Blog Archives

Is this thing on?

Image

Hello, It has been 2 years, 2 months, and 4 days since my last confession.  I wonder if some of you are still there.  In my mind your RSS alert systems just came to life after years of inactivity- not unlike those tape reels in the bottom of a bunker somewhere in an ’80s movie.  Silence…a red light begins to blink…a whirring sound…the tape reels spin…a Kenny Loggins song starts…

I think you get it.

So, where have I been for approximately 794 days?  Nation building!  As some of you know/knew I had a child.  What you don’t know is that Sab and I had another child shortly after Macy was born.  Her name is Rebecca.  She arrived 13 months after Macy.

ImageImage

I have been busy trying to create the next American Women’s Tennis Champion or Greatest Tea Party Hostess (they are interchangeable at this point) and making Rebecca giggle.  Its a full time job.  The best job.  So that’s where I have been.  Moving on…

Whats changed over the last 19,056 hours since we last spoke?  A few things actually…I will supply a short list.  You are welcome.

  • Rebecca Was Born
  • SOPA Protest – Largest in History of the Internet
  • A silent film won 5 Academy awards (Really?)
  • “Gangnam Style” becomes the first video to reach one billion views on YouTube
  • Lance Armstrong “apologizes,” loses a ba-jillion dollars, and still comes off like a douche bag
  •  Anonymous hacked Westboro Baptist Church (Yea!)
  • Macy decided that she is a “princess”
  • Rebecca likes yogurt

I am sure there were more events than those…however, I can not remember them right now.

This I will construct a more lucid post about something asap.  In the mean time, I am taking requests for topics.  In the comments, suggest a topic…or demand a topic.  I will write about it in my usual, hard to follow, grammatically incorrect manner.

Welcome back, me!

topic-suggestions

Advertisements

Why I love Fark.com

Fark.com is…well, I will let them describe themselves.

The first thing you should know is that Fark.com isn’t a Weblog. Fark.com, the Web site, is a news aggregator and an edited social networking news site. Every day Fark receives 2,000 or so news submissions from its readership, from which we hand-pick the funny and weird notable news — and not-news — of the day.

Fark takes actual news stories and creates a witty link title and posts them on the site.  I am a FAN of the people or person that comes up with these link titles.  Some are as funny as you can be in 10 words or less.  Here are some samples:

I hope this makes your day a little better.

Why Bin Laden Should Have Been Captured

America today resembles the land of the Munchkins as it celebrates the death of the Wicked Witch of the East. The joy is understandable, but to many outsiders, unattractive. It endorses what looks increasingly like a cold-blooded assassination as the White House is now forced to admit that Osama bin Laden was unarmed when he was shot twice in the head.

The order was given by a president who, as a former law professor, knows the absurdity of his statement that “justice was done.” Amoral diplomats and triumphant politicians join in applauding bin Laden’s summary execution because they claim that real justice—arrest, trial, and sentence—would have been too difficult in the case of public enemy No. 1. But in the long-term interests of a better world, should it not at least have been attempted?

That future depends on a respect for international law, with which the U.S. has always had an uneasy relationship.

The circumstances of bin Laden’s killing are just being clarified, and the initial objection (by former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and others) that the operation was an illegitimate invasion of state sovereignty must be rejected. Necessity required the capture of this indicted and active international criminal, and Pakistan’s abject failure (whether through incompetence or connivance) justified Obama’s order for an operation to apprehend him.

In the dock he would have been reduced in stature—never more to be remembered as the tall, soulful figure on the mountain, but as a hateful and hate-filled old man.

However, the terms of that order, as yet undisclosed, are all important. Bill Clinton admitted recently to having secretly approved the assassination of bin Laden by the CIA after the U.S. Embassy bombings in the 1990s, while President Bush publicly stated after 9/11 that he wanted bin Laden’s “head on a plate.” Did President Obama order his capture, or his execution?

The White House has been guilty of disinformation in first pretending that bin Laden was killed in a “firefight.” It now admits that he was unarmed when he died, which suggests that he could easily have been overpowered. They still maintain that he was asked to surrender, although in what language (he does not understand English) is not clear.

The law permits criminals to be shot in self-defense if they (or their accomplices) resist arrest in ways that endanger those striving to apprehend them. They should, if possible, be given the opportunity to surrender, but even if they do not come out with their hands up, they must be taken alive if that can be achieved without risk. Exactly how bin Laden came to be “shot in the head” (especially if it was the back of his head, execution-style) therefore requires explanation. Why a hasty “burial at sea” without a post mortem, as the law requires?

All that seems to have been done is to clean his body and take a photograph of it, which the White House says it is reluctant to release—no doubt for fear that it will become iconic like that of Che Guevara on the slab. But if the government kills people in this way, it must live with the consequences. Pakistan law requires a colonial inquest on violent death, and international human rights law insists that the “right to life” mandates an inquiry whenever violent death occurs from government or police action. The U.S. is therefore under a duty to hold an inquiry that will satisfy the world as to the true circumstances of this killing.

But the U.S. is celebrating summary execution, rationalized on the basis that this is one terrorist for whom trial would be unnecessary, difficult, and dangerous. It overlooks the downsides: that killing bin Laden has made him a martyr, more dangerous in that posthumous role than in hiding, and that both his legend and the conspiracy theories about 9/11 will live on undisputed by the evidence that would have been called to convict him at his trial.

Moreover, killing bin Laden gave him the consummation he most devoutly wished, namely a fast-track to paradise. His belief system required him to die mid-jihad, from an infidel bullet—not of old age on a prison farm in upstate New York. For this reason he would have refused any offer to surrender, and no doubt died with a smile on his lips.

I do not minimize the security problems that would have arisen at his trial or overlook the danger of it ending up as a squalid circus like that of Saddam Hussein. But the notion that any form of legal process would have been too hard must be rejected. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed—also (and confusingly) alleged to be the architect of 9/11—will shortly go on trial, and had bin Laden been captured he should have been put in the dock alongside him so that their shared responsibility could have been properly examined.

Bin Laden could not have been tried for 9/11 at the International Criminal Court—its jurisdiction only came into existence on 7/12, nine months later. But the Security Council could have set up an ad hoc tribunal in The Hague, with international judges (including Muslim jurists) to provide a fair trial and a reasoned verdict that would have convinced the Arab street of his guilt and his unworthiness. This would have been the best way of demystifying this man, debunking his cause and de-brainwashing his followers. In the dock he would have been reduced in stature—never more to be remembered as the tall, soulful figure on the mountain, but as a hateful and hate-filled old man, screaming from the dock or lying from the witness box. Since his videos exult in the killing of innocent civilians, any cross-examination would have emphasised his inhumanity. These benefits that flow from real justice have forever been foregone.

America’s obsessive belief in capital punishment—alone among advanced nations—is reflected in its rejoicing at the manner of bin Laden’s demise. It is ironic to reflect that Bill Clinton secured his election by approving the execution of Ricky Ray Rector (a convict so brain-damaged that he ordered pumpkin pie for his last meal and said that he would “leave the rest until later.”) And now Barack Obama has most likely secured his re-election by approving the execution of Bin Laden. This may be welcome, given the alternatives of Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee (who have both urged that Julian Assange be hunted down in similar fashion) or Donald Trump. But it is a sad reflection on the continuing attraction of summary execution.

It was not always thus. When the time came to consider the fate of men much more steeped in wickedness than Osama bin Laden—namely the Nazi leadership—the British government wanted them hanged within six hours of capture. President Truman demurred, citing the conclusion of Justice Robert Jackson that summary execution “would not sit easily on the American conscience or be remembered by our children with pride…the only course is to determine the innocence or guilt of the accused after a hearing as dispassionate as the times will permit and upon a record that will leave our reasons and motives clear.” He insisted upon judgment at Nuremberg, which has confounded Holocaust-deniers ever since its delivery. Killing instead of capturing Osama bin Laden was a missed opportunity to prove to the world that this charismatic leader was in fact a vicious criminal, who deserved to die of old age in prison, and not as a martyr to his inhuman cause.

Original Post

News Flash: Republican’s hate the Poor (and minorities)

What a novel thought...

Below is an article written by Sam Stein, a political blogger.  You can read the original posting here.  I am not going to expound on what this article expresses until you read it for yourself.  I will let you draw your own conclusions and my comments will follow.  However, I will highlight my favorite parts of it, so you can easily predict what is currently pissing me off. (HINT: RED = BAD )

Read the rest of this entry

America’s Opinions

I was curious about how my fellow Americans felt about issues that, in my humble opinion, are paramount to our nation and its position on a world stage.   After hours and hours of extensive research and documentation, I give you:

AMERICA’S OPINIONS Read the rest of this entry

…and then there is this.

So much for the republican return to “christian values and decency.”

For electing Scott Brown (see above), Massachusetts you suck.  Thank you for showing the world that you really don’t care about anything that the Kennedy family fought for.  As a bright point on the intellectual and socially in tune map you, Massachusetts, have really dropped the ball on this one.

Not familiar with Scott Brown and his nude modeling and political platform?  I will help with the political platform issue you can surf for right wing porn by your selves.

Scott Brown’s Political Platform (taken from Scott Brown’s Senate Website all RED highlights and underlining are my doing) :

Why I’m Running…
America is a great country but we also have some challenges that we need to solve if we’re going to remain the world’s superpower. The most important of our challenges is getting the U.S. economy moving again. People are hurting as they struggle to make ends meet. They’re worried about their future, and that of their children and grandchildren. I want to ensure that we leave them an America that is financially stronger and independent: minus a national debt that we can never repay.

Health Care

I believe that all Americans deserve health care coverage, but I am opposed to the health care legislation that is under consideration in Congress and will vote against it. It will raise taxes, increase government spending and lower the quality of care, especially for elders on Medicare. I support strengthening the existing private market system with policies that will drive down costs and make it easier for people to purchase affordable insurance. In Massachusetts, I support the 2006 healthcare law that was successful in expanding coverage, but I also recognize that the state must now turn its attention to controlling costs.


Economy
I am a free enterprise advocate who believes that lower taxes can encourage economic growth. Raising taxes stifles growth, weakens the economy and puts more people out of work. Our economy works best when individuals have more of their income to spend, and businesses have money to invest and add jobs. I have been a fiscal watchdog in the state legislature fighting bigger government, higher taxes and wasteful spending.

Energy and Environment
I support common-sense environment policy that will help to reduce pollution and preserve our precious open spaces. I realize that without action now, future generations will be left to clean up the mess we leave. In order to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, I support reasonable and appropriate development of alternative energy sources such as wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal and improved hydroelectric facilities. I oppose a national cap and trade program because of the higher costs that families and businesses would incur.

Education
I am passionate about improving the quality of our public schools. Accountability and high standards are paramount. I support choice through charter schools, as well as the MCAS exam as a graduation requirement. I have worked to ensure that all children have access to a quality education. I am a strong advocate for the METCO program, which provides lower income students with broader educational opportunities.

Immigration
I recognize that our strength as a nation is built on the immigrant experience in America. I welcome legal immigration to this country. However, we are also a nation of laws and government should not adopt policies that encourage illegal immigration. Providing driver’s licenses and in-state tuition to illegal immigrant families will act as a magnet in drawing more people here in violation of the law and it will impose new costs on taxpayers. I oppose amnesty, and I believe we ought to strengthen our border enforcement and institute an employment verification system with penalties for companies that hire illegal immigrants.

Veterans
As a Lieutenant Colonel in the Army National Guard, I am uniquely aware of the importance and sacrifice of our men and women serving in the military. I have been a vigorous supporter of legislation providing benefits to returning service members, as well as, benefits for the families of those killed in action. I believe we need to recognize the sacrifice of all of our servicemembers by keeping better track of returning military personnel so they get the services they deserve. That includes providing them with first-class medical care and other benefits to which they are entitled. I am known as a leader on veterans’ issues through my work on the Veterans and Federal Affairs Committee, the Hidden Wounds of War Commission, and the Governor’s Task Force on Returning Veterans.

Gun issues
I support the Second Amendment and believe that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms as a basic constitutional liberty. I support safe and responsible gun ownership.

Death penalty
I believe there are some crimes that are so heinous that they deserve capital punishment. Our Government should have the ability to impose the death penalty in cases where it is justified.

Abortion
While this decision should ultimately be made by the woman in consultation with her doctor, I believe we need to reduce the number of abortions in America. I believe government has the responsibility to regulate in this area and I support parental consent and notification requirements and I oppose partial birth abortion. I also believe there are people of good will on both sides of the issue and we ought to work together to support and promote adoption as an alternative to abortion.

Marriage
I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. States should be free to make their own laws in this area, so long as they reflect the people’s will as expressed through them directly, or as expressed through their elected representatives.

Israel
Israel has made enormous sacrifices in an attempt to secure peace – including unilateral withdrawal from Gaza.  I support a two-state solution that reaffirms Israel’s right to exist and provides the Palestinians with a place of their own where both sides can live in peace and security.  As our closest ally in the Middle East, Israel lives every day under the threat of terror yet shares with America a dedication to democratic ideals, a respect for faith, and a commitment to peace in the region. Until a lasting peace is achieved, I support the security barrier erected by Israel which has proven successful in protecting Israeli civilians from terrorist attacks.


Iran

I support the bi-partisan Iran sanctions bill and believe that until Ahmadinejad gives up his nuclear ambitions he should be isolated from the rest of the world. With its reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons, Iran represents the biggest threat to Israel. Ahmadinejad is a Holocaust denier who has threatened to wipe Israel off the map. Meeting with him confers legitimacy when the only correct response is to treat him as an outcast.  A personal meeting with Ahmadinejad, as suggested by my opponent, would embolden him and be used as a propaganda tool to strengthen his position.

Truth is stranger than fiction.  The proof is right there!

**I noticed on Scott Brown’s election page that he has a FLICKR link.  With what I have seen above, do you think that was a good idea.   Is that not hilarious to anyone else????

Wonkette : Decade of Feces: Top 100 Moments of the 2000s

I know how you feel.

This is a post from Wonkette.  Read it.  Its good.

Wonkette : Decade of Feces: Top 100 Moments of the 2000s

Posted using ShareThis

“By the People: The Election of Barak Obama”

I am watching this documentary about the election of Pres. Obama and all I can think of is how “political” he looks.  As much as I like the man- he looks like a politician.  That is unsettling to me.  The screen is showing David Poluffe talking about how little sleep they have going into the Iowa primary while Wolf Blitzer and his expert discuss the ” Viability” of the candidates.  There is a baby toting mom searching the caucus for Obama supporters as Obama’s Iowa victory is announced. At the after party Tommy Vietor shrugs and says, “Who knew?”   I think he should have.  After the volunteer cries to his mom on the phone about how happy he is that his work for all these weeks is not in vain, Obama is shown on a private jet flying away from Iowa to focus on New Hampshire.  It looks like he is saying “Thanks…See ya.”  I love watching Chuck Todd and Chris Matthews discuss the emerging political scene with questions firing back and forth at each other.  Ryan Lizza from the New York Post spouts stats like he is reading a text book.  When Axelrod and Gibbs broke the news to Obama that he did not win the New Hampshire primary he looked at them and said, “This is going to take a while, isn’t it?”  That question led to his realization that American politics is a corn maze that sometimes has no end.  I think Obama knows now that you have to be a politician, you have to take certain steps, you have to pay the pipers and the gate keepers and yes President Obama…It is going to take a while for any change to happen.

%d bloggers like this: