Thursday, September 27, 2007

Not the Fastest Learners

Here's a story about recent Israeli-Palestinan fighting.

There's really nothing new about the story, other than the date. It's the same old thing: Palestinans repeatedly fire rockets and mortars into Israel, Israel eventually goes and blows up some Palestinians, Palestinians vow revenge on the evil Israel.

Ever burn yourself touching a hot stove when you were a kid? How many times did you get burned before you figured it out?

So I can't for the life of me figure out why the Palestinans don't connect the dots here -- if you shoot things into Israel, Israel is going to get angry and fire back.

That seems pretty simple.

The most interesting part of this, to me, is that people will continue to criticize Israel for retaliating against hostile acts.

I personally have no horse in this race, I have no particular affection -- or disdain -- for Israel. I also think a Palestinian state is in order, if it would calm things down.

But I question that when I see the continued irrational behavior of the Palestinians. Every time there is a cease-fire, Palestinians are the ones to break it. Every time Palestinians attack Israelis, they cry foul when Israel fires back.

Eventually Israel is just going to obliterate the Palestinans.

Med Student Catches a Break

A 33-year-old Harvard student taking a medical licensing exam is causing quite a stir right now.

Here's a story.

It seems the woman, who has a 4-month-old daughter, sued the National Board of Medical Examiners because it denied her request for more break time to pump breast milk.

It seems the test, which is 9 hours, only allowed for 45 minutes' worth of break time. The woman, who is taking the test so she can begin her residency, contended that she was at a disadvantage to other test-takers because if she did not pump her breast milk she would be in pain.

A Massachusetts appeals court has now ruled that the woman must be given extra break time. The board says it will appeal, to maintain the "integrity of the exam," but if its appeal is not heard by the time the woman takes the test, she can have the extra break time.

All this is fine and dandy -- I'm unsure that it's really fair to allow anyone to bend rules when it comes to test-taking, because it seems like what was allegedly a disadvantage suddenly becomes an advantage.

But the part that really makes me uneasy is that, at the end of the story, it's revealed that the woman "already received some accommodation from the board for dyslexia and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. She can take the test over two days instead of one, for example."

To me, the whole breast-pumping issue seems unimportant compared to that.

I'm not sure I'd be comfortable being treated by someone who is not only dyslexic, but also has attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Understand, I'm not criticizing the woman for conditions she has no control over. It's good that she can overcome her own physical shortcomings -- at least to an extent. But, at some point doesn't someone have to ask if those conditions would hamper her ability as a medical professional?

I don't know about you, but if I go to the hospital, I really, really want whoever is treating me to be able to read my chart correctly and pay attention to what they're doing.

Just a thought.

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Follow-Up on Elton's Kid-Porn Pic

Here's Elton John's defense of a picture he owns of naked children.

I think defending something that is illegal in the U.S. by saying that other countries have no problem with it is just silly.

In some countries you legally can have sex with children, buy/use/sell drugs ... so is that a legitimate defense here in the U.S. where we have different laws than those other countries?

I believe Ukraine has different laws than we do regarding child pornography, so if you live here and look at a Web site based in the Ukraine that has kiddie-porn, the site is not breaking U.S. law, but as soon as you hit "save" and put that picture from a computer in Ukraine to a computer in the U.S., you've broken U.S. law.

The whole Elton John issue is still up in the air though, so who knows how it will turn out. Just wanted to get his side of the story on the record.

Bankrolling "Democracy"

No commentary here, just something you should read.

You hear all the time that rich conservatives rule the country, but there also are rich liberals who use wealth to further their agenda as well.

Here's a good editorial.

Dinner With Ahmadinejad

This is a story from Time's Web site. It's interesting.

I wasn't at this function, so I don't know how accurate it is, and I don't know the writer, Richard Stengel, so I can't say anything about his views.

But it's still an interesting read, so here it is.

Invasion & Withdrawal: Different Animals

I've long thought that the issues of whether the U.S. should have invaded Iraq and whether the U.S. should withdraw from Iraq are two distinctly different issues, and while they are related, one cannot influence the other.

Turns out Rep. Brian Baird, a Democrat from Washington state, feels the same way, and he's catching hell for it, thanks to the "agree with us 100% or get out" Democratic Party.

Here's a story.

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

Iran, the Straightest Country on Earth?

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said at Columbia University that there are no homosexuals in Iran.

Here's the story.

I think what he meant was that Iran used to have homosexuals, but the Islamic government killed them, so now they have no homosexuals.

After seeing the success of the TV show "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy," maybe Iran could use some homosexuals, because Ahmadinejad's wardrobe is really getting old.

Everyone Loves a Good Deformity

I know we're supposed to have compassion for people/animals with deformities and disabilities.

And I do have compassion.

But I also know that everyone loves a good freak show. So here it is.

Don't worry, it's not some poor little kid with 5 ears. It's a picture of a frog with extra hind legs, and it's creepy.

Just thought you might get a kick out it.

You Call That Art?

Here's an interesting story about a photo that has caused a controversy.

Seems a photo, owned by Elton John, shows a young girl with her legs spread apart. So it was seized and is being examined as possible child pornography.

Gee, you think?

Doesn't seem difficult to me -- there's really nothing "artistic" about a kid's private parts. Or an old person's privates, for that matter.

You'll hear the whacked-out "arts community" defend it as "art," I'm sure, but the entire standard of "art" has become really low these days.

Try this: Next time you use the bathroom, look in the bowl. Is it "art"? No, it's human waste. Yes, I know you made it yourself, but so do the rest of us. Now, take a picture of what's in the bowl. Is that "art"? Nope. That's a picture of human waste.

You can make the photo black and white, or put a flower next to the bowl, add a clown or even decorate it with confetti ... it's still just a pile of human waste, a far cry from what used to be considered "art."

Seems to me that standards for "art" have gotten so loose nowadays that pretty much anything anyone "creates," even if it's just taking a picture of some inanimate object doing nothing other than being an inanimate object, is suddenly "art."

Methinks it's just a way for lazy, untalented people to claim they have a profession.

As a side note ... artists for ages have painted pictures of naked people, I know. But that doesn't make it "art." If a musician hums a melody, is that a song? If a poet writes a grocery list, is that prose?

Nah. I think artists who paint nudes and call them "art" were just looking for a way to get some lady naked. Hey, I'm not criticizing them, that's a lot easier than the hoops we used to have jump through in college to see the same thing. I could have saved myself a great deal of time (and possibly some points on my GPA) had I just professed to want to see them naked for "art's sake," instead of that whole "I just want to be closer to you" load we use to try.

Monday, September 24, 2007

The Jena Six

Here's a good column about the Jena Six controversy in Louisiana.

No comment from me on this one, just read it it, it's good.

Now, here's a news update on the matter.

And on this one, I do have a comment. The 2nd piece, from WAVY-TV, ends with this line:

"If they can't get justice in Jena the protesters tell me the Capitol will hear their cries. "


To me, "justice" is when wrongdoers are punished under the law.

No, the Jena rallies aren't about justice. The Jena rallies aren't about fairness.

The Jena rallies are about a segment of America that refuses to live by the same rules as the rest of America, and about those who enable -- and even encourage -- that disregard for law.

It's pretty straightforward -- 6 people beat up 1 other person. That's illegal. To me, race plays no part in this, other than the role that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton -- two guys deathly afraid of having to find real jobs -- create for it by exploiting ignorance and shameful behavior.

A 6-on-1 fight isn't a fight, it's a beating. In the Jena case the crime was racially motivated, and even though I'm not too find of hate-crime legislation, crimes like this are exactly what those hate-crime laws are supposed to be about.

Finally, I'm really sick of hearing people invoke the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. King fought to have men judged by their character, not the color of their skin, and that's what we should do. The only way American society can stop from going the rest of the way down the toilet is for people to stop looking at crime, and criminals, in terms of race, and judge those people's actions.

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Being in College Doesn't Mean You're Smart

Here's an interesting little story about the student newspaper at Colorado State University.

It seems the paper ran an editorial, in response to the recent incident at a Florida university where a student was Tasered by security after disrupting a forum with U.S. Sen. John Kerry.

The editorial was only 4 words: "Taser this ... F*** Bush."

Only they spelled out that one particular word.

And now they're in hot water. The editor of the student paper, David McSwane, says that this was all about freedom of speech.

To me, it's all about far-left folks not having the capacity to (a) fully understand issues they protest against, or (b) formulate an intelligent response to those issues.

All over the Internet I have read reactions to the Florida Taser story, and I can't tell you how many people use it as an example of how evil President Bush is, and how the GOP is violating our civil rights.

But, as far as I can tell, Bush, nor the GOP in general, had anything to do with the Florida incident. How they can even say that astounds me, given the fact that a Democrat was the one up on stage.

It's another example of people looking to blindly criticize the administration, so they use incidents completely unrelated to the administration to do so.

It makes liberals look stupid, at least to me, when they blame everything from the Florida incident to wildfires to the Jena Six debacle on Bush and the Republicans, when in fact there is no association.

And, as the Colorado story proves, it also shows that getting into college doesn't mean you're smart.

So, just to make sure the dopes at the Colorado understand: F**k you, f**k Colorado State U, and f**k David McSwane.

I guess by the far left's standards, that's intelligent political discourse.

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Boycott Lee Greenwood

Here's a story that totally ticked me off:

DENVER (AP) — Country music singer Lee Greenwood, best known for his patriotic
anthem "God Bless the USA," refused to take the stage for a concert honoring
veterans, police and firefighters in a dispute over his payment.
Greenwood canceled as headliner for a concert Saturday that followed the "Colorado State
Parade of Honor" in downtown Denver after the organizer couldn’t come up with
$20,000 cash or cashier’s check required by the contract, his manager said.
Jerry Bentley, Greenwood’s Nashville, Tenn.-based manager, said Greenwood canceled his appearance after the concert organizer paid $10,000 in advance but offered only $2,000 in cash and a $2,000 personal check on the day of the show.
Frank Young, who organized the parade and concert, said he had wired $14,000 of Greenwood’s fee in advance and had $4,000 in cash to give the musician’s road manager the day of the show.
Young said he wanted to pay the remaining $2,000 with a check from the Knights of Columbus, one of four groups that agreed to pay for blocks of tickets to help finance the show.

I thought the whole country music thing was all about 'America' ... NASCAR and cowboys and rough-and-tumble stuff ... but maybe Greenwood is just a typical poser who's in it for the money. It's especially funny that he's "best known for his patriotic anthem "God Bless the USA," seeing as he needed $20,000 to do something nice for the people that fought so he could make a living singing songs.

And, even if "business is business," he got at least $10,000 up front. ... Even if he was owed another $10,000, couldn't he have just played the damn show?

I say if you're a fan of this guy, stop buying his stuff. Send him an e-mail telling him he's a selfish, money-hungry jerk. Here is his Web site, and here is a link to e-mail his general manager. Seriously, go ahead. I did, it was kind of fun. Look at the discography on his Web site, he has album after album of "patriotic" songs, which I guess he recorded purely to make a buck.

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

I Can't Wait to Buy Your House

I've seen countless articles about people who bought homes under adjustable rate mortgages, and, now that those rates are going up, are finding they can't pay the mortgage.

But I have limited sympathy for these folks.

I've been trying to buy a home for a couple of years now, and I just cannot afford it. I looked at all sorts of mortgages, and it was pretty straightforward -- an adjustable rate mortgage is dangerous -- you borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars without knowing the interest rate from one year to another.

No thanks.

But a lot of people did just that ... they went into something beyond their means and now they see what happens when you do that.

It's not rocket science: What's your income? Is it enough to pay the mortgage with enough left over for added expenses? No? Then you can't afford that house.

So as the homes get lost to the banks or go up for sale by people just looking to not lose their shirts, I may be able to get one at a decent price.

Shocking Treatment at Kerry Forum

This is plain crazy -- read this story.


A University of Florida student was restrained and Tasered after an incident during a forum with U.S. Sen. John Kerry. From several news sources, it seems the guy was asking Kerry some questions, used up all his time, then university cops went to remove him and he struggled and they Tasered him.


Videos of Monday's incident posted on several Web sites show officers pulling
Andrew Meyer, 21, away from the microphone after he asks Kerry about impeaching
President Bush and whether he and Bush were both members of the secret society
Skull and Bones at Yale University.
"He apparently asked several questions —
he went on for quite awhile — then he was asked to stop," university spokesman
Steve Orlando said. "He had used his allotted time. His microphone was cut off,
then he became upset."

This is really scary stuff, especially when you look at the possible ramifications -- if this particular guy had managed to shoot, stab or bludgeon the cops that were physically abusing him, it would to me seem like self-defense.

Here's what I want to know -- and the site where I got the video asks similar questions: Why was there no riot? Why didn't Kerry lose his mind on the cops?

People can protest all they want, wave signs and say that this president or that president is turning things into a police state ... but if people stand by and let things like this happen, then all the sign-waving and slogan-chanting is worthless. Moments like these are when people should stand up and fight.

Politics, Politics

Politicians know how to mess up anything.

Here's a story about some Democrats possibly hinging their confirmation of Judge Michael Mukasey for attorney general on whether they get information about the firing of a number of U.S. attorneys -- a related yet not really related issue.

It's interesting, because Mukasey was heralded as a good pick because he would get bipartisan support. ... Politicians will roadblock something they agree with, just to try to get their own way on something else.

It's sort of like John Edwards speaking in Iowa a day or two ago with the rest of the Democratic presidential hopefuls, saying that Congress should not authorize any funding for the war in Iraq that doesn't include a timetable for withdrawal of troops.

I realize that that's the game of politics, but it's disturbing nonetheless.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Is the New York Times biased?

The title of this post is a joke, because I already believe the Times is biased.

But, here's a story about how got a $120,000 discount on their ad attacking Gen. David Petraeus.

I won't even comment on the story -- just read it.

Competing Protests

Groups both for and against the war in Iraq are planning competing protests. Here's a story.

Ultraliberal Cindy Sheehan is even coming out of "retirement" to attend the protest.

As much as I despise Sheehan, she's got a right to say whatever she wants, even if it is moronic, so I hope they have fun at their protest.

One funny thing from the story is from Brian Becker, national coordinator for the antiwar group Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (ANSWER). He said: "Seventy percent [of Americans] support the immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces."

Really? Really?

Because the story continues with this: "A Sept. 8 CBS/New York Times poll found that 30 percent of Americans supported removing all troops from Iraq, while 35 percent supported decreasing the troop presence there. The poll did not ask respondents about a timeframe for withdrawal. A Sept. 7 ABC/Washington Post poll found that 55 percent of Americans would support legislation setting a spring 2008 deadline for withdrawing troops, while 41 percent would oppose such a measure."

Now, I'm no math whiz, but I can't seem to get those numbers to add up to 70.

It doesn't matter, really, because like I said before, I think polls are full of it. But I think it's funny when anyone uses statistics to say, "See, we're right." They should just leave that crap out, and say, "We are protesting because we want immediate withdrawl." To throw around make-believe numbers that are supposed to show that you know what everyone wants, that just irritates me.

But it's easy to do. Watch: I asked 5 people, and 4 of them said they would rather stick an icepick in their brain than listen to Cindy Sheehan spew her irrational, mean-spirited nonsense. So, I guess 80% of Americans would rather go deaf than listen to this lady bitch about Bush being Hitler and how Cheney is committing war crimes.

Sheesh. I wouldn't mind Sheehan and the other antiwar protesters so much if they would just be somewhat rational, and admit that, even without Bush and Cheney and the war in Iraq, there still would exist a problem with radical Islamists that can't be controlled by simply not doing anything -- That's what we've been doing for years while getting attacked by Muslims (the first WTC bombing, the Cole, our embassies in other countries, 9/11, Richard Reid ...).

You know? Be smart about it - call for a different strategy, not just the end of the current one, because you have to do something.

When I first started out in newspapers, I criticized a headline, and one of my editors told me, you don't just say the one that's there is wrong without having a correct one to put it its place.

Saying something is wrong is easy; making it correct is the challenge.

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Use Israel to Solve Iran Crisis

Iran poses a serious problem to Muslim and non-Muslim nations alike. Here's a story.

Iran says its nuclear efforts are aimed at generating nuclear power, but at the same time it supports militant groups in Lebanon and Iraq with funds and weapons, and has stated that it holds an interest in securing power in Iraq.

Some people believe that Iran's efforts are geared more toward nuclear weaponry, which, because of the martyr mentality of radical Islam, would mean there would be a nation with nuclear weapons that does not have the sense not to use those weapons for fear of mutual destruction.

It's a simple case of nuclear-armed nations with different goals: some countries work toward maintaining life on earth, while others work toward attaining an afterlife. You have people who don't want to die, in a fight with people who do want to die as long as they kill many other people in the process.

How do you reason with someone whose actions are not based in reason?

It's easy when two nuclear-armed nations are in a quarrel if neither wants to die. Both will be more open to diplomacy to avoid death.

But, if your adversary thinks dying is actually victory, how do you proceed?

I would say the solution would be to kill your adversary before they have the ability to kill you.

What you don't do is wait for them to have the ability, which is what the rest of the world has been doing with Iran for more than a few years.

But, with the U.S. pussyfooting around in Afghanistan and Iraq for fear of looking like tyrants, there's no way to deal with Iran in a meaningful way, because the only way to go in Iran would be to get rid of the radicals while letting alone the democracy-minded folks there.

Here's my solution: Let -- or better yet, force -- Israel to destroy Iran. They have the ability, they have the motive, and they are already sworn enemies. Israel should have no qualms about doing this, because if Iran develops nuclear weapons, Israel is toast, and they know it.

Once Israel destroys Iran, it can do the same to Syria, who also may be working on nukes.

From there I'm not so sure. ... But I do believe that once the radicals in Iran are gone, things like Iraq and Afghanistan would be easier to deal with.

Just a thought.

Worried About Global Warming?

For the past several years, the hot topic has been global warming, mankind's role in causing it, and the dire consequences of it.

But here's a great story about the other side of the whole debate -- those who say climate change is natural, and beneficial.

If this is true, there are quite a few people (like Al Gore) who are going to have to find some other way to scare people into listening to them.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Do You Like Dogs? Do You Like Barking Dogs?

Here's a short story about a Florida city looking to put the bite on dogs that bark too much.

I love dogs, they're great. But it does annoy me when people who live in close quarters have dogs, especially unattended dogs, that bark nonstop at all hours of the day and night.

To me, it's common sense: If you live where people are right on top of each other, don't have a dog, because it's cruel to the animal and annoying to your neighbors.

My upstairs neighbors have a dog, and it's the cutest little thing, but it's inside too much and barks at everything -- passers-by, traffic, the UPS guy, wind --and it's really irritating. An apartment, especially a 2nd-floor apartment, isn't really the place to keep a dog.

When the dog does get taken outside, it seems to enjoy standing outside my bedroom window and barking like mad while I'm trying to sleep. That's always a joyous way to be woken up.

I don't want people to have to get rid of their pets -- but use a little common sense, folks. If you have to live in a limited-space community, and you want to have a dog, you should be the ones to adapt your lifestyle to the fact that you have a dog. This means you should look for a first-floor apartment, or buildings where other tenants have dogs; it also means that you should expect to have to tell your dog to be quiet if they go off on a tear. If your dog is barking at nothing over and over and over, tell it to shut up -- they understand. If your kid just stood there screaming over and over, wouldn't you tell it to clam up?

Even More about Sen. Craig

Here's a story about Idaho Sen. Larry Craig attempting to withdraw his guilty plea to a disorderly conduct charge.

Craig says that, when accused of trying to set up a gay sex encounter in an airport bathroom, he took a guilty plea to disorderly conduct purely to avoid publicity and to get past the situation.

As I've said before, I have no idea if he's gay, or if he really tried to hook up with another guy in a bathroom, so I'm taking all this at face value.

But, it does seem plausible ... I mean, it makes sense that a public figure might see the plea as the easy, quiet way out of a difficult situation. This new development makes that seem more likely, because if he made the plea just to keep things quiet, but maintains his innocence, then now that the situation is anything but quiet he might as well fight the charge.

My interest in this story doesn't even have much to do with Craig -- I want to see how other lawmakers treat this issue -- I want to see how many people argue about the specific incident, which on its own should have some professional ramifications, and how many try and make something out of whether Craig is a closeted homosexual, which should not.

A Big Glass of Apple Whine

Here's a fun story ... people who rushed out and paid up to $600 for Apple's iPhone the day it came out are mad because about 2 months later, Apple has cut the price by $200.

Here's the story.

I think it's amusing, and I'm getting a kick out of these super-consumers' woe.

Look, the fact that these people ran to the store and plunked down $600 for a cell phone makes me question their intelligence right off the bat.

I like gadgets and cool stuff, too, but be realistic. What product -- cell phones, computers, MP3 players, cars -- hasn't dropped in price after the "first wave" of buyers?

And what's worse, these people are complaining because many of them are the "Apple faithful," meaning "silly people who worship anything Apple and have to be the first to own anything new from Apple."

If they're "faithful," then they had to have noticed at some point that this is what Apple -- and other companies -- do. They introduce a product amid massive hype, for a ridiculous price, and watch as thousands of people flock like sheep and spend all that money; then, as the sales dwindle, the company drops the price so that the people who actually had enough common sense not to spend $600 on a phone may buy the product.

And, by the way, even the new $400 price tag is still ridiculous, because you know in another 6 months you'll be able to get one for $250 through some cell phone provider promotion.

The article mentions the Motorola Razr phone as a product that went through similar price drops, and I have to testify to that: When it first came out people were paying a couple hundred dollars for the Razr. About 6 months later, I got one for free when I renewed my Verizon contract.

So, I have zero sympathy for the dopes who blew $600 on a phone so they could be part of the cool crowd that made headlines for 2 or 3 days.

Monday, September 10, 2007

Kanye Hear Me Now?

Kanye West got mad that he didn't win anything at the MTV Video Awards.

See how funny this is:

"That's two years in a row, man ... give a black man a chance," West said, stomping around his entourage and directing his comments at a reporter. "I'm trying hard man, I have the ... number one record, man." West said he never will return to MTV.

OK. This is just ridiculous. First, if West hadn't noticed, other black people have done just fine musically. Second, it's funny that he vows not to return to MTV ... because obviously they don't seem too impressed when he does show up, now do they?

They guy gets paid huge money for doing something super-fun, and because he can't get outside validation he's got to piss and moan like a baby?

(Personally, I think Kanye West's music is awful, so I guess I'm biased on this one.)

MTV -- Moron Television

Remember when MTV - Music Television - used to have music?

Now it's moronic shows that basically show people from the wading area of the gene pool doing dumb thing.

Well, the newest is another reality dating show. ... Except this time, a bisexual woman will choose from 16 guys and 16 lesbians.

Now, I'm not one for censorship, so whatever, go ahead. Doesn't interest me. But what I did find interesting was this:

Tony DiSanto, executive VP of series development and programming for MTV, said, "The show is a roller coaster ride of drama, conflict and emotion, busting stereotypes and challenging the norm—proving that the rules of attraction are made to be broken.”

Drama, conflict and emotion? Is this guy for real? It's about a bisexual chick who's going to hook up with someone. Wow, earth-shattering.

This is the kind of crap that makes us all look bad. I'm sorry, but someone's sexual ambiguity shouldn't make them famous.

Is That Why They're Called 'Pigs'?

Here's a funny story.

A cop bought a McDonald's burger that had had salt spilled on it, and he says it was so salty it made him sick.

The person that spilled the salt says it was an accident, and that she, too, ate a one of the burgers that had had salt spilled on it and it didn't make her sick.

Here's the beauty of the story - this lady, who's worked at McD's for 5 months, asked why, if the cop thought the burger was overly salty, he continued to eat the whole thing.

Maybe the wrong person is behind the grill, huh?

Dems in Miami

Democratic presidential hopefuls were in Miami speaking about immigration.

Here is a UPI story about it.

It's interesting -- They all talked about how awful Bush and the GOP are when it comes to immigration, and how they further anti-immigrant sentiment, but none of them mentioned anything about illegal immigration, or how illegal immigration is illegal.

No, they skipped that part. Instead, they vowed to fight for immigration, which the U.S. already allows, and criticized Bush for politicizing the issue. (By the way, speaking about it at a campaign event, I guess, is how you don't politicize it.)

Anyway, it's a fun read. I like watching politicians suck up to people, it makes them look so foolish.

One of the funnier parts: John Edwards accused Bush of using “absolutely every tool available to him politically to divide this country.”

Hah! Like without Bush we'd be united? Like, without any Republicans around, the rest of us would forget how much we like speaking English and keeping the money we earn?

Friday, September 7, 2007

Comcast Limits Unlimited Internet Service

Here's one that'll tick you off.

Comcast offers "unlimited" high-speed Internet access -- and it's expensive. I know, I use it.

But the evil part of this is that Comcast is now cutting access to users who "use too much" -- which is so funny, because if there's no limit, how can there be a limit?

I'm of the mindset that if Comcast wants to charge an arm and a leg for its service, it has the right to -- just like we have the right not to buy the service.

But, to sell "unlimited" service, and then complain that people use it too much, is ridiculous.

The only restriction that Comcast used to put on their Net service was that users couldn't then sell off their bandwidth to other people - common sense, no reselling of the product.

Now, to sell limited service while touting it as unlimited is, to me, false advertising, and should make Comcast vulnerable to legal action.

By the way, when I say expensive ... Comcast charges a minimum of $47 a month for it's "unlimited" high-speed access, and you have to be buying other services from them already to get that price (unless you can convince then to give you a bundle deal, which I found they will offer you if you call them to cancel your phone, Internet and digital cable!).

Scent of an Obama

Barack Obama's wife says he smells bad in the morning.

Aren't you glad you know?

Cripes, can you believe this stuff is even in the newspaper? Who cares?

Like we all need refresher courses in "Everybody Poops."

Osama bin Laden is reportedly going to make a video address on the 6th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks.

Here's a story (and a photo!) about the allegedly "new" video.

One thing that has always bothered me about the whole Islamic extremist thing ... they make videos, they have Internet sites where they make announcements ... so why can't they be tracked?

It seems weird that this country can track down people on the Net that trade dirty pictures of underage girls, but have no idea how to locate the people putting out this Osama/jihad/al-Qaida stuff.

Coulter on Craig

I know, the title of this post sounded like it was going to be something else ... something much more disturbing.

But, no, this is just a link to a column in which Ann Coulter takes a look at some of the media reaction to the predicament of Sen. Larry Craig.

Here's the column.

One thing I found amusing, and I'm trying to find the transcript to check it, is that Coulter says "Chris Matthews opened his 'Hardball' program on Aug. 28 by saying Larry Craig had been 'exposed as both a sexual deviant and a world-class hypocrite.'"

Interesting, how some people's perception of how to consider homosexuals depends on the homosexual's political affiliation.

Anyway, it's an interesting column.

Thursday, September 6, 2007

The New F-Word

As a word person, I'm getting increasingly annoyed with people policing language in this country.

TV actor Isaiah Washington got in trouble for using the word "fag"; Don Imus caught hell for his "nappy-headed hos" remark; actor and comedian Eddie Griffin had the plug pulled on a standup routine because he repeatedly said "nigger." (FYI, Griffin is black.)

Now, Jerry Lewis is in hot water for using the word "fag" -- during his annual telethon. (You can read the full story here.)

Right off the bat, let me say this: OK, the telethon was most certainly not the place for such language.

But when the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation comes out swinging, it makes my blood boil.

Here's what GLAAD president Neil Giuliano said: "It also feeds a climate of hatred and intolerance that contributes to putting our community in harm's way."

That's ridiculous. And it ticks me off, because (a) I don't like the policing of language, and (b) because it's used as a crutch by whatever "community" is bent out of shape at the time.

On the first point -- this country is based on freedom of speech and expression. If Jerry Lewis wants to use the word "fag," he should be able to. Period. True, it's not a nice word. but it's just a word. If he called a specific person that word, then I could see that particular person getting angry because then it's an insult. But the simple use of the word should not necessitate apologies or punishment. What words are next? Fat? Ugly? Dummy?

On the second point -- To say that the use of a word "feeds a climate of hatred" is utterly moronic, and is a misguided view of why the "community" may feel they are persecuted or in danger.

Can we be realistic about this, please?

If someone has some hatred for a "community," then maybe it has less to do with a word in the dictionary and more to do with the behavior of the people in that community, or something in the psyche of the person with the hatred. But the simple use of a word does not automatically foster hatred. (Unless it follows other words, like "kill the ..." or "We should all hate ... .")

And, if you think the problem here is word choice, you're wrong. It's about squashing differing opinions, about forcing you to adhere to someone else's beliefs. Would Jerry Lewis -- or anyone, for that matter -- catch less heat if, instead of using the word "fag," had said "sexual deviant" or "person with abnormal sexual behavior"? I don't think so.

Here's a great example of how the word police work: I distinctly recall when the "gay community" and their advocates were up in arms over the word "queer." You couldn't use the term without the same kind of firestorm we now see with "fag." That is, until "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" came out, and suddenly "queer" was acceptable again, because it was used on a show that made being gay hip.

Let me leave you with this: The GLAAD president used the word "intolerance" ... but in these cases of policing language, who is it that's really being intolerant?

Wednesday, September 5, 2007

Policing Craigslist

OK. This is not a story about Sen. Craig -- this is a story about the real Internet craigslist.

It's basically a message board for everything from jobs and real estate to dating personals and nasty sex stuff.

But law enforcement is beginning to police the message board to find and arrest prostitutes and potential customers.

Just a fun story. The Internet offers anonymity, and that can be good, if you're trying to remain anonymous, but it can also be bad if the "hooker" you're communicating with is actually a cop.

No Liberal Bias, You Say?

Interesting little interview with Cyrus Nowrasteh, one of the producers of "The Path to 9/11." You can listen to it here (turn on your speakers!).

The show is a $40-million, five-hour ABC miniseries which received seven Emmy nominations and drew a combined two-night audience of more than 25 million viewers.

In the interview, Nowrasteh tells KFI's John Ziegler the film is not being turned into a DVD because of politics.

He says that because there is no way to talk about 9/11 without being critical of the Clinton administration, under which al-Qaida grew in power and devised the plan for 9/11, ABC is not releasing the show on DVD because Hillary is running for president.

True? I don't know. But it's not impossible, and is something I've grown to expect from the major networks. Networks exist to make money, so when they voluntarily throw away spent money and then just ignore potential revenue, something is amiss.

Another lovely example of liberal hypocrisy -- they only like free speech that they agree with, or that shows how wonderful they are. Anything else ... well, see my posts on "free speech" in Iran.

Some Interesting Stories from Iran

Here are two very interesting articles about Iran.

This one is a story that looks at President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his policies, and their effects on average Iranians. Basically, the way he's working things is making life really tough for regular Joes, but those folks aren't really complaining too loudly because Ahmadinejad also is against dissent, so it's dangerous to complain.

The second story is just a short about Iran executing some drug dealers -- something to compare the U.S. justice system to.

Happy reading!

Tuesday, September 4, 2007

John Edwards Wants Your Money

Here's a neat little story about John Edwards' plan for universal health care.

He says that under his plan, every American would get health insurance, including dental and vision, and would be subject to mandatory doctor visits to ascertain health.

It's a nice idea -- if you're giving someone health care, the point is to keep them healthy, so you should make sure they get checked out.

Now for the bad part: His plan would cost up to $120 billion a year.

He says he'd get that money by ending Bush's tax cuts for people that make more than $200,000 per year.

It's a nice line, but there's no way that just the added tax revenue from those folks is going to gather $120 billion.

So, basically what you're left with is another Democrat proposing another way to take your money and make you pay for someone else's stuff.

All the Dems keep whining about the 40 million uninsured people in this country, and how we're supposed to feel terrible about the number of uninsured children.

But what about those 40 million people? Are they all poor? How many of those people elect to have other luxuries instead of health insurance?

Here you go: I lived in front of a housing project -- I saw "poor" people who got money from the government for their rent, money from the government for their food, money from the government for their illegitimate children ... toys for the kids at Christmas, turkey dinners for Thanksgiving ... yet somehow, these "poor" people managed to have satellite TV, cars with shiny rims, designer clothes and jewelry, and drugs and alcohol.

So, excuse me if I'm in no rush to give anyone anything. The only way I would support universal health care is if the government, before handing out the health insurance ID cards, gets rid of the nanny state we're in and makes sure people living on the dole have their priorities in order.

As far as I'm concerned, the only way you should get any money for food, shelter or anything is if you have at least 1 job, if not 2, and have already spent ALL your money on food and shelter and are still coming up short.

Face it, if you get a dime from the government, you should have the bare necessities only, and if you want more, work for it. If you work for it and still can't afford the luxuries, work harder, or lower your standards.

But, for Pete's sake, stop taking my money and giving it to other people.

More on Sen. Craig

So the embattled Sen. Craig of Idaho resigned Saturday, but maintains he did not take part in any sexual activity in an airport bathroom.

I'm still not sure what's going on -- he's playing the 'wrong place, wrong time' thing, saying he pleaded guilty to a minor offense in order to close the issue rather than have courtroom drama and publicity.

But I wasn't there, so I have no idea.

Interesting turn - his kids say they've asked him all about the incident, and say they believe he is innocent of wrongdoing. Here's a story.

I realize that family members' credibility has to be questioned because, after all, it's their dad. But I would imagine that if they thought he was guilty of the act they would just not say anything to the news. Unless Craig was lying to them, which you also have to consider. The kids could be telling what they believe to be the truth.

But I still find it humorous that some people who are criticizing Craig for "immoral" acts are the same people who defend immorality and sexually deviant behavior tooth and nail -- and who do all they can to remove expectations of morality from society -- as long as the deviants aren't Republicans.

I like to remove political affiliation and look at it with some plain sense: Cheating on your spouse is wrong, same-sex relations are weird, and lying always winds up to be more trouble than just being honest.