Yes, your mess. We didn't make it, you never elect us, you never even pay attention to us. You crapped on the floor, and now you're bickering about the best way to fix it. Not only are you fighting each other, you're fighting yourselves! Normal Democrats are mad at "Blue Dog" Democrats, Ohio Republicans are mad at Southern Republicans. You aren't getting anything done, the crap is still on the rug and if you don't clean it up soon you're going to need a Rug Doctor, and we're fresh out of cash to afford one because they're really expensive.
But, listen, I can fix it! I have ideas, big ones!
First thing I'd do is the most obvious one of all, legalize marijuana. It's shocking that it's illegal in the first place, let alone in 2009. The legalization and subsequent taxation of marijuana would be a cash cow for the cash strapped government. I could go into the medical benefits that marijuana has, but I've already done that. They're well stated, regardless of what the drug czar says, I have it on good authority that he's an idiot. The legalization of marijuana would also mean that restrictions on it's sister plant, hemp, would be lifted. Hemp can make all sorts of cool things, you can even eat hemp seeds and they're really good for you. Hemp can also be converted to ethanol which serves two goods: first is that it frees up corn to become exclusively a food source once again, and second is that it's rapid growth rate would help loosen imported oil's death grip on our economy. Of course, the oil and pharmaceutical industries would be none-too-pleased with this which is why we would have to outlaw corporate lobbying.
But that's not all! Call now and we'll outfit every municipal, county, state and federal building with green power systems and save tax payers a bundle by dramatically cutting the power bills for those buildings! Yes, that includes the sports venues that billionaires held cities and states over a barrel to build, those would get the same treatment and the associated sports owners wouldn't see a dime of revenue from it. Take this for instance, that's the Charlotte Bobcats Arena, a municipally constructed venue in the heart of Charlotte with a bare concrete roof. Do you not see the potential there? Next to the arena is the CATS bus hub, it would also be outfitted with them.
Recently Peter Gorman, he's the head of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, a failed educational organization in Charlotte, fired a bunch of teachers and announced that he may have to cut middle school sports. If you put self-reliant energy systems in the schools you could save a ton of money.
Of course, making marijuana legal would free up a lot of room in the prison system which would give us the ability to shut some prisons down and save even more money.
What would we do with all this money? Well, we'd have universal healthcare and bridges that don't fall apart.
It'd be nice, but you won't listen to us.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
It's just like watching Newcastle
Of course, I'm referring to the Republican Party of the United States and it's hilarious infighting. Of course, if they keep it up, they could meet a similar fate to the Toon!
Recently Barack Obama's poll numbers have taken a hit and while some Republicans have been quick to point this out, the party itself has been unable to capitalize on them, at all. In fact, their numbers managed to take a hit as well. The leadership of the party would like for the attention to be on the way the Republicans are handling the President's healthcare bill, but instead the spotlight has been shifted to the (loud) extremist elements of the party who claim that Obama is an illegal immigrant. Most mainstream Republicans reject (all of them voted to support some totally unnecessary resolution in Congress that said Obama was born in Hawaiʻi) this nonsense but that doesn't stop the "birthers" from screaming, literally.
Recently Barack Obama's poll numbers have taken a hit and while some Republicans have been quick to point this out, the party itself has been unable to capitalize on them, at all. In fact, their numbers managed to take a hit as well. The leadership of the party would like for the attention to be on the way the Republicans are handling the President's healthcare bill, but instead the spotlight has been shifted to the (loud) extremist elements of the party who claim that Obama is an illegal immigrant. Most mainstream Republicans reject (all of them voted to support some totally unnecessary resolution in Congress that said Obama was born in Hawaiʻi) this nonsense but that doesn't stop the "birthers" from screaming, literally.
Yes, that really happened. That's a real person going crazy at a town hall meeting held by Congressman Mike Castle (R-De.), a normal human being. Yes, I know that was last week, but it doesn't change anything.
It's not something I really want to go into, I find it that stupid, but I have to say a few things. G. Gordon Liddy, possibly the most famous "birther", likes to say "there's no hospital listed". My birth certificate doesn't list a hospital either. I'm pretty sure I'm American, in fact, I carry Catawba blood in my veins. Nonetheless, maybe I should start carrying my birth certificate (which actually reads "Certificate of Birth", maybe I'm fake too) around in a ziplock bag with a tiny American flag.
Naw.
Now Senator George Voinovich (R-Oh.) says "the Southerners" are ruining the Republican Party by getting on TV and acting like, well, morons. Southern Republicans (like Louisiana's David Vitter, who has ties to the D.C. madam) have lashed out at Voinovich, calling him "wishy-washy". Vitter is up for re-election in 2010, one of his opponents is Stormy Daniels, a pornstar Independent who was just arrested on charges of domestic violence. Seriously. The Democrats could probably run Teddy Ruxpin in a Che shirt and win 65% of the vote in that race.
This is where the Libertarian Party should be paying attention and running homegrown candidates, not defected Republicans and Democrats. They actually have a chance to take a real slice of the conservative base over the next two years if they get on the radio and television making sense instead of making wild accusations about where the President was born. Libertarians can get away with sex scandals too.
It's not something I really want to go into, I find it that stupid, but I have to say a few things. G. Gordon Liddy, possibly the most famous "birther", likes to say "there's no hospital listed". My birth certificate doesn't list a hospital either. I'm pretty sure I'm American, in fact, I carry Catawba blood in my veins. Nonetheless, maybe I should start carrying my birth certificate (which actually reads "Certificate of Birth", maybe I'm fake too) around in a ziplock bag with a tiny American flag.
Naw.
Now Senator George Voinovich (R-Oh.) says "the Southerners" are ruining the Republican Party by getting on TV and acting like, well, morons. Southern Republicans (like Louisiana's David Vitter, who has ties to the D.C. madam) have lashed out at Voinovich, calling him "wishy-washy". Vitter is up for re-election in 2010, one of his opponents is Stormy Daniels, a pornstar Independent who was just arrested on charges of domestic violence. Seriously. The Democrats could probably run Teddy Ruxpin in a Che shirt and win 65% of the vote in that race.
This is where the Libertarian Party should be paying attention and running homegrown candidates, not defected Republicans and Democrats. They actually have a chance to take a real slice of the conservative base over the next two years if they get on the radio and television making sense instead of making wild accusations about where the President was born. Libertarians can get away with sex scandals too.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Indianapolis Motor Speedway is a problem
I noticed NASCAR was at Indianapolis Motor Speedway this week. Between the BS about how prestigious the venue is they mentioned something about how during the 2008 NASCAR race at IMS the tires tore all to hell. Tire problems? At Indy? That sounds familiar.
In 2005 Formula 1 staged their United States Grand Prix at Indianapolis Motor Speedway, it turned into the biggest charade in motorsports history as paying fans witnessed what as essentally a parade as all the cars using Michelin tires pulled out of the race after tire wear issues in earlier sessions.
Both times the blame was deflected. In 2005 Formula 1 and Michelin were blamed for the incident, in fact, it basically destroyed the relationship and left Bridgestone as the sole tire supplier in Formula 1 as Michelin pulled out. In 2008 NASCAR and Goodyear were blamed, Goodyear brought a bad tire and NASCAR let them do it people said. Different tires, different cars. But lets look again, what do these two incidents have in common?
The Indianapolis Motor Speedway.
The track itself is the problem. Not F1, not Bernie's hair, not NASCAR, not Brian France's jaw, but the track. The holy, the infallible, the precious yard of bricks. The track caused both incidents, and if it wasn't Indianapolis Motor Speedway, people would've blamed the track for the incidents just like they blame Talladega when someone flies into the air at Talladega. The difference is that Talladega was built in the late 60's by a guy many people like to think of as a redneck, and the races were attended by people many like to think of as rednecks (and trust me, there are a good few rednecks) so it's impossible to attach "presitigious" to Talladega Superspeedway like you can Indianapolis Motor Speedway, but Talladega Superspeedway has one glaring thing in common with The holy, the infallible, the precious yard of bricks.
Talladega Superspeedway sucks.
It's too big, it's literally the size of an airport because it used to be it's own airport. You can't see all of it from the stands, a trait it shares with Indianapolis. It's gimmicky, just like Indy. No, there's nothing simple and elegant about building a golf course and a freaking castle in the middle of a track, it looks gaudy. You want to see how a simple, elegant, very American race track looks? Look here, where the USGP belongs.
I know, I know: The history! Just because a sports venue has history doesn't make it impervious to criticism. I'll say this right now: Hampden Park is an awful little turd of a stadium. It has a track that isn't big enough for track events, it's dirty, and the fans are a million miles from the field. Hampden has more history in it's sport than Indy does.
I know what you'll say: "Indy is better than Charlotte" and you'd be wrong. Charlotte's track isn't perfect, but it's better than Indy. Yes, Charlotte is gimmicky as hell, but you can see the entire tracks. Yea, tracks, Charlotte has three configurations within it's main oval, and you can see the entirety of all three from the stands.
It's time we admit the truth here, the track is doing more harm than good for motorsports in America.
NASCAR needs to leave it. Move Atlanta's date back to the fall, move California's fall date to Indy's weekend, and bring back Darlington's second date for Labor Day. Darlington is a better track.
F1 needs a USGP, but it doesn't need Indy. It needs to alternate coasts each year: Odd years - Watkins Glen, even years - Laguna Sega.
In 2005 Formula 1 staged their United States Grand Prix at Indianapolis Motor Speedway, it turned into the biggest charade in motorsports history as paying fans witnessed what as essentally a parade as all the cars using Michelin tires pulled out of the race after tire wear issues in earlier sessions.
Both times the blame was deflected. In 2005 Formula 1 and Michelin were blamed for the incident, in fact, it basically destroyed the relationship and left Bridgestone as the sole tire supplier in Formula 1 as Michelin pulled out. In 2008 NASCAR and Goodyear were blamed, Goodyear brought a bad tire and NASCAR let them do it people said. Different tires, different cars. But lets look again, what do these two incidents have in common?
The Indianapolis Motor Speedway.
The track itself is the problem. Not F1, not Bernie's hair, not NASCAR, not Brian France's jaw, but the track. The holy, the infallible, the precious yard of bricks. The track caused both incidents, and if it wasn't Indianapolis Motor Speedway, people would've blamed the track for the incidents just like they blame Talladega when someone flies into the air at Talladega. The difference is that Talladega was built in the late 60's by a guy many people like to think of as a redneck, and the races were attended by people many like to think of as rednecks (and trust me, there are a good few rednecks) so it's impossible to attach "presitigious" to Talladega Superspeedway like you can Indianapolis Motor Speedway, but Talladega Superspeedway has one glaring thing in common with The holy, the infallible, the precious yard of bricks.
Talladega Superspeedway sucks.
It's too big, it's literally the size of an airport because it used to be it's own airport. You can't see all of it from the stands, a trait it shares with Indianapolis. It's gimmicky, just like Indy. No, there's nothing simple and elegant about building a golf course and a freaking castle in the middle of a track, it looks gaudy. You want to see how a simple, elegant, very American race track looks? Look here, where the USGP belongs.
I know, I know: The history! Just because a sports venue has history doesn't make it impervious to criticism. I'll say this right now: Hampden Park is an awful little turd of a stadium. It has a track that isn't big enough for track events, it's dirty, and the fans are a million miles from the field. Hampden has more history in it's sport than Indy does.
I know what you'll say: "Indy is better than Charlotte" and you'd be wrong. Charlotte's track isn't perfect, but it's better than Indy. Yes, Charlotte is gimmicky as hell, but you can see the entire tracks. Yea, tracks, Charlotte has three configurations within it's main oval, and you can see the entirety of all three from the stands.
It's time we admit the truth here, the track is doing more harm than good for motorsports in America.
NASCAR needs to leave it. Move Atlanta's date back to the fall, move California's fall date to Indy's weekend, and bring back Darlington's second date for Labor Day. Darlington is a better track.
F1 needs a USGP, but it doesn't need Indy. It needs to alternate coasts each year: Odd years - Watkins Glen, even years - Laguna Sega.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Walter Cronkite, 1916 - 2009
Today we lost the most trusted man in America. A true journalist who wasn't afraid to say what the country needed to hear instead of what it wanted to hear. Mr. Cronkite had spoken openly about his displeasure at the blurring of the line between information and entertainment in media, a topic which concerns many people.
Cronkite felt that American journalism was becoming too soft, and too vulnerable to corporate financial interests. He worried that this could damage our democracy. He was right.
I came a long three years after Cronkite signed off from the CBS anchor's chair for the final time, but if you watch the news in America, you feel his impact.
We lost a legend today, may he rest in peace.
Cronkite felt that American journalism was becoming too soft, and too vulnerable to corporate financial interests. He worried that this could damage our democracy. He was right.
I came a long three years after Cronkite signed off from the CBS anchor's chair for the final time, but if you watch the news in America, you feel his impact.
We lost a legend today, may he rest in peace.
On some of that ol' Jeremy Mayfield sh*t
It won't stop. It just won't.
I'm not a great NASCAR fan, but I do live in Charlotte which would make me an expert in NASCAR by the standards of any other city.
In Charlotte, Jeremy Mayfield's court battle with NASCAR is as big a news item as the Sonia Sotomayor confirmation hearings, and a bigger deal than the Mexico v United States match being on Mun2. That's to be expected though, NASCAR is more or less Charlotte's second biggest industry after incompetent guys in suits screwing up and getting bailed out by the same people they keep trying to screw over, I mean banking.
By now I'm sure everyone knows, it's even mainstream on ESPN. Back in May NASCAR claimed that Jeremy Mayfield failed a drug test and announced he'd be suspended. Mayfield denied any accusations of doing drugs, as you would expect, and demanded that NASCAR lift his ban. NASCAR said "no", they can do that because one family owns NASCAR, it's not like the Premier League, the NFL, or The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques League Cup, well, it's a little like that one. Of course upon hearing that NASCAR denied his request, Mayfield sued them. He went out and got Charlotte's biggest (literally and figuratively) lawyer, Bill Diehl (random fact: Bill Diehl's wife was my third grade teacher, and a good one at that - six degrees of NASCAR, bitches) to represent him in court. NASCAR countersued and everything went crazy. Eventually Diehl found a way to get Jeremy's ban lifted by the courts, NASCAR was pissed. Mayfield was allowed to show up at Daytona, NASCAR even had guys at the gate waiting on him, no word on whether or not they also had a truck load of wild Pit Bulls. Mayfield didn't bring his #41 car to the track.
Mayfield also no-showed the following week (at "Chicago") and rumors began to circle as to why, some accused him of doing meth again. On July 15th NASCAR announced that Mayfield had failed a drug test, again for meth, on July 6th and had a sworn statement from his stepmother saying she'd seen him snort meth at least "thirty times" in a seven-year period. Mayfield blew his top. He said of his stepmother "She's pretty much a whore" and said that she "shot and killed (his) dad". He also said she's always trying to get money out of him, that she's a golddigger, and a trashy bitch, rumor has it he dropped the C-bomb on her too. She sure sounds like a class act. But, if she saw him doing it "at a race shop in Mooresville (Mooresville is a giant race shop, basically)", why didn't anyone else in the race shop see it. Okay, he may have been alone with her at that time, I'll concede that, but why didn't she alert NASCAR to the problem knowing that a tweaked-out driver was putting at least fourty-two other lives at risk every week?
Mayfield also said of Brian France: “Brian France out there talking about effective drug policy, it’s kind of like Al Capone talking about effective law enforcement. And that’s the way I feel about it. The pot shouldn’t be calling the kettle black, you know what I’m saying? And I think the world needs to hear that, too.” Which I thought was hilarious.
That was it, that was Jeremy's story, or at least that was Jeremy's version of the story. A couple of days later I got the truth from Tommy, you always got the truth from Tommy, it was one of his major weaknesses. He never lied, he never took drugs, and he never cheated on anyone...wait, that never happened.
Anyway, back on topic. Mayfield says he's going to fight NASCAR with everything he's got, and he will. One thing that has to be said for Jeremy Mayfield is that he doesn't know when to quit, he doesn't know how to give up. He never has, he never will. If he's lying then he's really playing with fire, but if he's telling the truth NASCAR could end up in a world of hurt. WADA has already said their drug testing policies are garbage and NASCAR still refuses to adhear to WADA guidelines, probably because WADA is European. Because of NASCAR's hardheadedness on this issue there's still a chance that the judge will rule against them, having expressed disfavor with NASCAR's testing methods in the past. Jeremy also says that he has passed several independent lab tests since May, if he's telling the truth, Brian France has some 'splainin' to do. Okay, enough channeling Tom Coburn.
Somewhat on topic, but meth is/was considered a WMD in parts of North Carolina. Really.
But remember, when you say the name of the make that wins the championship in 2011: it's Hyundai (Hun-Day), like "Sunday".
That said, this evil little peace loving librul needs his sleep.
I'm not a great NASCAR fan, but I do live in Charlotte which would make me an expert in NASCAR by the standards of any other city.
In Charlotte, Jeremy Mayfield's court battle with NASCAR is as big a news item as the Sonia Sotomayor confirmation hearings, and a bigger deal than the Mexico v United States match being on Mun2. That's to be expected though, NASCAR is more or less Charlotte's second biggest industry after incompetent guys in suits screwing up and getting bailed out by the same people they keep trying to screw over, I mean banking.
By now I'm sure everyone knows, it's even mainstream on ESPN. Back in May NASCAR claimed that Jeremy Mayfield failed a drug test and announced he'd be suspended. Mayfield denied any accusations of doing drugs, as you would expect, and demanded that NASCAR lift his ban. NASCAR said "no", they can do that because one family owns NASCAR, it's not like the Premier League, the NFL, or The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques League Cup, well, it's a little like that one. Of course upon hearing that NASCAR denied his request, Mayfield sued them. He went out and got Charlotte's biggest (literally and figuratively) lawyer, Bill Diehl (random fact: Bill Diehl's wife was my third grade teacher, and a good one at that - six degrees of NASCAR, bitches) to represent him in court. NASCAR countersued and everything went crazy. Eventually Diehl found a way to get Jeremy's ban lifted by the courts, NASCAR was pissed. Mayfield was allowed to show up at Daytona, NASCAR even had guys at the gate waiting on him, no word on whether or not they also had a truck load of wild Pit Bulls. Mayfield didn't bring his #41 car to the track.
Mayfield also no-showed the following week (at "Chicago") and rumors began to circle as to why, some accused him of doing meth again. On July 15th NASCAR announced that Mayfield had failed a drug test, again for meth, on July 6th and had a sworn statement from his stepmother saying she'd seen him snort meth at least "thirty times" in a seven-year period. Mayfield blew his top. He said of his stepmother "She's pretty much a whore" and said that she "shot and killed (his) dad". He also said she's always trying to get money out of him, that she's a golddigger, and a trashy bitch, rumor has it he dropped the C-bomb on her too. She sure sounds like a class act. But, if she saw him doing it "at a race shop in Mooresville (Mooresville is a giant race shop, basically)", why didn't anyone else in the race shop see it. Okay, he may have been alone with her at that time, I'll concede that, but why didn't she alert NASCAR to the problem knowing that a tweaked-out driver was putting at least fourty-two other lives at risk every week?
Mayfield also said of Brian France: “Brian France out there talking about effective drug policy, it’s kind of like Al Capone talking about effective law enforcement. And that’s the way I feel about it. The pot shouldn’t be calling the kettle black, you know what I’m saying? And I think the world needs to hear that, too.” Which I thought was hilarious.
That was it, that was Jeremy's story, or at least that was Jeremy's version of the story. A couple of days later I got the truth from Tommy, you always got the truth from Tommy, it was one of his major weaknesses. He never lied, he never took drugs, and he never cheated on anyone...wait, that never happened.
Anyway, back on topic. Mayfield says he's going to fight NASCAR with everything he's got, and he will. One thing that has to be said for Jeremy Mayfield is that he doesn't know when to quit, he doesn't know how to give up. He never has, he never will. If he's lying then he's really playing with fire, but if he's telling the truth NASCAR could end up in a world of hurt. WADA has already said their drug testing policies are garbage and NASCAR still refuses to adhear to WADA guidelines, probably because WADA is European. Because of NASCAR's hardheadedness on this issue there's still a chance that the judge will rule against them, having expressed disfavor with NASCAR's testing methods in the past. Jeremy also says that he has passed several independent lab tests since May, if he's telling the truth, Brian France has some 'splainin' to do. Okay, enough channeling Tom Coburn.
Somewhat on topic, but meth is/was considered a WMD in parts of North Carolina. Really.
But remember, when you say the name of the make that wins the championship in 2011: it's Hyundai (Hun-Day), like "Sunday".
That said, this evil little peace loving librul needs his sleep.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
¡Hola, Mun2!
Since my OleOle blog post isn't showing up....
Well, maybe I should say "Hi there, Mun2!", considering that Mun2 usually broadcasts in English.
(Note to self: Watch the Chicas project)
Why am I writing about Mun2? Well, if you're asking that than you obviously aren't aware of the situation concerning the Mexico v United States World Cup Qualifying match on August 12th.
Usually US National Team matches are broadcast on ESPN2 (or sometimes they feel generous and put them on ESPN), at the very least ESPN Classic. But that isn't the case for this match, and that isn't the fault of ESPN actually. Since Mexico is the home team the Federación Mexicana de Fútbol Asociación (or FEMEXFUT, which is equally a mouthful) controls who owns the rights to broadcast the match and they have a deal with NBC Universal through Telemundo for both rights -- Spanish AND English. This is where it get interesting.
Supposedly NBC outbid Disney (ABC & ESPN) for the World Cup but the USSF had a word with FIFA about how ESPN supports MLS and therefore deserves the rights to the World Cup more than NBC. Needless to say, NBC wasn't, and isn't, happy about this. The rumor is that ESPN approached NBC about buying the English rights so they could show the match, which is expected to be in high demand given the ferocity of the rivalry and the Americans recent Confederations Cup success, NBC said "How about naw?", or something like that.
So, instead of the match being broadcast in English on ESPN it will be broadcast in English on Mun2, Telemundo's baby sister, and I do mean "baby" - Mun2 is in 30 million US homes. Telemundo has yet to decide who will call the match for Mun2.
This has caused a fair bit of controversy in American soccer circles, obviously. Hardly anyone gets Mun2 (though many get Telemundo, who will broadcast the Spanish feed). There's even a petition (linked) to get the match moved to one of NBC's seven-gazillion other networks, namely the USA Network.
People have a right to be angry, but you can't exactly fault NBC. If the World Cup rumors are true they really got screwed. Plus they obviously want people to be more aware of Mun2's existence, it doesn't seem like a bad channel to be honest. It's kind of like MTV.
If you've gotten this far, I love you. Mun2 is on Dish Network 838 and DirecTV 410, I believe the latter requires a subscription to a Spanish language package.
In other news, the doctor says I have bronchitis. Ick.
Well, maybe I should say "Hi there, Mun2!", considering that Mun2 usually broadcasts in English.
(Note to self: Watch the Chicas project)
Why am I writing about Mun2? Well, if you're asking that than you obviously aren't aware of the situation concerning the Mexico v United States World Cup Qualifying match on August 12th.
Usually US National Team matches are broadcast on ESPN2 (or sometimes they feel generous and put them on ESPN), at the very least ESPN Classic. But that isn't the case for this match, and that isn't the fault of ESPN actually. Since Mexico is the home team the Federación Mexicana de Fútbol Asociación (or FEMEXFUT, which is equally a mouthful) controls who owns the rights to broadcast the match and they have a deal with NBC Universal through Telemundo for both rights -- Spanish AND English. This is where it get interesting.
Supposedly NBC outbid Disney (ABC & ESPN) for the World Cup but the USSF had a word with FIFA about how ESPN supports MLS and therefore deserves the rights to the World Cup more than NBC. Needless to say, NBC wasn't, and isn't, happy about this. The rumor is that ESPN approached NBC about buying the English rights so they could show the match, which is expected to be in high demand given the ferocity of the rivalry and the Americans recent Confederations Cup success, NBC said "How about naw?", or something like that.
So, instead of the match being broadcast in English on ESPN it will be broadcast in English on Mun2, Telemundo's baby sister, and I do mean "baby" - Mun2 is in 30 million US homes. Telemundo has yet to decide who will call the match for Mun2.
This has caused a fair bit of controversy in American soccer circles, obviously. Hardly anyone gets Mun2 (though many get Telemundo, who will broadcast the Spanish feed). There's even a petition (linked) to get the match moved to one of NBC's seven-gazillion other networks, namely the USA Network.
People have a right to be angry, but you can't exactly fault NBC. If the World Cup rumors are true they really got screwed. Plus they obviously want people to be more aware of Mun2's existence, it doesn't seem like a bad channel to be honest. It's kind of like MTV.
If you've gotten this far, I love you. Mun2 is on Dish Network 838 and DirecTV 410, I believe the latter requires a subscription to a Spanish language package.
In other news, the doctor says I have bronchitis. Ick.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Rep. Paul Broun is a horse's ass.
One that's just had a large, grotesque bowel movement at that. A horrible little disgusting excuse for a human being.
On July 10th Rep. Broun (R-Ga. 10) said that Britons and Canadians "obviously don't have the appreciation for life that we (Americans) do", and that public healthcare would "kill people", a lot of people.
Nice.
We're not allowed to say Americans kill themselves at a rate much higher that Britons, because that would make him look stupid. So I won't. Oops.
Suicide is a horrible thing and I feel terrible using it to make a point.
My point is not that Americans commonly off themselves, it's that you should think before you open your mouth. It is amazing to me that some people, people in Congress, can say things that are so outrageous without even thinking about it.
I do believe that we need healthcare reform, badly. I'm uninsurable and lower middle class. In America's unspoken caste system, I'm an untouchable. If I could get insurance, I would have it. I know, I know. "They don't have to take a chance on you", and you're right, they don't. Nevermind that I passed my last physical (and paid in cash for it) and all I want to do is be able to see a GP from time to time. That's okay.
I guess it's also okay that 15.3% of the US GDP is spent on a broken healthcare system while Japan spends 8% of it's GDP on a fabulous one? I mean, you can call Britain, Canada, France, and even Germany (though you can opt out of Germany's system) "Marxist" (Groucho or Karl?) but Japan is more capitalist than we are, much more even. Go ahead, call them Marxist. Or little libertarian Switzerland, say it about them.
You can be against it, that's fine. But you'd better have a good reason, and you'd better not support any wasteful spending. If you really supported a free market, the following things would be private: The Military, tap water, the Police, fire & rescue, parks, and roads.
Couldn't you just see the Marines all decked out in NASCAR-esque suits to cover the bills? Yea, didn't think so.
On July 10th Rep. Broun (R-Ga. 10) said that Britons and Canadians "obviously don't have the appreciation for life that we (Americans) do", and that public healthcare would "kill people", a lot of people.
Nice.
We're not allowed to say Americans kill themselves at a rate much higher that Britons, because that would make him look stupid. So I won't. Oops.
Suicide is a horrible thing and I feel terrible using it to make a point.
My point is not that Americans commonly off themselves, it's that you should think before you open your mouth. It is amazing to me that some people, people in Congress, can say things that are so outrageous without even thinking about it.
I do believe that we need healthcare reform, badly. I'm uninsurable and lower middle class. In America's unspoken caste system, I'm an untouchable. If I could get insurance, I would have it. I know, I know. "They don't have to take a chance on you", and you're right, they don't. Nevermind that I passed my last physical (and paid in cash for it) and all I want to do is be able to see a GP from time to time. That's okay.
I guess it's also okay that 15.3% of the US GDP is spent on a broken healthcare system while Japan spends 8% of it's GDP on a fabulous one? I mean, you can call Britain, Canada, France, and even Germany (though you can opt out of Germany's system) "Marxist" (Groucho or Karl?) but Japan is more capitalist than we are, much more even. Go ahead, call them Marxist. Or little libertarian Switzerland, say it about them.
You can be against it, that's fine. But you'd better have a good reason, and you'd better not support any wasteful spending. If you really supported a free market, the following things would be private: The Military, tap water, the Police, fire & rescue, parks, and roads.
Couldn't you just see the Marines all decked out in NASCAR-esque suits to cover the bills? Yea, didn't think so.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Did Palin crap the bed too?
If the rumors are to believed, she did, big time. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt and say it's a hollow rumor, but if she did...
At this rate the Republican primary in 2012 will consist of Mitt Romney, Ron Paul (if he's around), and hilariously Pat McCrory. I know, I'm stretching it, but at the rate they're dropping due to scandals it might not sound so crazy next year. He actually appeals to both sides and is a Republican who, *gasp*, doesn't drone on about his religion. That's probably because he has an actual platform though. On second thought, don't run him, he may actually make sense as oppose to those train wrecks the Republicans keep trotting out.
Oh well, looks like we won't have Sarah to kick around anymore. But these people probably still out there somewhere.
At this rate the Republican primary in 2012 will consist of Mitt Romney, Ron Paul (if he's around), and hilariously Pat McCrory. I know, I'm stretching it, but at the rate they're dropping due to scandals it might not sound so crazy next year. He actually appeals to both sides and is a Republican who, *gasp*, doesn't drone on about his religion. That's probably because he has an actual platform though. On second thought, don't run him, he may actually make sense as oppose to those train wrecks the Republicans keep trotting out.
Oh well, looks like we won't have Sarah to kick around anymore. But these people probably still out there somewhere.
Would someone please shut that loud one up? Good lord.
But I do have to say, as an architecture snob, the Menard Sports Center is a ghastly little hole of an arena. They went over budget on that? Wow. I guess I can't really talk about projects going over budget, being from Charlotte and all, but at least our over budget stuff is usually neat.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
From Africa, To Africa
I bought some coffee from Starbucks today. It's called "From Africa, To Africa" and as the name implies it's an African coffee and revenue from the product goes back to African farmers. That's nice.
Jane told me about it and she was really excited about it - she doesn't tout it much, but she actually really cares about helping people, she's a lovely person - so I bought it. It's actually quite good, though I'm not a huge coffee drinker because I have a delicate stomach.
The whole (red) line finds itself on the end of a lot of criticism, a lot. I'll admit that I seem like I'd be in that camp, but I'm not. We live in a consumer based society and at the moment there isn't much we can do about it on a grand scale. Companies aren't required to give any profits to anyone other than the shareholders of that company, and many of them simply don't. Thanks to NAFTA and it's ilk, companies aren't required to practice fair trade, and many of them simply don't. Thanks to deregulation the food industry isn't required to use products not tainted by growth hormones, and many of them simply don't. Starbucks does. See here: charities (ones they don't tout, they just do), fair trade, unmodified milk. Yeah, they actually do what they claim to do. Do you? Yes, that's a general rule, if you're going to call someone on it, you better damn well do it yourself.
Could Starbucks do better? God yes. Everyone could, and unless you live in a mud brick house, grow your own food, and use the sun as your only source of light, so could you. We could all do better, but most of us don't even try, Starbucks does and they deserve credit for that. Remember, this is a company that isn't exactly doing well either, so it's not like they have money to spend on this type of thing.
I'm not saying don't pressure them, by all means, write them letters and ask them to be more Green. Please do. For instance, they could put solar panels on some of their roofs, that'd be a nice start. I'm not on Starbucks' side, but calling them out for actually doing stuff is a bit crass. Who cares if they market it, they actually did it and that's what matters.
Starbucks isn't the enemy. They do some less than desirable things, yes, but they also do a lot more good than many other companies. You want a company that destroys lives, jobs, health, and the environment? Look no further than Monsanto. Want to make a difference? Stop them, not Starbucks. Starbucks doesn't have the blood of an entire town on their hands, Monsanto does: meet Anniston, Alabama. There's also the whole Agent Orange and the blood of an entire nation thing as well.
I also have to say, the (red) campaign is to raise awareness of AIDS in Africa. Believe it or not, many Americans simply aren't aware of the scope of the problem. You can blame this on a number of things, mainly the public schools and their infatuation with test scores while ignoring issues of worldly concern. There's another thing you can rail on. It needs to be advertised, that's how you get people's attention in America. When they went on Oprah and talked about (red), that was a big moment, that got people's attention. The companies involved made that moment happen.
I'm not arguing against traditional charity, that's a wonderful, wonderful thing. If you do it. But if you don't do it, don't you dare mention it.
Jane told me about it and she was really excited about it - she doesn't tout it much, but she actually really cares about helping people, she's a lovely person - so I bought it. It's actually quite good, though I'm not a huge coffee drinker because I have a delicate stomach.
The whole (red) line finds itself on the end of a lot of criticism, a lot. I'll admit that I seem like I'd be in that camp, but I'm not. We live in a consumer based society and at the moment there isn't much we can do about it on a grand scale. Companies aren't required to give any profits to anyone other than the shareholders of that company, and many of them simply don't. Thanks to NAFTA and it's ilk, companies aren't required to practice fair trade, and many of them simply don't. Thanks to deregulation the food industry isn't required to use products not tainted by growth hormones, and many of them simply don't. Starbucks does. See here: charities (ones they don't tout, they just do), fair trade, unmodified milk. Yeah, they actually do what they claim to do. Do you? Yes, that's a general rule, if you're going to call someone on it, you better damn well do it yourself.
Could Starbucks do better? God yes. Everyone could, and unless you live in a mud brick house, grow your own food, and use the sun as your only source of light, so could you. We could all do better, but most of us don't even try, Starbucks does and they deserve credit for that. Remember, this is a company that isn't exactly doing well either, so it's not like they have money to spend on this type of thing.
I'm not saying don't pressure them, by all means, write them letters and ask them to be more Green. Please do. For instance, they could put solar panels on some of their roofs, that'd be a nice start. I'm not on Starbucks' side, but calling them out for actually doing stuff is a bit crass. Who cares if they market it, they actually did it and that's what matters.
Starbucks isn't the enemy. They do some less than desirable things, yes, but they also do a lot more good than many other companies. You want a company that destroys lives, jobs, health, and the environment? Look no further than Monsanto. Want to make a difference? Stop them, not Starbucks. Starbucks doesn't have the blood of an entire town on their hands, Monsanto does: meet Anniston, Alabama. There's also the whole Agent Orange and the blood of an entire nation thing as well.
I also have to say, the (red) campaign is to raise awareness of AIDS in Africa. Believe it or not, many Americans simply aren't aware of the scope of the problem. You can blame this on a number of things, mainly the public schools and their infatuation with test scores while ignoring issues of worldly concern. There's another thing you can rail on. It needs to be advertised, that's how you get people's attention in America. When they went on Oprah and talked about (red), that was a big moment, that got people's attention. The companies involved made that moment happen.
I'm not arguing against traditional charity, that's a wonderful, wonderful thing. If you do it. But if you don't do it, don't you dare mention it.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
John Edwards made a sex tape?!
Allegedly. I don't want him suing me. According a former Edwards aide, Edwards made a sex tape with Rielle Hunter. Yes, if that's true, John Edwards made a sex tape.
Why are the people of the Carolinas, who are generally very decent human beings, cursed with this douchebag politicians? The list goes on-and-on (Jesse, Strom...) but recently John Edwards and Mark Sanford have broken off from the rest and formed a sort of Douchebag Premier League (note to self: less soccer analogies). I mean, I'm not the biggest fan of Pat McCrory (though I begrudgingly voted for him, I was really voting against Bev), but compared to these two he's Mandela! This has made me thankful that we have McCrory. I disagree with him a great deal of the time, but he calls it how he sees it. He never broke out the "good Christian man" card like Sanford, and never touted a fake issue like Edwards. That said, North Carolina will regret not picking Munger.
I liked John Edwards, I really did. I thought he was the real deal, I believed in him. I genuinely thought that he was going to make some good changes. He was strong on the issue of poverty and that really resonated with me. I admire Elizabeth greatly, she has faced down unbelievable demons in recent years and handled them brilliantly. Elizabeth deserves respect, John deserves to get slapped in the face and kicked in the balls. He had smart, passionate people behind him and he ruined it. We honestly thought that we had someone very special, and we thought very wrong. I've gone from voting for him to despising him. He is a slimey, untrustworthy snake of a man and a blight on the State of North Carolina's name. I'm glad you lost to Obama, John, I am. Obama is everything you aren't.
Jenny Sanford and Elizabeth Edwards need to have a chat and kick their worthless husbands to the curb.
Most of us bash Bev, she presents an easy target, but let's give the woman a little credit, she's a far cry from the likes of Edwards, Sanford, or Easley. A far cry.
Why are the people of the Carolinas, who are generally very decent human beings, cursed with this douchebag politicians? The list goes on-and-on (Jesse, Strom...) but recently John Edwards and Mark Sanford have broken off from the rest and formed a sort of Douchebag Premier League (note to self: less soccer analogies). I mean, I'm not the biggest fan of Pat McCrory (though I begrudgingly voted for him, I was really voting against Bev), but compared to these two he's Mandela! This has made me thankful that we have McCrory. I disagree with him a great deal of the time, but he calls it how he sees it. He never broke out the "good Christian man" card like Sanford, and never touted a fake issue like Edwards. That said, North Carolina will regret not picking Munger.
I liked John Edwards, I really did. I thought he was the real deal, I believed in him. I genuinely thought that he was going to make some good changes. He was strong on the issue of poverty and that really resonated with me. I admire Elizabeth greatly, she has faced down unbelievable demons in recent years and handled them brilliantly. Elizabeth deserves respect, John deserves to get slapped in the face and kicked in the balls. He had smart, passionate people behind him and he ruined it. We honestly thought that we had someone very special, and we thought very wrong. I've gone from voting for him to despising him. He is a slimey, untrustworthy snake of a man and a blight on the State of North Carolina's name. I'm glad you lost to Obama, John, I am. Obama is everything you aren't.
Jenny Sanford and Elizabeth Edwards need to have a chat and kick their worthless husbands to the curb.
Most of us bash Bev, she presents an easy target, but let's give the woman a little credit, she's a far cry from the likes of Edwards, Sanford, or Easley. A far cry.
Monday, June 29, 2009
USA v Brazil, the media, and ESPN v Univision
I write about soccer in another blog, but I don't do it much here. You can see my thoughts on the on field happenings of the FIFA Confederations Cup final there. I'm extremely proud of our players, but puzzled by our manager's tactics. It was a heartbreaking loss.
Being in a final, even a Confederations Cup final, is a big deal, and as such it has brought a lot of attention to the national team both positive and negative. International sports outside of the Olympics are often met with derision by the American mainstream media for some reason (though the general American populace seems to enjoy them greatly), I don't know why. One writer once said he thought that the US should pull out of the Olympics and just have an American Olympics (sidenote: We already have something similar, that took 30 seconds of research) because "we always win anyway", apparently China didn't get the memo. That struck me as xenophobic. He's a rather well known writer, he's even featured on television for some reason. I guess because controversy creates cash and if you yell out the most outrageous things someone will argue with you. By now I've learned to ignore the detractors.
There has been positive attention as well, and that's been very nice. If that was your first non-World Cup soccer experience, the national team plays several matches every year, often all through out the country, if you're interested you'd be more than welcome at any of them. The Gold Cup starts on July 3rd, click the link and you can see if any matches are near you. The Gold Cup is our regional championship, think of it as a World Cup with only North American teams (CONCACAF is North America, Central America and the Caribbean including Suriname, Guyana, and French Guiana). It's fun and you may meet some good people at the same time.
I have to say though, ESPN has disappointed me again. I speak very little Spanish but I often find myself watching the Univision feed for matches. ESPN's feed often seems to lack the passion associated with the sport and I guess that rubs me the wrong way. Yes, the GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL can be over-the-top at times but if you watch the entire feed you can honestly see how passionate the commentary team on Univision is. I know there's a massive controversy over English and Spanish in the United States but Univision (Miami, FL-based) is as American as ESPN (Bristol, CT-based) and seemed more proud of that fact during the Confederations Cup. I'm thankful ESPN showed the competition (but if they hadn't, FSC would've and Max Bretos is very passionate about the game and the US team) but I wish they'd try a little harder, it'd be nice.
Now my stomach hurts, I shouldn't eat red meat. I must turn in, again.
Being in a final, even a Confederations Cup final, is a big deal, and as such it has brought a lot of attention to the national team both positive and negative. International sports outside of the Olympics are often met with derision by the American mainstream media for some reason (though the general American populace seems to enjoy them greatly), I don't know why. One writer once said he thought that the US should pull out of the Olympics and just have an American Olympics (sidenote: We already have something similar, that took 30 seconds of research) because "we always win anyway", apparently China didn't get the memo. That struck me as xenophobic. He's a rather well known writer, he's even featured on television for some reason. I guess because controversy creates cash and if you yell out the most outrageous things someone will argue with you. By now I've learned to ignore the detractors.
There has been positive attention as well, and that's been very nice. If that was your first non-World Cup soccer experience, the national team plays several matches every year, often all through out the country, if you're interested you'd be more than welcome at any of them. The Gold Cup starts on July 3rd, click the link and you can see if any matches are near you. The Gold Cup is our regional championship, think of it as a World Cup with only North American teams (CONCACAF is North America, Central America and the Caribbean including Suriname, Guyana, and French Guiana). It's fun and you may meet some good people at the same time.
I have to say though, ESPN has disappointed me again. I speak very little Spanish but I often find myself watching the Univision feed for matches. ESPN's feed often seems to lack the passion associated with the sport and I guess that rubs me the wrong way. Yes, the GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL can be over-the-top at times but if you watch the entire feed you can honestly see how passionate the commentary team on Univision is. I know there's a massive controversy over English and Spanish in the United States but Univision (Miami, FL-based) is as American as ESPN (Bristol, CT-based) and seemed more proud of that fact during the Confederations Cup. I'm thankful ESPN showed the competition (but if they hadn't, FSC would've and Max Bretos is very passionate about the game and the US team) but I wish they'd try a little harder, it'd be nice.
Now my stomach hurts, I shouldn't eat red meat. I must turn in, again.
Friday, June 26, 2009
North and South Carolina should probably look at legalizing marijuana
Another person has been arrested for growing marijuana in the Carolinas. This time it's a dentist, a highly educated doctor who may well see jail time for this. North Carolina's already overstretched prison infrastructure will get yet another inmate who hasn't harmed anyone or anything, and North Carolina's overstretched medical infrastructure will lose yet another professional.
Both Carolinas have always been, and still are, tobacco producing States. Some of us aren't proud of that but we won't bash the farmers for growing it, no one bashes farmers who grow the ingredients for beer and it's harmful, yet it's celebrated as a staple of Americana. With the recent tobacco legislation farmers in the Carolinas are going to take a huge hit, and while ten months ago this may have been a small deal ever since the banking industry (a major Carolina employer) has fallen on it's face our secondary industries are a big deal. North and South Carolina both rank in the top ten of unemployment.
Which brings me back to the issue of marijuana, something which is somewhat of a "hot button" issue due to it's status as a "gateway drug" (don't tell anyone, but so is beer). Many people demonize marijuana as some evil substance sent by the devil or something, despite the fact that it has been shown to be less harmful than alcohol to the human body. In fact, hundreds die from an alcohol overdose ever year, there has never been a recorded marijuana overdose. In fact, alcoholism is the third leading cause of death in America. Marijuana addiction hasn't really caused any. Celebrated. Americana. Among smokers who smoke marijuana exclusively there have been zero (as in, less than one) cases of lung cancer caused by smoking. Alcohol contributes to the destruction of the liver, kidneys, pancreases, and heart. While small amounts of alcohol are touted as being healthy, marijuana's active ingredient actually kills cancer cells. Kills cancer cells.
I don't think alcohol should be illegal, you should have a right to drink if you want to, but for it to be legal and marijuana to be illegal is simply mind-boggling. But how does this effect North and South Carolina you ask? Well, the federal government seems to be asleep at the wheel on this topic. The reason they banned marijuana in the first place was because so many racists were in power at the time and they wanted to arrest Mexicans. Really. North and South Carolina have endless tobacco fields, thus endless space for growing marijuana. Both States, regardless of what Mark Sanford says, need tax revenue badly. Even Bev knows that and she's stupid. Marijuana legalization could provide a lifeline for the farmer who will be hurt by the tobacco legislation and provide the two States with a stream of tax money at the same time it will stop harmless people from clogging up our prison system. This is without mentioning the benefits of legalizing marijuana's sister plant Hemp, which is being studied for many, many uses including ethanol.
Honestly, it's 2009. It's time to move forward.
Both Carolinas have always been, and still are, tobacco producing States. Some of us aren't proud of that but we won't bash the farmers for growing it, no one bashes farmers who grow the ingredients for beer and it's harmful, yet it's celebrated as a staple of Americana. With the recent tobacco legislation farmers in the Carolinas are going to take a huge hit, and while ten months ago this may have been a small deal ever since the banking industry (a major Carolina employer) has fallen on it's face our secondary industries are a big deal. North and South Carolina both rank in the top ten of unemployment.
Which brings me back to the issue of marijuana, something which is somewhat of a "hot button" issue due to it's status as a "gateway drug" (don't tell anyone, but so is beer). Many people demonize marijuana as some evil substance sent by the devil or something, despite the fact that it has been shown to be less harmful than alcohol to the human body. In fact, hundreds die from an alcohol overdose ever year, there has never been a recorded marijuana overdose. In fact, alcoholism is the third leading cause of death in America. Marijuana addiction hasn't really caused any. Celebrated. Americana. Among smokers who smoke marijuana exclusively there have been zero (as in, less than one) cases of lung cancer caused by smoking. Alcohol contributes to the destruction of the liver, kidneys, pancreases, and heart. While small amounts of alcohol are touted as being healthy, marijuana's active ingredient actually kills cancer cells. Kills cancer cells.
I don't think alcohol should be illegal, you should have a right to drink if you want to, but for it to be legal and marijuana to be illegal is simply mind-boggling. But how does this effect North and South Carolina you ask? Well, the federal government seems to be asleep at the wheel on this topic. The reason they banned marijuana in the first place was because so many racists were in power at the time and they wanted to arrest Mexicans. Really. North and South Carolina have endless tobacco fields, thus endless space for growing marijuana. Both States, regardless of what Mark Sanford says, need tax revenue badly. Even Bev knows that and she's stupid. Marijuana legalization could provide a lifeline for the farmer who will be hurt by the tobacco legislation and provide the two States with a stream of tax money at the same time it will stop harmless people from clogging up our prison system. This is without mentioning the benefits of legalizing marijuana's sister plant Hemp, which is being studied for many, many uses including ethanol.
Honestly, it's 2009. It's time to move forward.
On the difference between Mark Sanford and Bill Clinton
"Were you calling for Bill Clinton to step down?! Huh?!"
Why yes, yes I was. Bill Clinton lied to the nation about his affair and that was a terrible thing to do, he lied under oath and he should've stepped down. I agree.
John Edwards is even worse, what he did was vile. But John Edwards was a private citizen when he did it, while that doesn't excuse it, it does disqualify him from discussion.
Yes, you lose certain rights when you become the Governor of a State. You don't become a public official to play golf with powerful people, you do it to shape policy, you become a public servant. A CEO isn't paying you, the people are paying you, you work for them and you answer to them whenever they call your name. This is why "liberals" (The Democratic Party is a moderate party, just FYI. Here's a left-wing party.) are harder on Mr. Sanford than they are on Mr. Edwards.
To find out why they're harder on Mr. Sanford than they are on Mr. Clinton you have to look no further than the platforms of the two candidates. Mr. Sanford is a Christian conservative, who ran on a platform of family values, a platform of Christian morals, and more than once defended "the traditional family unit". Mr. Clinton did not. This is why Mr. Sanford is a hypocritical scoundrel while Mr. Clinton is simply a scoundrel. It's not that hard to understand.
Mr. Sanford along with his fellow Republicans Mark Foley, John Ensign, and Larry Craig ran on a platform of bravado. A platform that proclaimed them as men and their male opponents from other parties as, well, not men. They spoke of defending the "family unit", bringing morality back into the Government and what it meant to be of good moral character. But mostly, being a man! They spoke to Preachers and got the Church goers to vote for them, they spun a record that played well in houses of worship every Sunday and they reaped the rewards of doing that, and then they lied to those people. No "liberal" does this. These four men proved to be of disgraceful moral fiber despite spending entire campaigns questioning that of their opponents, often sacrificing time to speak on real issues in the process. For this, they're being put to the sword, and rightly so. They shouldn't be defended, these men aren't martyrs, they're scoundrels.
There is nothing wrong with running on a platform of morality, that's perfectly fine. We have freedom of speech in this country. If you want to tout your dedication to your faith, do it, please. But you'd better live up to it. And when the crap hits the fan, don't look at the people who didn't profess it in the first place.
Until the Republicans can find a candidate that fits these requirements within their own party I've taken the time to find one who fits them in another party. A self-made man, a dedicated husband, a proud father, a man of strong faith and a man of values. Why don't you stop yelling for a second, and give him a look sometime.
Why yes, yes I was. Bill Clinton lied to the nation about his affair and that was a terrible thing to do, he lied under oath and he should've stepped down. I agree.
John Edwards is even worse, what he did was vile. But John Edwards was a private citizen when he did it, while that doesn't excuse it, it does disqualify him from discussion.
Yes, you lose certain rights when you become the Governor of a State. You don't become a public official to play golf with powerful people, you do it to shape policy, you become a public servant. A CEO isn't paying you, the people are paying you, you work for them and you answer to them whenever they call your name. This is why "liberals" (The Democratic Party is a moderate party, just FYI. Here's a left-wing party.) are harder on Mr. Sanford than they are on Mr. Edwards.
To find out why they're harder on Mr. Sanford than they are on Mr. Clinton you have to look no further than the platforms of the two candidates. Mr. Sanford is a Christian conservative, who ran on a platform of family values, a platform of Christian morals, and more than once defended "the traditional family unit". Mr. Clinton did not. This is why Mr. Sanford is a hypocritical scoundrel while Mr. Clinton is simply a scoundrel. It's not that hard to understand.
Mr. Sanford along with his fellow Republicans Mark Foley, John Ensign, and Larry Craig ran on a platform of bravado. A platform that proclaimed them as men and their male opponents from other parties as, well, not men. They spoke of defending the "family unit", bringing morality back into the Government and what it meant to be of good moral character. But mostly, being a man! They spoke to Preachers and got the Church goers to vote for them, they spun a record that played well in houses of worship every Sunday and they reaped the rewards of doing that, and then they lied to those people. No "liberal" does this. These four men proved to be of disgraceful moral fiber despite spending entire campaigns questioning that of their opponents, often sacrificing time to speak on real issues in the process. For this, they're being put to the sword, and rightly so. They shouldn't be defended, these men aren't martyrs, they're scoundrels.
There is nothing wrong with running on a platform of morality, that's perfectly fine. We have freedom of speech in this country. If you want to tout your dedication to your faith, do it, please. But you'd better live up to it. And when the crap hits the fan, don't look at the people who didn't profess it in the first place.
Until the Republicans can find a candidate that fits these requirements within their own party I've taken the time to find one who fits them in another party. A self-made man, a dedicated husband, a proud father, a man of strong faith and a man of values. Why don't you stop yelling for a second, and give him a look sometime.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
The King of Pop, 1958-2009
Michael Jackson died today, it honestly came out of the blue and I was taken by surprise. It happened on the same day we lost Farrah Fawcett, and the same week we lost Ed McMahon. I'm not big on the cult of celebrity, as you can tell from my post on Perez Hilton and Will.I.Am, but all three of the people we lost this week were enormous talents who deserved and earned all of their fame. Jackson through his music, music which defined a generation, Farrah through her screen work, and McMahon thanks to his prolific resume and down to earth character. It is tragic.
Michael Jackson's "Bad" was the first CD I ever owned, and I still own it. It's an excellent album, in fact Michael rarely put out bad music. The man's career became overshadowed by his eccentric behavior in the 90s and allegations that he had taken advantage of children. He was never proven guilty, many claimed that his status as a mega-star helped him get off the hook, I don't know. I don't think Michael had the heart to harm anyone.
He often spoke of how he never really had a childhood and his fascination with Peter Pan, he famously named his ranch "Neverland", a homage to the fictional universe of Peter Pan. Michael suffered the same torments as many child stars, Dana Plato for example, except Michael suffered them in the spotlight. His career never really fizzled out like many other child stars, an testament to his special talent and brilliant songwriting ability. Despite the millions of dollars, and billions (literally, billions) of fans, you could often feel yourself feeling sorry for Michael, and while some may disagree at times he seemed somewhat of an unwilling celebrity. His reclusive nature attracted the cameras, as there was money in capturing Michael's face on film, but he always seemed as if he wanted to escape from adulthood, like Peter Pan.
Despite being reclusive Jackson did love his fans. He loved them in an odd way, but he never forgot that without his fans he was just another person, something many modern celebrities could learn a lot from.
I hope his legacy is that of a brilliant musician and generous philanthropist, and not that of a strange man. Michael had many problems, but he was also an original. Until his last day he remained one-of-a-kind in a Xerox world.
He is a legend.
Michael Jackson's "Bad" was the first CD I ever owned, and I still own it. It's an excellent album, in fact Michael rarely put out bad music. The man's career became overshadowed by his eccentric behavior in the 90s and allegations that he had taken advantage of children. He was never proven guilty, many claimed that his status as a mega-star helped him get off the hook, I don't know. I don't think Michael had the heart to harm anyone.
He often spoke of how he never really had a childhood and his fascination with Peter Pan, he famously named his ranch "Neverland", a homage to the fictional universe of Peter Pan. Michael suffered the same torments as many child stars, Dana Plato for example, except Michael suffered them in the spotlight. His career never really fizzled out like many other child stars, an testament to his special talent and brilliant songwriting ability. Despite the millions of dollars, and billions (literally, billions) of fans, you could often feel yourself feeling sorry for Michael, and while some may disagree at times he seemed somewhat of an unwilling celebrity. His reclusive nature attracted the cameras, as there was money in capturing Michael's face on film, but he always seemed as if he wanted to escape from adulthood, like Peter Pan.
Despite being reclusive Jackson did love his fans. He loved them in an odd way, but he never forgot that without his fans he was just another person, something many modern celebrities could learn a lot from.
I hope his legacy is that of a brilliant musician and generous philanthropist, and not that of a strange man. Michael had many problems, but he was also an original. Until his last day he remained one-of-a-kind in a Xerox world.
He is a legend.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
So that's where Mark Sanford was, but why are we surprised?
South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford cheated on his wife. Hardcore. He didn't cheat on her in South Carolina, he didn't even pop up to North Carolina for a bit of afternoon delight, no, Mark left the freaking continent.
Sanford, who looks like what would happen if you spliced the DNA of Bert with that of a carrot, went AWOL last week but everyone's suspicions were raised when his wife said she "didn't know where he was" but wasn't the least bit worried. Republicans rushed to defend one of their rising stars - Sanford has been listed as a potential Presidential candidate in 2012 - but even they had to know something was amiss. Some spoke of how Sanford was supposedly out hiking, and "being a man, something lubrals (liberals) wouldn't understand". Well, if being a man means leaving the your wife and four children behind while you desecrate your marriage thousands of miles away, I don't know if that's what I want to be.
Now their defense is that Sanford "made a mistake" and that it's "no worse than what Clinton or Edwards did" (ah, the old Slick Willy chestnut), but they're wrong. They're very wrong. The actions of Bill Clinton and John Edwards were nothing short of despicable, no one is doubting that, but Clinton and Edwards never ran on a platform of family values, Christian morals, and never pushed sexual minorities to the fringes of society with their rhetoric. Sanford has made no secret of his distaste for homosexuals, bisexuals, or even sexually active heterosexuals who may not be married. He is going to get a lot of stick for this incident, and he deserves every bit of it. There is no room to defend this hypocritical lying sack of crap, there isn't.
Soon we will hear them climb atop their towers and cry foul of the "liberal media", the same liberal media that includes The State newspaper, Columbia's daily, which received the erotic emails exchanged between Sanford and his lover as early as last December and elected to withhold them, in essence, protecting a conservative official from public scorn. All the outlets are blocked off, Sanford is impossible to defend. You can't blame this one on Obama, who, I may add, is a dedicated husband and father. He's also a Christian. He is what Sanford claimed to be.
Furthermore Sanford was a harsh critic of Bill Clinton and voted for the President's impeachment following his affair in the 1990s. Sanford actually resorted to name calling, though he was never as bad as Lindsay Graham. Sanford may not have lied under court oath, but he did lie. He lied under religious oath to his wife (you know, something about a Preacher, an alter, a Church, lots of people watching), he lied to his family, he lied to his staff, and he lied to South Carolina. By his own standards, he is unfit for leadership.
No, this isn't a good time to jump on Mark Sanford, that happened a long time ago.
One person in the Observer editorial forum asked if we could send NC Gov. Bev Perdue for a hike and transfer Sanford here, you still want that? Bev might be stupid, but she has nothing on Sanford.
I'm not a Democrat, in fact I'm not very fond of them, but thanks to people like Mark Sanford, John Ensign, Larry Craig, and Mark Foley (all supposedly Christian men who ran on a platform of morals only to prove themselves hypocrites) this country is going to become a one party state with the Democrats in charge.
Well, at least the Democrats try. The SC Libertarian party is probably loving this, and they have every right to be. Every right to be.
Sanford, who looks like what would happen if you spliced the DNA of Bert with that of a carrot, went AWOL last week but everyone's suspicions were raised when his wife said she "didn't know where he was" but wasn't the least bit worried. Republicans rushed to defend one of their rising stars - Sanford has been listed as a potential Presidential candidate in 2012 - but even they had to know something was amiss. Some spoke of how Sanford was supposedly out hiking, and "being a man, something lubrals (liberals) wouldn't understand". Well, if being a man means leaving the your wife and four children behind while you desecrate your marriage thousands of miles away, I don't know if that's what I want to be.
Now their defense is that Sanford "made a mistake" and that it's "no worse than what Clinton or Edwards did" (ah, the old Slick Willy chestnut), but they're wrong. They're very wrong. The actions of Bill Clinton and John Edwards were nothing short of despicable, no one is doubting that, but Clinton and Edwards never ran on a platform of family values, Christian morals, and never pushed sexual minorities to the fringes of society with their rhetoric. Sanford has made no secret of his distaste for homosexuals, bisexuals, or even sexually active heterosexuals who may not be married. He is going to get a lot of stick for this incident, and he deserves every bit of it. There is no room to defend this hypocritical lying sack of crap, there isn't.
Soon we will hear them climb atop their towers and cry foul of the "liberal media", the same liberal media that includes The State newspaper, Columbia's daily, which received the erotic emails exchanged between Sanford and his lover as early as last December and elected to withhold them, in essence, protecting a conservative official from public scorn. All the outlets are blocked off, Sanford is impossible to defend. You can't blame this one on Obama, who, I may add, is a dedicated husband and father. He's also a Christian. He is what Sanford claimed to be.
Furthermore Sanford was a harsh critic of Bill Clinton and voted for the President's impeachment following his affair in the 1990s. Sanford actually resorted to name calling, though he was never as bad as Lindsay Graham. Sanford may not have lied under court oath, but he did lie. He lied under religious oath to his wife (you know, something about a Preacher, an alter, a Church, lots of people watching), he lied to his family, he lied to his staff, and he lied to South Carolina. By his own standards, he is unfit for leadership.
No, this isn't a good time to jump on Mark Sanford, that happened a long time ago.
One person in the Observer editorial forum asked if we could send NC Gov. Bev Perdue for a hike and transfer Sanford here, you still want that? Bev might be stupid, but she has nothing on Sanford.
I'm not a Democrat, in fact I'm not very fond of them, but thanks to people like Mark Sanford, John Ensign, Larry Craig, and Mark Foley (all supposedly Christian men who ran on a platform of morals only to prove themselves hypocrites) this country is going to become a one party state with the Democrats in charge.
Well, at least the Democrats try. The SC Libertarian party is probably loving this, and they have every right to be. Every right to be.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Perez Hilton, Will.I.Am, and the Bonobo
As you surely know by now, professional loud mouth Perez Hilton was punched by a member of Will.I.Am's entourage in Toronto after the MuchMusic video awards, or something. Apperently Will.I.Am's manager hit him.
This has, somehow, become major news in the last day, and it's a shame that it has. It's not news, it just isn't. Neither of these people are important, one is famous for running his mouth, and the other is famous for making trendy music that no one will remember in ten years time, maybe not even him. The way people are acting you'd think Bob Dylan laid out Tom Wolfe with a hurricane kick. Honestly.
Perez probably deserved to be hit, I'm not disputing that, but I will openly question the masculinity of those involved. Do you really need multiple people around to beat up an out-of-shape gay man? Really? I mean, listen to the guy, he's about as tough as a goomba, the proper ones. And really, Perez, calling him a "faggot"? Nice one, hypocrite.
The Khalid Sheikh Mohammed joke was brilliant though, shame most ardent fans of either party will have no earthly idea who that is.
The fact that this is major news during a revolution in one of the world's most important nations, during the worst financial crisis in global history, and the day after a deadly commuter rail crash in our nation's capital has me questioning mankind's fitness for it's position atop the animal kingdom.
You may ask, who will take our place then? (or maybe, who will take r place den?) Dolphins? No, they're overrated. But I love them anyway. Baboons? Possibly. Elephants? That's a good shout, but I can't see it. The most likely answer is the Bonobo. Bonobos do have facial expressions and emotional awareness, which puts them ahead of Mike Jefferies. Kanzi, a 26-year-old male from Des Moines, understands some 3,000 spoken English words, which is more than most celebrity worshipers. Underneath the hairstyles and fancy clothes, we're still apes (I know I am), and Perez Hilton and Will.I.Am are the ones throwing their own crap for attention.
It'll take them awhile, no doubt as they're still progressing, but we should be very aware that we have someone gunning for our spot now, and our strength is not in our depth.
Thanks a million, Perez.
This has, somehow, become major news in the last day, and it's a shame that it has. It's not news, it just isn't. Neither of these people are important, one is famous for running his mouth, and the other is famous for making trendy music that no one will remember in ten years time, maybe not even him. The way people are acting you'd think Bob Dylan laid out Tom Wolfe with a hurricane kick. Honestly.
Perez probably deserved to be hit, I'm not disputing that, but I will openly question the masculinity of those involved. Do you really need multiple people around to beat up an out-of-shape gay man? Really? I mean, listen to the guy, he's about as tough as a goomba, the proper ones. And really, Perez, calling him a "faggot"? Nice one, hypocrite.
The Khalid Sheikh Mohammed joke was brilliant though, shame most ardent fans of either party will have no earthly idea who that is.
The fact that this is major news during a revolution in one of the world's most important nations, during the worst financial crisis in global history, and the day after a deadly commuter rail crash in our nation's capital has me questioning mankind's fitness for it's position atop the animal kingdom.
You may ask, who will take our place then? (or maybe, who will take r place den?) Dolphins? No, they're overrated. But I love them anyway. Baboons? Possibly. Elephants? That's a good shout, but I can't see it. The most likely answer is the Bonobo. Bonobos do have facial expressions and emotional awareness, which puts them ahead of Mike Jefferies. Kanzi, a 26-year-old male from Des Moines, understands some 3,000 spoken English words, which is more than most celebrity worshipers. Underneath the hairstyles and fancy clothes, we're still apes (I know I am), and Perez Hilton and Will.I.Am are the ones throwing their own crap for attention.
It'll take them awhile, no doubt as they're still progressing, but we should be very aware that we have someone gunning for our spot now, and our strength is not in our depth.
Thanks a million, Perez.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Holy waste of newsprint, Batman!
Excuse me for the canned headline, I actually feel dirty for that. I apologize profusely.
On Saturday the Charlotte Observer did it's credibility no favors when it published a story about a Batman comic that made a mother angry. Really, they actually put it in the print edition. Here's the online version.
I don't blame the mother, Yvette Spivock, as much as I blame the Observer. Seriously, has the editorial staff been under a rock? Charlotte has big problems, world changing events are taking place in Iran and I'm sure something must've happened in Gastonia recently. Honestly, don't cover this crap, it isn't news, it isn't even fluff, it's garbage. Are you going to cover it every time an overzealous parent complains about some crappy show giving Paris Hilton television time? It's a slippery slope, and no, it wasn't a "slow news day".
But really, Mrs. Spivock, I'm not mad at you, but if you were "outraged" by a Batman comic it's time to reevaluate your values. Do you really think comic books should be labeled like cigarettes?
South Charlotte *sigh*. It was nicer when it was just farmland.
Every time a convention comes to town people do this stuff, and the paper covers it! Why, paper, why?!
On Saturday the Charlotte Observer did it's credibility no favors when it published a story about a Batman comic that made a mother angry. Really, they actually put it in the print edition. Here's the online version.
I don't blame the mother, Yvette Spivock, as much as I blame the Observer. Seriously, has the editorial staff been under a rock? Charlotte has big problems, world changing events are taking place in Iran and I'm sure something must've happened in Gastonia recently. Honestly, don't cover this crap, it isn't news, it isn't even fluff, it's garbage. Are you going to cover it every time an overzealous parent complains about some crappy show giving Paris Hilton television time? It's a slippery slope, and no, it wasn't a "slow news day".
But really, Mrs. Spivock, I'm not mad at you, but if you were "outraged" by a Batman comic it's time to reevaluate your values. Do you really think comic books should be labeled like cigarettes?
South Charlotte *sigh*. It was nicer when it was just farmland.
Every time a convention comes to town people do this stuff, and the paper covers it! Why, paper, why?!
Friday, June 19, 2009
"The Hut"
http://consumerist.com/5297272/pizza-hut-tries-to-avoid-blame-for-its-pizza-shortens-name-to-the-hut
You are so going out of business.
It's actually not that surprising when you consider Yum! Brands, parent company of "The Hut", was spun-off from Pepsi for whom 2009 has been a rebranding disaster on more than one occasion.
Edit: They now say it's only a "secondary name". Mmmhmm.
You are so going out of business.
It's actually not that surprising when you consider Yum! Brands, parent company of "The Hut", was spun-off from Pepsi for whom 2009 has been a rebranding disaster on more than one occasion.
Edit: They now say it's only a "secondary name". Mmmhmm.
Monday, June 15, 2009
A hero
The 2009 equivalent of Tank Man. (Photo: TehranLive.org)
Try as they might all of the efforts by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's goons to stop the free flow of information out of Iran have been circumvented by modern technologies and creativity. Despite silencing the venerable BBC by jamming equipment, and destroying NBC's Tehran offices, the government has been unable to prevent people from seeing their tyrannical behavior, which includes beating protesters to the verge of death. Some have even shown their injuries on YouTube and related site.
The Iranian government hasn't stopped at injuring people within it's own borders, it has launched DoS attacks on some ex-patriot news sites such as TehranBureau (twitter account as the site as been attacked), which are critical of the conservative government. Some have offered reformists within Iran a cyber lifeline of sorts in the form of American and European proxy IPs which allow them to freely post updates to sites such as twitter.
In support of the reformists, and in support of freedom, everyone should take the opportunity to wear green. People do it every St. Patrick's Day, many without the slightest clue as to why, just that it's what everyone does. Do it for something important.
Stand with FREE Iran. Protect a free world.
Try as they might all of the efforts by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's goons to stop the free flow of information out of Iran have been circumvented by modern technologies and creativity. Despite silencing the venerable BBC by jamming equipment, and destroying NBC's Tehran offices, the government has been unable to prevent people from seeing their tyrannical behavior, which includes beating protesters to the verge of death. Some have even shown their injuries on YouTube and related site.
The Iranian government hasn't stopped at injuring people within it's own borders, it has launched DoS attacks on some ex-patriot news sites such as TehranBureau (twitter account as the site as been attacked), which are critical of the conservative government. Some have offered reformists within Iran a cyber lifeline of sorts in the form of American and European proxy IPs which allow them to freely post updates to sites such as twitter.
In support of the reformists, and in support of freedom, everyone should take the opportunity to wear green. People do it every St. Patrick's Day, many without the slightest clue as to why, just that it's what everyone does. Do it for something important.
Stand with FREE Iran. Protect a free world.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Do schools kill creativity?
My friend came across this and shared the link. It's from a TED talk featuring Sir Ken Robinson.
As a product of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools I can say that the answer as related to CMS is plainly, yes. For those who don't know, CMS is basically the educational and governmental equivalent of what British Leyland was to the automobile industry. A large, unwieldy, overly bureaucratic, top heavy organization that has lost sight of it's original goal.
CMS, as with most Western educational systems, focuses primarily on mathematics and language (in our case, English), then on science and social studies (though the latter is being forced closer to the fringe), and then, and only if there's time after all the standardized testing, physical education and the arts. In many cases the last two are seeing themselves axed in the name of saving money. Teachers are being fired while the top level officials who ran the ship so shoddily that it began to take on water in the first place keep their six-figure jobs.
According to these people sitting behind their desks in office buildings in Second Ward, Raleigh, and Washington, the education of the youth should be based solely on the student's ability to pass a standardized test. A menial, tedious selection of multi-choice questions answered on a sheet of paper with hundreds of tiny circles on it. This, to them, is education, and the aggregate performance of students on these tests determines how much money is allocated to each school for the following year. Bad performance - for some bizarre reason - equates to less money, and with the focus so heavily on math and language, the arts and physical education bare the brunt of the cuts.
Furthering out the arts and physical education is the somewhat recent idea of "workforce development", basically turning schools into an assembly line of workers for the already established business community. You basically go to school to learn how to become a good, productive worker. This rigid system stifles individual creativity because it's dead-set in the needs of the industrial economy. Yesterday's economy.
I'm not saying that it's all about more focus on the arts and physical education, it isn't. Not everyone's talent is playing the harp or keeping goal. One can be talented and creative with mathematics and languages, but it once again boils down to the standardized, rigid system employed by the higher-ups.
Also, I am not criticizing teachers. I'm a great admirer of teachers, they are among the most selfless people on the planet and often work for a pittance because they have a passion for helping young people. I am criticizing those in the higher positions, some of whom have never been teachers, who believe that test scores determine a person's worth. It's borderline criminal.
In my opinion education needs to be revolutionized to fit the 21st century rather than the 19th century. The world has changed dramatically, but the education system is stuck in the era of the steam engine.
Children should be taught to express themselves, and to learn by doing, rather than placed on an assembly line and have their failures punished in draconian ways.
Nike, of all things, makes sense with this ad:
As a product of Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools I can say that the answer as related to CMS is plainly, yes. For those who don't know, CMS is basically the educational and governmental equivalent of what British Leyland was to the automobile industry. A large, unwieldy, overly bureaucratic, top heavy organization that has lost sight of it's original goal.
CMS, as with most Western educational systems, focuses primarily on mathematics and language (in our case, English), then on science and social studies (though the latter is being forced closer to the fringe), and then, and only if there's time after all the standardized testing, physical education and the arts. In many cases the last two are seeing themselves axed in the name of saving money. Teachers are being fired while the top level officials who ran the ship so shoddily that it began to take on water in the first place keep their six-figure jobs.
According to these people sitting behind their desks in office buildings in Second Ward, Raleigh, and Washington, the education of the youth should be based solely on the student's ability to pass a standardized test. A menial, tedious selection of multi-choice questions answered on a sheet of paper with hundreds of tiny circles on it. This, to them, is education, and the aggregate performance of students on these tests determines how much money is allocated to each school for the following year. Bad performance - for some bizarre reason - equates to less money, and with the focus so heavily on math and language, the arts and physical education bare the brunt of the cuts.
Furthering out the arts and physical education is the somewhat recent idea of "workforce development", basically turning schools into an assembly line of workers for the already established business community. You basically go to school to learn how to become a good, productive worker. This rigid system stifles individual creativity because it's dead-set in the needs of the industrial economy. Yesterday's economy.
I'm not saying that it's all about more focus on the arts and physical education, it isn't. Not everyone's talent is playing the harp or keeping goal. One can be talented and creative with mathematics and languages, but it once again boils down to the standardized, rigid system employed by the higher-ups.
Also, I am not criticizing teachers. I'm a great admirer of teachers, they are among the most selfless people on the planet and often work for a pittance because they have a passion for helping young people. I am criticizing those in the higher positions, some of whom have never been teachers, who believe that test scores determine a person's worth. It's borderline criminal.
In my opinion education needs to be revolutionized to fit the 21st century rather than the 19th century. The world has changed dramatically, but the education system is stuck in the era of the steam engine.
Children should be taught to express themselves, and to learn by doing, rather than placed on an assembly line and have their failures punished in draconian ways.
Nike, of all things, makes sense with this ad:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
