaking directly - and critically - to someone like Donald Rumsfeld was a crime.
Thank God I exercise restraint in my life. Nancy Pelosi IS a freaking imbecile, and I might have found myself so inclined to tell her.
Not any more.
Liberal columnist Steve Howards says he used to fantasize about what he'd say to President Bush or Vice President Cheney if he ever got the chance.
That opportunity arrived on June 16, the same day he says he read about U.S. fatalities in Iraq reaching 2,500.
"Initially, I walked past him. Then I said to myself, I can't in good conscience let this opportunity pass by. So I approached him, I got about two feet away, and I said in a very calm tone of voice, 'Your policies in Iraq are reprehensible."
Howards says he was taking two of his kids to their Suzuki piano camp in Beaver Creek, Colorado. They were walking across the outdoor public mall area when all of a sudden he saw Cheney there.
"I didn't even know he was in town," Howards says. "He was walking through the area shaking hands. Initially, I walked past him. Then I said to myself, 'I can't in good conscience let this opportunity pass by. So I approached him, I got about two feet away, and I said in a very calm tone of voice, 'Your policies in Iraq are reprehensible.' And then I walked away."
Howards says he knew the Administration has a history of making problems for people who protest its policies, so he wanted to leave off at that.
But the Secret Service did not take kindly to his comment. "About ten minutes later, I came back through the mall with my eight-year-old son in tow," Howards recalls, "and this Secret Service man came out of the shadows, and his exact words were, 'Did you assault the Vice President?'
Here's how Howards says he responded: "No, but I did tell Mr. Cheney the way I felt about the war in Iraq, and if Mr. Cheney wants to be shielded from public criticism, he should avoid public places. If exercising my constitutional rights to free speech is against the law, then you should arrest me."
Which is just what the agent, Virgil D. Gus Reichle Jr, proceeded to do.
"He grabbed me and cuffed my hands behind my back in the presence of my eight-year-old son and told me I was being charged with assault of the Vice President,"Howards recalls.
He says he told the agent, "I can't abandon my eight-year-old son in a public mall."
According to Howards, Reichle responded: "We'll call Social Services." "Before that could happen, however, my son ran away and found my wife, who was nearby," Howards says.
"First of all, I was scared,"Howard recalls. "hey wouldn't tell my wife where they were taking me. Second of all, I was incredulous this could be happening in the United States of America. This is what I read about happening in Tiananmen Square. They hauled me away to Eagle County jail and kept me with my hands cuffed behind my back for three hours."
At the jail, the charge against him was reduced to harassment, he says, and he was released on $500 bond. The Eagle County DA's office eventually dropped that charge.
On October 3, Howards sued Reichle for depriving him of his First Amendment right of free speech and his Fourth Amendment right to be protected from illegal seizure.
Howards and his attorney, David Lane, have not demanded a specific dollar amount.
"We will go to trial and let a Colorado jury decide what type of damages are appropriate," says Howards. "This isn't about anything I did. This about what I said. There is a frontal assault occurring on our constitutional right to free speech. We brought this suit because of our belief that this Administration's attempt to suppress free speech is a greater threat to the long-term integrity of this nation than ten Osama bin Ladens."
Reichle did not return my call for comment. Nor did he respond to The New York Times in its article on this incident.
Lon Garner, special agent in charge at the Secret Service's Denver office, says he has "no reaction to the lawsuit. It's in litigation," he says. "We have no comment."
Before his encounter with Cheney, Howards says he had a clean record.
"I was never arrested before," he says. "I don't have so much as a speeding ticket."
If Mr. Howards' story is in fact 100% correct, I gotta go with "Lefty" on this one. It is not against our Constitutional rights to criticize, even in an off-hand way in a public setting. "Lefty" is correct on this one when he said, "If you don't want public criticism, don't go to public places."
Would I myself say something to someone like Nancy Pelosi? Probably not.
I believe ignoring those you think are stupid is the adult thing to do. However, we do live in the United States, and with that citizenship comes a certain amount of latitude...latitude provided by men far smarter than Vice President Cheney over 2 centuries ago.
With that said, don't any of you who've actually read my stuff think I'm jumping the fence - because I'm not. There was an incident in 1995 when President Clinton was shaking hands at a democratic fund-raiser in Louisiana, and one of the people in line refused. When President Clinton asked the gentleman why, he responded with, "Because I don't like your ass." Several minutes later, a Secret Service Agent warned the man that "one more derogatory comment will get you a pair of handcuffs and a trip to the county jail."
Soooooo, I guess the point here is this: If an American citizen - ANY American citizen - is not free to publicly criticize the highest officers in this country, I think it's high time you let us all know that. I do believe 99.9% of us had no idea speaking directly - and critically - to someone like Donald Rumsfeld was a crime.
Thank God I exercise restraint in my life. Nancy Pelosi IS a freaking imbecile, and I might have found myself so inclined to tell her.
Not any more.
Saturday, October 07, 2006
Cruise
Went on a 5-day cruise this past week, and when I feel I can muster up the energy, I'm fairly certain I can post a typical JL4 sarcastic blog about it. It was indeed great fun and a wonderful trip.
First stop was Key West...the city, not the string of islands known as "The Keys". The ocean surrounding the Keys themselves is breathtaking, as I'm sure the islands away from the main poulation are as well. We didn't get to see any of the beautiful stuff though...we went to the city.
Key West is described as "historic", "quaint", and "a breath of fresh air away from modernism".
Hmmmm. The adjective I would have used is "dump".
There is the main drag (pun definitely intended for those of you who get the joke) called Duval Street. It has approximately 350 T-shirt stores, 280 phony jewelry stores, and 150 bong and water pipe stores. The truly wealthy and prosperous locals own the three-tiered T-shirt/jewelry/bong combination stores, clearly a cut above the other single-faceted establishments. And speaking of the locals...evidently having a job is waaaaaaay down the priority list, and I'm not talking retirees here. Thousands between the ages of 30 and 55 just walk the streets every day, a can of cold beer in their hand at 10 am on a Tuesday, looking as if they'd just left the South Florida bonging festival, which of course they probably just had. No one shaves, washes their hair, wears clean clothing, or owns shoes. They also are clearly perturbed at the cruise ship tourists being there. Little do they know their disdain for our presence is matched by our will to get back on the boat after about 30 minutes of walking their dingy streets.
As you walk down Duval Street and several of the side-streets, you're struck by three very distinct things:
1) About every 12th house or hotel is a beautifully restored and maintained bungalow in the best Key West traditions. These are what you see in the brochures.
2) The 11 structures that follow would make people in the South Bronx mutter, "Say Whaaa? I ain't not gonna live in that rat trap...nah ahhh....who you be bullshittin with dat $650,000.00 price tag for a 700 sq ft hurricane speed bump?"
3) Sweeping and otherwise cleaning the streets is apparently illegal in Key West. To be fair, there is no one to sweep the streets since the only people employed are working the T-shirt stores or selling you the newest version of a hash pipe. The majority of the potential work force is wandering around town drinking a Coors silver bullet and awaiting their next chance to twist one up.
In closing, I wanted to point out one other thing. In EVERY store, there was a variety of underwear for sale. All the male underwear had some sort of FART joke printed on the backside, while the female undies reflected what the other person was presumably supposed to do with what lay underneath them. Classy.
"Historic", "quaint", and "a breath of fresh air away from modernism". Ummm, not quite. To be honest, when you reside at a level beneath Wal-Mart and Spencers Gifts by a large margin, the quaintness kinda goes out the window.
Must be the constant farting.
First stop was Key West...the city, not the string of islands known as "The Keys". The ocean surrounding the Keys themselves is breathtaking, as I'm sure the islands away from the main poulation are as well. We didn't get to see any of the beautiful stuff though...we went to the city.
Key West is described as "historic", "quaint", and "a breath of fresh air away from modernism".
Hmmmm. The adjective I would have used is "dump".
There is the main drag (pun definitely intended for those of you who get the joke) called Duval Street. It has approximately 350 T-shirt stores, 280 phony jewelry stores, and 150 bong and water pipe stores. The truly wealthy and prosperous locals own the three-tiered T-shirt/jewelry/bong combination stores, clearly a cut above the other single-faceted establishments. And speaking of the locals...evidently having a job is waaaaaaay down the priority list, and I'm not talking retirees here. Thousands between the ages of 30 and 55 just walk the streets every day, a can of cold beer in their hand at 10 am on a Tuesday, looking as if they'd just left the South Florida bonging festival, which of course they probably just had. No one shaves, washes their hair, wears clean clothing, or owns shoes. They also are clearly perturbed at the cruise ship tourists being there. Little do they know their disdain for our presence is matched by our will to get back on the boat after about 30 minutes of walking their dingy streets.
As you walk down Duval Street and several of the side-streets, you're struck by three very distinct things:
1) About every 12th house or hotel is a beautifully restored and maintained bungalow in the best Key West traditions. These are what you see in the brochures.
2) The 11 structures that follow would make people in the South Bronx mutter, "Say Whaaa? I ain't not gonna live in that rat trap...nah ahhh....who you be bullshittin with dat $650,000.00 price tag for a 700 sq ft hurricane speed bump?"
3) Sweeping and otherwise cleaning the streets is apparently illegal in Key West. To be fair, there is no one to sweep the streets since the only people employed are working the T-shirt stores or selling you the newest version of a hash pipe. The majority of the potential work force is wandering around town drinking a Coors silver bullet and awaiting their next chance to twist one up.
In closing, I wanted to point out one other thing. In EVERY store, there was a variety of underwear for sale. All the male underwear had some sort of FART joke printed on the backside, while the female undies reflected what the other person was presumably supposed to do with what lay underneath them. Classy.
"Historic", "quaint", and "a breath of fresh air away from modernism". Ummm, not quite. To be honest, when you reside at a level beneath Wal-Mart and Spencers Gifts by a large margin, the quaintness kinda goes out the window.
Must be the constant farting.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Why?
I’ll be gone for a week, so this is my last post for a while. I have some questions I need answered:
- What do you call that little plastic safety ring that sits near the apex of a bottled soda after the seal is broken with the top?
- Why did birds suddenly appear every time Karen Carpenter’s former boyfriend came around?
- Why is it that a tele-marketer or your mother-in-law catches you every time, but that phone call you were waiting on for 3 hours comes 30 seconds after you’ve taken your seat in the bathroom?
- Have you ever known anyone who actually became rich off of a fortune cookie?
- Some studies have shown that more men legitimately qualify for the title “Genius”. If that’s true, how come its men who pull the pan out of the oven without the mitt, don’t know better than to simply ask for directions, and think a woman’s eyes are about 8 inches below her chin?
- If I can get a “Ronco Wiz-o-Matic” for three easy payments of $19.99, can I get it even cheaper for 3 really complicated payments?
- Why do commercials on both radio and TV still say things like: “Do you want a pain reliever that works?”…or…”Are you tired of paying top dollar for your home, car, or RV?”
- Why is this the only crap I could think of to write today?
Thursday, September 28, 2006
What I "get"
US Marines and Soldiers are stationed in and around Islamic Holy lands, playing Metalica, Godsmack, and Hip-hop artists on their iPods. This angers the Islamists...I get that.
Danish Newspapers publish a coupla cartoons depicting Muhammad and Islam in general as more a religion of violence than the peace verbalized by Islam's supporters. This angers millions of Muslims world-wide...and I get it.
The Pope quotes a 14th century Islamic scholar who stated 600+ years ago his opinion that Islam was about violence and conquests. This infuriates millions more....and I get it.
The response to the military in Iraq is to car bomb, ambush, and use IED's, killing thousands in the past 3 years.
The response to the Danish Cartoons is to have massive riots in the streets, where hundreds of thousands gather to chant, "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", and in fact dozens have been trampled to death during these demonstrations.
The response to the Pontiff's statements was to brutally gun down a nun at a Somalian hospital.
Like I said...I get it. Do you?
Danish Newspapers publish a coupla cartoons depicting Muhammad and Islam in general as more a religion of violence than the peace verbalized by Islam's supporters. This angers millions of Muslims world-wide...and I get it.
The Pope quotes a 14th century Islamic scholar who stated 600+ years ago his opinion that Islam was about violence and conquests. This infuriates millions more....and I get it.
The response to the military in Iraq is to car bomb, ambush, and use IED's, killing thousands in the past 3 years.
The response to the Danish Cartoons is to have massive riots in the streets, where hundreds of thousands gather to chant, "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", "DEATH", and in fact dozens have been trampled to death during these demonstrations.
The response to the Pontiff's statements was to brutally gun down a nun at a Somalian hospital.
Like I said...I get it. Do you?
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
One response
I asked a very intelligent friend who works in the same company as I, what she thought the answer to the question I posed in the post directly below this is. As a refresher, the question was:
Why are we (the United States) supposed to differentiate between Iraqis, Syrians, Hammas, Hizb Allah, the PLO, the PLFP, Al Quaeda, the Taliban, Iranians, and any number of extremist groups that have America - and OUR children - finely sighted in their rifle scopes, when the terrorists do not?
Her answer was immediate and short: "Because then we'd be like Bin Laden".
I though about that for hours and hours, running the potential this and that scenario's through my head. A book most military men and women are quite familiar with is Sun Tzu's "The Art of War", written over 2,500 years ago, and widely recognized as the world's oldest military treatise. In the book, Sun Tzu says the following:
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
Heavy stuff from a guy who's been dead for 2 and a half millennia. Who knew he would still be pertinent and spot-on today? I believe the average American has little or no comprehension of our enemy, nor does the average person in our nation understand the true danger posed by that enemy.
"Then we'd be like Bin Laden". Yes, in some respects we would. In February of 1945, the Royal Air Force and the United States Army Air Corps spent 2 days fire-bombing Dresden, Germany...an extremely controversial attack even within the standards of that time. 3,900 tons of bombs were dropped between Feb 13th and Feb 15th. 12,000 buildings were totally destroyed, many of them part of a large German military industrial complex. Currently, historians list the death toll at between 25,000 and 30,000 military and civilians.
Controversial then...controversial now...the fact remains that the will to fight was sucked out of most of the German people and a large percentage of their highest military commanders. Was the attack immoral? Well, killing itself is somewhat immoral, even in war. Was the attack the beginning of the end of Nazi Germany? Yes, it was.
The question then remains: In the interest of self-preservation and national sovereignty, is adopting an equally brutal tactic necessarily a bad thing?
Why are we (the United States) supposed to differentiate between Iraqis, Syrians, Hammas, Hizb Allah, the PLO, the PLFP, Al Quaeda, the Taliban, Iranians, and any number of extremist groups that have America - and OUR children - finely sighted in their rifle scopes, when the terrorists do not?
Her answer was immediate and short: "Because then we'd be like Bin Laden".
I though about that for hours and hours, running the potential this and that scenario's through my head. A book most military men and women are quite familiar with is Sun Tzu's "The Art of War", written over 2,500 years ago, and widely recognized as the world's oldest military treatise. In the book, Sun Tzu says the following:
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
Heavy stuff from a guy who's been dead for 2 and a half millennia. Who knew he would still be pertinent and spot-on today? I believe the average American has little or no comprehension of our enemy, nor does the average person in our nation understand the true danger posed by that enemy.
"Then we'd be like Bin Laden". Yes, in some respects we would. In February of 1945, the Royal Air Force and the United States Army Air Corps spent 2 days fire-bombing Dresden, Germany...an extremely controversial attack even within the standards of that time. 3,900 tons of bombs were dropped between Feb 13th and Feb 15th. 12,000 buildings were totally destroyed, many of them part of a large German military industrial complex. Currently, historians list the death toll at between 25,000 and 30,000 military and civilians.
Controversial then...controversial now...the fact remains that the will to fight was sucked out of most of the German people and a large percentage of their highest military commanders. Was the attack immoral? Well, killing itself is somewhat immoral, even in war. Was the attack the beginning of the end of Nazi Germany? Yes, it was.
The question then remains: In the interest of self-preservation and national sovereignty, is adopting an equally brutal tactic necessarily a bad thing?
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
I need someone to help clarify things for me. I'm obviously confused.
Today in a White House press question and answer session, Afghan President Hamid Karzai responded to the question:
"Mr. President; There are many who think the Iraq war has become a recruiting tool and is fostering more terrorism throughout the world. Can you attest to the accuracy of that?"
To which President Karzai responded:
"Terrorism was hurting us way before Iraq or September 11 ... These extremist forces were killing people in Afghanistan for years, closing schools, burning mosques, killing children, uprooting vineyards," Karzai said. "They came to America on September 11, but they were attacking you before September 11 in other parts of the world. We are a witness in Afghanistan.
"Do you forget people jumping off the 80th floor or 70th floor when the planes hit them? Can you imagine what it will be for a man or woman to jump from that high?" Karzai asked recalling some of the more shocking scenes from the World Trade Center bombing. "How do we get rid of them? ... Should we wait for them to come and kill us again?"
Why does it take the President of a back-water, third-world, hell-hole of a country to tell the American press corps - and the American people for that matter - that it's high time to stop the internal cat-fighting and get down to the business of planting these terrorists six feet under?
A question: Do you think there were people who died on September 11th who did not like the President and his policies? A betting person would say "yes".
Do you think there were anti-war, anti-destruction, people killed on 9/11? Again, most likely the answer is "yes".
This is a fact of life (or death in this case). The perpetrators of 9/11 didn't differentiate between conservatives, liberals, jews, muslims, gay, straight, black, white, hispanic, asian, tall or short, meek, aggressive, male, female, adult or child. All killed were American's, and that was ok with them.
Yet, according to nearly half this country, we're supposed to differentiate between Iraqis, Syrians, Hammas, Hizb Allah, the PLO, the PLFP, Al Quaeda, the Taliban, Iranians, and any number of extremist groups that have America - and OUR children - finely sighted in their rifle scopes.
For the life of me, I just can't see the logic in that. We're under attack from all sides; we're under the threat of attack from all sides; but half the country wants to split hairs on who is a legitimate target and who is not.
Are the ones out to get us splitting hairs on which element of American children they want to kill?
"Mr. President; There are many who think the Iraq war has become a recruiting tool and is fostering more terrorism throughout the world. Can you attest to the accuracy of that?"
To which President Karzai responded:
"Terrorism was hurting us way before Iraq or September 11 ... These extremist forces were killing people in Afghanistan for years, closing schools, burning mosques, killing children, uprooting vineyards," Karzai said. "They came to America on September 11, but they were attacking you before September 11 in other parts of the world. We are a witness in Afghanistan.
"Do you forget people jumping off the 80th floor or 70th floor when the planes hit them? Can you imagine what it will be for a man or woman to jump from that high?" Karzai asked recalling some of the more shocking scenes from the World Trade Center bombing. "How do we get rid of them? ... Should we wait for them to come and kill us again?"
Why does it take the President of a back-water, third-world, hell-hole of a country to tell the American press corps - and the American people for that matter - that it's high time to stop the internal cat-fighting and get down to the business of planting these terrorists six feet under?
A question: Do you think there were people who died on September 11th who did not like the President and his policies? A betting person would say "yes".
Do you think there were anti-war, anti-destruction, people killed on 9/11? Again, most likely the answer is "yes".
This is a fact of life (or death in this case). The perpetrators of 9/11 didn't differentiate between conservatives, liberals, jews, muslims, gay, straight, black, white, hispanic, asian, tall or short, meek, aggressive, male, female, adult or child. All killed were American's, and that was ok with them.
Yet, according to nearly half this country, we're supposed to differentiate between Iraqis, Syrians, Hammas, Hizb Allah, the PLO, the PLFP, Al Quaeda, the Taliban, Iranians, and any number of extremist groups that have America - and OUR children - finely sighted in their rifle scopes.
For the life of me, I just can't see the logic in that. We're under attack from all sides; we're under the threat of attack from all sides; but half the country wants to split hairs on who is a legitimate target and who is not.
Are the ones out to get us splitting hairs on which element of American children they want to kill?
Monday, September 25, 2006
Is that so???
So often I hear about the political differences in our society. "We're so bi-polar", I hear a great deal. "We can't agree on anything", is another.
Of course we can't. Our differences are not political, they're philosophical. And philosophies are nearly impossible to change, especially if the opposite side offers nothing in terms of an alternative.
Let's start with something small, a friggin' movie. A TV movie came out a few weeks ago called, "The Path to 9/11". Hotly debated before it even hit the screen, this movie was derived from thousands of hours of research of the 9/11 commission's findings, as well as direct testimony and interviews. But lo and behold, anyone I've talked to who is against the current administration won't even discuss the movie. Apparently President Clinton said almost everything preceding January 2001 was a fabrication or someone's interpretation of the facts. Interestingly, the conservative right fought the 9/11 Commission from the beginning, and there was no doubt Democrat's were tickled to death with the commission's findings - until this movie did what most people did not do...show people what they found in a format that wasn't 19,000 pages of bureaucratic-speak.
Okay. He's (President Clinton) not only entitled to his opinion, he may actually be correct. But...
I'm not here to debate the movie. I don't even care about the movie. I'm here to make the point that our country is not bi-polar politically - we're bi-polar philosophically, and we are so by choice.
I am no more interested in hearing someone say that President Clinton never had a legitimate shot at taking out Osama Bin Laden, than a liberal is interested in hearing that Bin Laden fostered, built, and began deployment of his army during the 8 years President Clinton was in office. Conservative talk radio doesn't want to hear a liberal call in and make sense, and liberal newspapers like the Sentinel News Brand don't want letters to the editor with a conservative slant. And on and on. I don't believe in your shit, and you're under no obligation to believe in mine. That's the way it is.
We will not pull together; we will not band as one; and we will not speak with one voice. Our country is too large, too diverse, and both teams in the extreme left and right wars have perverted the freedoms of speech, liberties, and the right to pursue happiness that our forefathers so thoughtfully and carefully constructed. Just click on "Next Blog" and just keep clicking until you find some armchair conspiracy theorist, and in particular - arm chair physicist - who will tell you all about controlled demolitions and the fall of the towers. That'll provide enough information on the type of people I will never associate with or even give one second of my time to. And when you find out the guy with the 200-blog website on 9-11 conspiracy is actually the third-shift assistant manager at a Des Moines Burger King, and that he also possesses the largest collection of Star Trek and Dungeons and Dragons memorabilia in the country, don't say I didn't tell you so ahead of time.
Drawn are the battle lines, and verbal disagreement is our weapon of choice (except for the guy above, who would prefer "phasers on stun"). We use phrases like "religious right" and "left wingers" with such vitriol and voracity, they've become the rallying cries for millions on either side. If gay marriage is opposed publicly, liberal America accuses conservatives with muddying the "real" issues, oblivious to the fact that gay marriage agenda's are the exclusive property of liberals and are being pushed as we speak. If the left asks questions about Haliburton or wonders about the status of Iraq, the far right accuses them of a lack of patriotism. Both sides accuse the other of insensitivity, and both are correct. There are some out there that are so blind with their hatred, the mere mention of the word "Bush" sends them into a frenzy. Now, I myself could do without the Martin Sheen's and the Rosie's of our world, but I've never hated anyone who is willing to do public service for our nation, regardless of whether or not I liked them. Did you hear me? I don't hate anyone willing to do public service.
If YOU DO, then maybe you should drag your narrow-minded ass down to city hall and register to do it yourself. And that goes for you too, gay marriage bashers, bible-thumpers, and unflinching hard-asses. You too need a swift kick into next month as well.
In any case, we're not coming together, so forget about it. We need to figure out how to make it work like it is, with all the disparity. And we can start by forever eliminating the phrase, "In a perfect world", cuz there ain't no such thing, homeboy.
Oh, and somebody tell the conspiracy theory guy to go to the store and buy some shampoo.
Of course we can't. Our differences are not political, they're philosophical. And philosophies are nearly impossible to change, especially if the opposite side offers nothing in terms of an alternative.
Let's start with something small, a friggin' movie. A TV movie came out a few weeks ago called, "The Path to 9/11". Hotly debated before it even hit the screen, this movie was derived from thousands of hours of research of the 9/11 commission's findings, as well as direct testimony and interviews. But lo and behold, anyone I've talked to who is against the current administration won't even discuss the movie. Apparently President Clinton said almost everything preceding January 2001 was a fabrication or someone's interpretation of the facts. Interestingly, the conservative right fought the 9/11 Commission from the beginning, and there was no doubt Democrat's were tickled to death with the commission's findings - until this movie did what most people did not do...show people what they found in a format that wasn't 19,000 pages of bureaucratic-speak.
Okay. He's (President Clinton) not only entitled to his opinion, he may actually be correct. But...
I'm not here to debate the movie. I don't even care about the movie. I'm here to make the point that our country is not bi-polar politically - we're bi-polar philosophically, and we are so by choice.
I am no more interested in hearing someone say that President Clinton never had a legitimate shot at taking out Osama Bin Laden, than a liberal is interested in hearing that Bin Laden fostered, built, and began deployment of his army during the 8 years President Clinton was in office. Conservative talk radio doesn't want to hear a liberal call in and make sense, and liberal newspapers like the Sentinel News Brand don't want letters to the editor with a conservative slant. And on and on. I don't believe in your shit, and you're under no obligation to believe in mine. That's the way it is.
We will not pull together; we will not band as one; and we will not speak with one voice. Our country is too large, too diverse, and both teams in the extreme left and right wars have perverted the freedoms of speech, liberties, and the right to pursue happiness that our forefathers so thoughtfully and carefully constructed. Just click on "Next Blog" and just keep clicking until you find some armchair conspiracy theorist, and in particular - arm chair physicist - who will tell you all about controlled demolitions and the fall of the towers. That'll provide enough information on the type of people I will never associate with or even give one second of my time to. And when you find out the guy with the 200-blog website on 9-11 conspiracy is actually the third-shift assistant manager at a Des Moines Burger King, and that he also possesses the largest collection of Star Trek and Dungeons and Dragons memorabilia in the country, don't say I didn't tell you so ahead of time.
Drawn are the battle lines, and verbal disagreement is our weapon of choice (except for the guy above, who would prefer "phasers on stun"). We use phrases like "religious right" and "left wingers" with such vitriol and voracity, they've become the rallying cries for millions on either side. If gay marriage is opposed publicly, liberal America accuses conservatives with muddying the "real" issues, oblivious to the fact that gay marriage agenda's are the exclusive property of liberals and are being pushed as we speak. If the left asks questions about Haliburton or wonders about the status of Iraq, the far right accuses them of a lack of patriotism. Both sides accuse the other of insensitivity, and both are correct. There are some out there that are so blind with their hatred, the mere mention of the word "Bush" sends them into a frenzy. Now, I myself could do without the Martin Sheen's and the Rosie's of our world, but I've never hated anyone who is willing to do public service for our nation, regardless of whether or not I liked them. Did you hear me? I don't hate anyone willing to do public service.
If YOU DO, then maybe you should drag your narrow-minded ass down to city hall and register to do it yourself. And that goes for you too, gay marriage bashers, bible-thumpers, and unflinching hard-asses. You too need a swift kick into next month as well.
In any case, we're not coming together, so forget about it. We need to figure out how to make it work like it is, with all the disparity. And we can start by forever eliminating the phrase, "In a perfect world", cuz there ain't no such thing, homeboy.
Oh, and somebody tell the conspiracy theory guy to go to the store and buy some shampoo.
Friday, September 22, 2006
No, no...you got it wrong again
Armitage denies threatening Pakistan after 9/11
Former deputy secretary of state clarifies exchange with Musharraf
Richard Armitage denies threatening Pakistan with "bombing them back into the stoneage". MSNBC has confirmed that the list of "stan" countries we want to bomb into the stoneage does not include Pakistan.
The then Deputy Secretary clearly said we wanted to make a solid glass museum out of Uzbekistan, Turkmeninstan, Seanpennistan, Kazakhstan, Afghanistan, Sheehanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Saranistan, Tajikistan, and Belefontistan.
Not Pakistan.
Former deputy secretary of state clarifies exchange with Musharraf
Richard Armitage denies threatening Pakistan with "bombing them back into the stoneage". MSNBC has confirmed that the list of "stan" countries we want to bomb into the stoneage does not include Pakistan.
The then Deputy Secretary clearly said we wanted to make a solid glass museum out of Uzbekistan, Turkmeninstan, Seanpennistan, Kazakhstan, Afghanistan, Sheehanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Saranistan, Tajikistan, and Belefontistan.
Not Pakistan.
Ladies and Gentlemen, the President of the United States....
What would it be like,how would it be?
If we all spoke like the Snoop,
Snoop Dogg Dee Oh Double Gee.
Would our culture rise,
or would it fizzle?
If every sentence
ended in fagizzle?
And what of the Doctor,
the one called Seus?
Would heezle beezle the neezle,
if let out on the loose?
With the song playing proudly,
Prez Snoop would declare loudly:
Weezle have to raizle the tax-o-pizzle,
to be able to snizzle wif da mizzles.
He's our man, the keeper of the plan.
Our Commander in Chief.
I just can't understand the guy,
when his bizzle meets da beef.
Peace - out.
Thursday, September 21, 2006
The little squirt is in trouble
Wednesday 09-20-2006 4:40pm
(AP)
A Missouri mother is angry that her first-grader was suspended from school over a plastic toy gun. "I asked her, 'You're going to suspend my son for 10 days for this? He cannot harm a soul with this,'" said Danielle Womack, whose son, Tawann Caskey, was suspended from Milton Moore Elementary School in Kansas City. Tawann was suspended over a 2-inch plastic squirt gun. "She told me it's a weapon, a little girl saw it and reported to a teacher that he had a weapon," Womack said.
A spokesperson for the Kansas City School district explained that when a student makes a verbal acknowledgement that they have seen a "weapon", it becomes a Class IV code of conduct violation, which is an automatic 10-day suspension. When queried about potentially making a logical determination as to whether the "weapon" in question is indeed a weapon, the spokesperson said, "We don't have a by-law that permits case-by-case analysis. A weapon was reported and we are within our rights to enact the punishment".
Now blogger-folks, just when you think our nation has reached new depths of idiocy, read on...
Yesterday I heard about this on an Orlando-based talk radio station. A teacher from the Florida Coast called in to say this: "You have to understand how the school system must react. Let's say for example this plastic toy had liquid explosive in it instead of water..."
He went on for a minute or so to dumbfounded silence from the talk show host and I can only assume thousands listening in their cars on the drive home. I'm fairly certain most listeners thought the caller was spoofing the host, but after a few questions it was apparent the caller was serious. According to the brain surgeon/educator/WMD specialist on the radio, young Mr. Caskey of Kansas City could have been a terrorist attempting to blow the entire school up.
And I just felt a monkey fly out of my arse.
(AP)
A Missouri mother is angry that her first-grader was suspended from school over a plastic toy gun. "I asked her, 'You're going to suspend my son for 10 days for this? He cannot harm a soul with this,'" said Danielle Womack, whose son, Tawann Caskey, was suspended from Milton Moore Elementary School in Kansas City. Tawann was suspended over a 2-inch plastic squirt gun. "She told me it's a weapon, a little girl saw it and reported to a teacher that he had a weapon," Womack said.
A spokesperson for the Kansas City School district explained that when a student makes a verbal acknowledgement that they have seen a "weapon", it becomes a Class IV code of conduct violation, which is an automatic 10-day suspension. When queried about potentially making a logical determination as to whether the "weapon" in question is indeed a weapon, the spokesperson said, "We don't have a by-law that permits case-by-case analysis. A weapon was reported and we are within our rights to enact the punishment".Now blogger-folks, just when you think our nation has reached new depths of idiocy, read on...
Yesterday I heard about this on an Orlando-based talk radio station. A teacher from the Florida Coast called in to say this: "You have to understand how the school system must react. Let's say for example this plastic toy had liquid explosive in it instead of water..."
He went on for a minute or so to dumbfounded silence from the talk show host and I can only assume thousands listening in their cars on the drive home. I'm fairly certain most listeners thought the caller was spoofing the host, but after a few questions it was apparent the caller was serious. According to the brain surgeon/educator/WMD specialist on the radio, young Mr. Caskey of Kansas City could have been a terrorist attempting to blow the entire school up.
And I just felt a monkey fly out of my arse.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Mahmoud Ahch (something is caught in my throat)
His name is Achnad Whodat Waddafuck, or whatever. He's the President of Eye-Ran, as most illiterate Americans like to pronounce it. And he's one of the most lethal psycho/sociopath's in the world today, right up there with Kim Il Jung of Korea, Serbian Retard-in-Hiding Slobodan Milosevic, Rosie O'Donnell of Lesbonia, and OJ Simpson - allegedly.
Dude - there are other colored suits in existence you know. Can you find something other than tan or off-white to wear while paralyzing the planet with your insane diatribes?
Saturday, September 16, 2006
Maybe...
His name is Bill, or perhaps Tom, and he grew up in small town America in places like Dalton, Mass, Secaucus NJ, or Wamego, Ks. His family was neither rich nor poor, and he was taught the social mannerisms and values of his generation:
"Yes, sir". "No, ma'am". "Please" and "Thank you".
In November of 1943, he turned 17. He cared about his football team, his buddies, and his best girl. The Pharmacy down the street had a soda bar in it, where you could get a cherry or cream soda fresh from the fountain - the syrup pumped out from the spout, followed by the carbonated water. Man, that sure was some good stuff, and at 5 cents per soda, just the ticket. He and his best girl would arrive there every Saturday around noon, and he would spring for the two soda's.
"It's the right thing to do ya know – bein’ I'm the man and all".
It was here about a year ago that our guy stole his first kiss, mild by comparison, but a kiss none-the-less. She planted it on his left cheek, and he blushed a brighter shade of that cherry soda pop sitting in his glass. Unsure what to do afterwards, he ran home as fast as he could, gleefully withholding his little secret. Thoughts of her swirled in his head as he fell asleep that night.
In all his wildest dreams or nightmares, Bill – or is it Tom? – never once imagined he’d be carrying a 27 lb machine gun from 50 yards off the shore at Omaha beach all the way to Berlin, but that’s what he did. Although rare, he got a ride or two, but by and large he walked, slogged, crawled, and fought his way to Germany. The total trip was slightly over 700 miles.
On foot...All the while carrying his 27lb machine gun and the ever-increasing weight of lost friends and comrades. Someone once told him he was part of a unit that lost 659 total to death, and over 2,000 rotating in and out to wounds. But still he walked forward, his sights set on a goal to bring this to an end.
Perhaps our boy flew missions, knowing full-well that as soon as his back foot was up on that ladder leading to the fuselage, his feet may never touch that ground again. And yet without the slightest hesitation, he climbed those steps - over and over. He may have island-hopped; flew a flag at Iwo Jima or fought a huge naval battle at Midway. In any instance, he was there, fighting and sweating, and hoping this day - just like yesterday - would not be his last.
Afterwards he came home, went to college or started a career, and raised a family. If he actually cared about it, he would have had to build a separate wing to house the medals and decorations he won. He never suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder, never blamed his government for the war and subsequent death and destruction, and never asked anything in return. He did it because it just seemed to be the right thing to do at the time.
You know what? Maybe they are “The Greatest Generation”, now that I think about it.
Friday, September 15, 2006
When...
When your dog comes up to you with his ears down and a happy look on his face...
When the sun comes up and it dawns on you it's Saturday, and you can roll back over...
When a child asks you for a hug and a kiss...
When someone winks at you to acknowledge your existence...
When you see a firefighter and your mind thinks of heroism and bravery...
When your favorite old song that you haven't heard for years comes on the radio...
When someone says something that confirms what you've believed for years to be true...
When the fingertip touch of a loved-one is all you need to get you through the moment...
When you cry and it feels good to do so...
When you laugh, and it feels good as well...
When silliness is considered acceptable...
When friendship is important to you...
When you find some time to be alone with your own thoughts...
When those thoughts lead to answers previously unknown...
When the news speaks of something good...
When a movie makes you step back and think...
When you anonymously help someone out, and only you know of your good deed...
When your child says something in an adult manner, and you see you may indeed be getting through...
When you admit you were incorrect, and it clears your soul...
When someone admits the same to you....
When your opinion counts for something...
When someone informs you that life doesn't revolve around your words and deeds - and you're ok with it...
When love is more important than money...
When fame is something you'd rather others have...
When the clock strikes twelve, and the carriage turns out to be yours...
When the salty old bastard lightens up a bit, and shows some of his softer edges...
When the nation rejoices as one, and mourns as one...
When the light in a child's eyes is the most important thing in your life...
When...well...yeah
When the sun comes up and it dawns on you it's Saturday, and you can roll back over...
When a child asks you for a hug and a kiss...
When someone winks at you to acknowledge your existence...
When you see a firefighter and your mind thinks of heroism and bravery...
When your favorite old song that you haven't heard for years comes on the radio...
When someone says something that confirms what you've believed for years to be true...
When the fingertip touch of a loved-one is all you need to get you through the moment...
When you cry and it feels good to do so...
When you laugh, and it feels good as well...
When silliness is considered acceptable...
When friendship is important to you...
When you find some time to be alone with your own thoughts...
When those thoughts lead to answers previously unknown...
When the news speaks of something good...
When a movie makes you step back and think...
When you anonymously help someone out, and only you know of your good deed...
When your child says something in an adult manner, and you see you may indeed be getting through...
When you admit you were incorrect, and it clears your soul...
When someone admits the same to you....
When your opinion counts for something...
When someone informs you that life doesn't revolve around your words and deeds - and you're ok with it...
When love is more important than money...
When fame is something you'd rather others have...
When the clock strikes twelve, and the carriage turns out to be yours...
When the salty old bastard lightens up a bit, and shows some of his softer edges...
When the nation rejoices as one, and mourns as one...
When the light in a child's eyes is the most important thing in your life...
When...well...yeah
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Rosie
I received an e-mail from a friend who knows who I am and reads my blog from time (and apparently doesn't really like it) who told me I was too harsh on Rosie.
Really????? Let's check the facts.
In late 2003, O'Donnell entered into a legal battle with the publishers of Rosie magazine. They claimed that the failure of the magazine was due to O'Donnell's uncooperative, rude and violent behavior within the magazine's offices. They claimed that by removing herself from the magazine's publication, she was in breach of contract. O'Donnell claimed that there was no way she could in good conscience continue to be a part of the magazine, because they were moving away from her vision. She never defined that vision, but was nonetheless released from any wrong-doing...as was the magazine. The result? A draw.
Economic insiders state the folding of the magazine came from an insistence on uncontrolled political bias, which caused the drying up of sponsorship dollars. Of note during the trial was the curious public statement to a former magazine colleague who testified that O'Donnell said to her on the phone that "people who lie die of cancer." O'Donnel never reconciled this statement.
Rosie O'Donnell is an outspoken supporter of gun control and a major figure in the Million Mom March. In 2000, O'Donnell outraged parents of kindergartners at the private school her son attends when she was granted special permission to allow an armed bodyguard to accompany her son to school. In response, she promised that the bodyguard wouldn't actually be armed while on the school grounds. Her critics charged that this was hypocrisy, citing the April 19th, 1999, broadcast of her talk show, on which she stated, "You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun, I think you should go to prison." Ms. O'Donnell has subsequently explained her faux pas by opining, "Celebrities shoot their mouths off too much." No one has yet to explain that statement.
Rosie, who claims to be a "Woman of the people", has an estimated net worth of $115 Million and growing. Yet her personal IRS documents show one single charitable donation of $1 million to a children's foundation. During her tenure as a talk-show host, she frequently highlighted various charitable projects, which tended to generate significantly increased donations. This much is to be rightfully accredited her, but a $1 million personal donation with a net worth of $115 million is hardly worthy of the title "philanthropy".
To my friend who says I was too hard on her - If I had this much bullshit attached to my name, I'd be lucky to have a job picking up garbage on Monday's and Thursdays. But she's a mega-millionaire - and I see no point in defending her.
Please - I have over 100 blogs on here that you are free to rip apart as you wish. This isn't one of them. Rosie is an asshole.
Period. End of conversation.
Really????? Let's check the facts.
In late 2003, O'Donnell entered into a legal battle with the publishers of Rosie magazine. They claimed that the failure of the magazine was due to O'Donnell's uncooperative, rude and violent behavior within the magazine's offices. They claimed that by removing herself from the magazine's publication, she was in breach of contract. O'Donnell claimed that there was no way she could in good conscience continue to be a part of the magazine, because they were moving away from her vision. She never defined that vision, but was nonetheless released from any wrong-doing...as was the magazine. The result? A draw.
Economic insiders state the folding of the magazine came from an insistence on uncontrolled political bias, which caused the drying up of sponsorship dollars. Of note during the trial was the curious public statement to a former magazine colleague who testified that O'Donnell said to her on the phone that "people who lie die of cancer." O'Donnel never reconciled this statement.
Rosie O'Donnell is an outspoken supporter of gun control and a major figure in the Million Mom March. In 2000, O'Donnell outraged parents of kindergartners at the private school her son attends when she was granted special permission to allow an armed bodyguard to accompany her son to school. In response, she promised that the bodyguard wouldn't actually be armed while on the school grounds. Her critics charged that this was hypocrisy, citing the April 19th, 1999, broadcast of her talk show, on which she stated, "You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun, I think you should go to prison." Ms. O'Donnell has subsequently explained her faux pas by opining, "Celebrities shoot their mouths off too much." No one has yet to explain that statement.
Rosie, who claims to be a "Woman of the people", has an estimated net worth of $115 Million and growing. Yet her personal IRS documents show one single charitable donation of $1 million to a children's foundation. During her tenure as a talk-show host, she frequently highlighted various charitable projects, which tended to generate significantly increased donations. This much is to be rightfully accredited her, but a $1 million personal donation with a net worth of $115 million is hardly worthy of the title "philanthropy".
To my friend who says I was too hard on her - If I had this much bullshit attached to my name, I'd be lucky to have a job picking up garbage on Monday's and Thursdays. But she's a mega-millionaire - and I see no point in defending her.
Please - I have over 100 blogs on here that you are free to rip apart as you wish. This isn't one of them. Rosie is an asshole.
Period. End of conversation.
The View
On a television show called "The View", Rosie O'Donnell said something stupid - then followed it up with something stupid. In between she said more stupid things, and finished the show with a few well-chosen nuggets of ignorance.
Stupidity is the essence of Rosie, most know that to be true.
I've never watched the show because it's on daytime, weekday T.V., so I didn't hear her comments first-hand, only the re-hashing of them on talk radio last night. Apparently Rosie angered a large segment of our society. My question is, why?
By a show of hands, how many people out there think Rosie has even the slightest relevance in our culture and society? C'mon...put 'em up higher. I can't see any.
I thought so.
So why get all worked up about what she said? No one really cares what Rosie thinks anyways, so ranting about it only serves to empower her to say more stupid things. If you ignore her, eventually she'll go away.
Even if she doesn't, just change the channel.
Stupidity is the essence of Rosie, most know that to be true.
I've never watched the show because it's on daytime, weekday T.V., so I didn't hear her comments first-hand, only the re-hashing of them on talk radio last night. Apparently Rosie angered a large segment of our society. My question is, why?
By a show of hands, how many people out there think Rosie has even the slightest relevance in our culture and society? C'mon...put 'em up higher. I can't see any.
I thought so.
So why get all worked up about what she said? No one really cares what Rosie thinks anyways, so ranting about it only serves to empower her to say more stupid things. If you ignore her, eventually she'll go away.
Even if she doesn't, just change the channel.
9-11 Commission
Whether you are a Democrat or a Republican is irrelevant. Whether you are a liberal or hard-line conservative is irrelevant. The 9-11 commission - 5 Republican's and 5 Democrat's - along with thousands of researchers published their findings in 2004.
Democrats applauded the report. Republican's cringed at times. In any case, they all signed off on it.
The following is the 7th and 8th paragraphs in the PREFACE of the report. Like it or not, I've been saying this in this blog for nearly a year. Here it is in writing. You got a problem with it, take it up with them, not me. Both parties signed off; both parties agreed the report should stand as it is.
Our aim has not been to assign individual blame. Our aim has been to
provide the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11 and to
identify lessons learned.
We learned about an enemy who is sophisticated, patient, disciplined,
and lethal. The enemy rallies broad support in the Arab and Muslim world
by demanding redress of political grievances, but its hostility toward us and
our values is limitless. Its purpose is to rid the world of religious and political pluralism, the plebiscite, and equal rights for women. It makes no distinction between military and civilian targets.
Collateral damage is not in its lexicon.
Any questions?
Democrats applauded the report. Republican's cringed at times. In any case, they all signed off on it.
The following is the 7th and 8th paragraphs in the PREFACE of the report. Like it or not, I've been saying this in this blog for nearly a year. Here it is in writing. You got a problem with it, take it up with them, not me. Both parties signed off; both parties agreed the report should stand as it is.
Our aim has not been to assign individual blame. Our aim has been to
provide the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11 and to
identify lessons learned.
We learned about an enemy who is sophisticated, patient, disciplined,
and lethal. The enemy rallies broad support in the Arab and Muslim world
by demanding redress of political grievances, but its hostility toward us and
our values is limitless. Its purpose is to rid the world of religious and political pluralism, the plebiscite, and equal rights for women. It makes no distinction between military and civilian targets.
Collateral damage is not in its lexicon.
Any questions?
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
The Sports Parents Museum
The year: 2054
The following are the types of exhibits represented in the Sports Parents Museum:
Momus Whimpasosus. This creature is well defined at the younger ages. Her little one could never be told what to do by a coach; never be knocked down during a game; and never criticized because "those other kids are just too rough". The only thing more prevalent than excuses was appeasement.
Parentus Ohgawdatile. The unbelieving parent. "How could we possibly be losing this game?" The realization that Kyle is NOT going to play Major League Baseball has yet to sink in. She still thinks he's bound for millionaire glory. The reason he can't hit is because "that damn coach pitching doesn't know what he's doing!"
Megaphonasops. "Goooooooooo Brittany!!! Gooooooo!!!!" "HURRY UP BRIT - HURRY UP - HURRRRRRRRY UUUUUUPPPP!!!!
(Ring ring)
"Oh hi Margie. Nope, just sitting here watching my daughters game".
Incuffsaraptor. This is the famous dad at the hockey game. "What did you
say?" "What?" "Why you sonava..."
Leevmealoneasaur. The rarest form of the species. So rare, all the museum has is an artists rendering. Stands apart from the others, and simply watches the game. Cheers when appropriate, but never too loudly. Wants the best for everyone, not just his or her own kid. Thinks sports is great for intellectual, social, and physical development. Wasn't stupid enough to bank on his kid's college being a freebie. Child grew up into a productive adult in the business community, and now coaches little kids with the same ideals his dad instilled in him.
The following are the types of exhibits represented in the Sports Parents Museum:
Momus Whimpasosus. This creature is well defined at the younger ages. Her little one could never be told what to do by a coach; never be knocked down during a game; and never criticized because "those other kids are just too rough". The only thing more prevalent than excuses was appeasement.
Parentus Ohgawdatile. The unbelieving parent. "How could we possibly be losing this game?" The realization that Kyle is NOT going to play Major League Baseball has yet to sink in. She still thinks he's bound for millionaire glory. The reason he can't hit is because "that damn coach pitching doesn't know what he's doing!"
Megaphonasops. "Goooooooooo Brittany!!! Gooooooo!!!!" "HURRY UP BRIT - HURRY UP - HURRRRRRRRY UUUUUUPPPP!!!!(Ring ring)
"Oh hi Margie. Nope, just sitting here watching my daughters game".
Incuffsaraptor. This is the famous dad at the hockey game. "What did you say?" "What?" "Why you sonava..."
Leevmealoneasaur. The rarest form of the species. So rare, all the museum has is an artists rendering. Stands apart from the others, and simply watches the game. Cheers when appropriate, but never too loudly. Wants the best for everyone, not just his or her own kid. Thinks sports is great for intellectual, social, and physical development. Wasn't stupid enough to bank on his kid's college being a freebie. Child grew up into a productive adult in the business community, and now coaches little kids with the same ideals his dad instilled in him."What's new?"
This morning a co-worker sent an e-mail to "Everyone" in our company asking "What's new?".
After several business-related responses, I sent this:
Ummmmm...the Democrats are whining. Wait - that's not new. The Republican's aren't listening. Wait - that's not new either. In a recent survey, 46% of all American's think 9-11 was a conspiracy perpetrated by the President and his administration. Let's see here...the guy who says words like Nu-cu-lar master-minded the largest, most complex conspiracy in the history of mankind? Tens of thousands were involved, and not one person has spoken up about it in 5 years? Former President Clinton couldn't keep his foray with his intern quiet for 5 weeks, but no one involved with the supposed 9-11 conspiracy has as yet chimed in?
I don't thin so Luzzy.
What it tells us is that 46% of all American's are total doof-balls, but then again...
That's not new information either.
After several business-related responses, I sent this:
Ummmmm...the Democrats are whining. Wait - that's not new. The Republican's aren't listening. Wait - that's not new either. In a recent survey, 46% of all American's think 9-11 was a conspiracy perpetrated by the President and his administration. Let's see here...the guy who says words like Nu-cu-lar master-minded the largest, most complex conspiracy in the history of mankind? Tens of thousands were involved, and not one person has spoken up about it in 5 years? Former President Clinton couldn't keep his foray with his intern quiet for 5 weeks, but no one involved with the supposed 9-11 conspiracy has as yet chimed in?
I don't thin so Luzzy.
What it tells us is that 46% of all American's are total doof-balls, but then again...
That's not new information either.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
