ENOUGH!!!

I am getting sick and tired of hearing this back and forth about what party makes this country safer and which doesn’t. This debate which has been rekindled because of the attempted bombing on Christmas day is absolutely asinine. For all of you out there attacking the President because you feel his “apologetic” world stance is making us “less safe”; pull your heads OUT of your asses and wake the hell up!

The President had basically played NO part in the major security lapses that allowed this terrorist onto the plane. What allowed it to happen was the security people not doing their jobs AND the lack of intelligence sharing. Neither of these things are controlled by the President on a daily basis and nor should they be. Micromanaging is just as bad as completely ignoring. All of this nonsense about Democrats making the nation less safe and Republicans making it more safe is asinine and helps NO ONE. EVERY single politician cares about having a safe country. EVERYONE! If they did not then they would not have gotten into the offices they now occupy. They may have different ideas of when force (military action) is needed but ALL of them want a safe and peaceful nation. Can we please stop this damn pissing contest over who is more “patriotic” and who isn’t. It helps NO ONE. By bitching back and forth, we are giving our enemies EXACTLY what they want. One of the desired effects of the tactic of terrorism is to not only instill fear into a populace, but also to sow the seeds of paranoia and distrust among that same populace. An opponent who is divided and fighting amongst themselves is a WEAKER opponent than one that is unified in opposition. So by saying one party is “less patriotic” and makes us “less safe” not only makes the person saying it look weak but it also weakens the country as a whole. Look, I know and fully admit, that I will bash people and issues like there is no tomorrow. But I have never and will never, NEVER, accuse a person of being unpatriotic or purposefully trying to destroy this country unless I have proof to the contrary! As the great President Lincoln said so eloquently: “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

If you are going to blame someone then blame the Department of Homeland Security. That entire department was created in 2003 to allow the sharing of intelligence, protecting the borders, and improve responses to disasters (terrorism, natural, etc) and yet as we are beginning to find out, the intelligence sharing STILL has not become a reality. Thousands died in 2001, as well as others before 2001 (ie USS Cole, embassy bombings, etc), because intelligence was not available to ALL agencies involved in ensuring the safety of this country. The FBI, CIA, NSA, military intelligence agencies, etc kept all of their information in house. What has to happen for these people to stop their pointless turf war and put ALL of their information in one central place so that ALL of the other agencies have access to the exact same information? What one agency may deem nothing of importance, may be the key to solving something in another agency. I hope the President brings the hammer down on all these agencies and FORCES them to share ALL of their information with each other ALL the time.


"We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave, to every living heart and hearth-stone, all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature."
-Abraham Lincoln, First inaugural address, March 4, 1861

Pointless new rules

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_airline_attack_regulations

This is seriously one of the most asinine new regulations I have yet to see. You can’t get up, can’t access your carry-on, AND cannot have anything in your lap for the last hour of a flight. How in the hell does this help with “travel security”? Does this mean no bathroom breaks either? So rather than overflowing lavatories we will now have to deal with people in overflowing underwear? Great…

How about we address the REAL security lapse in this case. This guy was on a NO FLY LIST! HELLO!!! Might a better security measure be firing the asses of every person who is supposed to check names with such a list! I guess they are too busy screening all the little old ladies or little kids who have “similar” names to those on no fly lists. Isn’t the whole idea of security screening and no fly lists to PREVENT people like this guy from EVER getting near a plane? Why did NONE of the security personnel find something suspicious about this guy. If you are a customs official wouldn’t you investigate a powdery looking substance in someone’s bag? Just a thought…

This is a perfect example of excessive security. The current procedures in place seem to be doing there job just fine. IF YOU DO YOUR DAMN JOB! I rarely get up in a plane, even on long flights, but these new regulations make me more willing to drive places rather than fly. Not because I feel “less safe” (I feel safer in a plane than any other form of transportation) but because of totally asinine rules such as these, especially when they don’t come close to addressing the actual issue.

Eat greens to go Green? Not so fast my friends

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=1856817&page=1

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=101211795



With the climate summit in Denmark getting underway this week, I wanted to address somethings that I have heard a few times. One concerns our diet, and the other concerns businesses and economy.

I have heard that argument made (mostly from Bill Maher) that we can help fight global warming by simply becoming a vegetarian. This is true and yet false. Yes by eating only greens we would no longer have herds of cows, pigs, etc which means no grazing land is needed and no methane expulsions. But that is as far as the argument goes as far as I am concerned because eating all greens can be just as damaging to the environment**. Sure you no longer need grazing lands but if EVERYONE became a vegetarian then you would have to drastically increase the amount of farm land. Forests are destroyed not only for grazing but also to expand farmland. Now I admit that farms full of growing plants would help reduce CO2 through photosynthesis, however, that is only while those plants are growing. Dirt during the winter does nothing for the level of CO2. A forest full of trees and shrubs is far more beneficial to the environment even during the winter months. Another problem with this idea is that of water. Farms consume a huge amount of water, and in places such as the Western U.S. water is just as valuable as gold. Some animals are much better at living with less water than crops. I don’t think it is our diet that is the problem as much as it is the sheer numbers of us. We are very rapidly approaching (if not over) the carrying capacity of our environment and I think that is as much of a cause to climate change as anything else. If you doubt this, simply look at the few native people in the world who still live as foragers (hunting and gathering plants). They eat meat and greens and yet have an equilibrium with their environment. They don’t reproduce like rabbits and as a result their environment can easily sustain their way of life.

The other argument I have heard is that going green will hurt business and the economy. This argument is simply asinine because the only businesses that going green hurts are the oil companies. That’s it. If going green was so bad to businesses and the economy then how could Denmark drop their carbon footprint by 13% and yet grow their economy by 45% in the same time period? The simple fact is that with energy costs rising due to dwindling sources. It is greatly beneficial to spend more money to switch to green energy NOW because the longer we stay on conventional power sources, the higher the prices will rise. It is simple economic theory, as demand goes up and/or supply drops the cost goes up. The sooner we realize this and the sooner we bite the initial bullet of cost, the better of we all will be.

** I am not anti vegetarian and am impressed with people who can only eat greens I just don’t think its an end all save all diet.

Taxes and Tiger

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13930159

I love how politicians always think that they can have their cake and eat it too. The idea that you vow to not raise, and block, any tax raises is asinine. To completely reject something before you even know what the budget situation will be like is simply bad policy AND politics. Taxes are the biggest way the government raises money and as much as we all hate it, they sometimes have to be raised. I would love to see people who bitch about current rates, and current proposals to raise them, live during the 50s, 60s, and 70s. The tax rates then were far higher than they are now.

Now sure, you can cut budgets and government spending to try and close shortfalls but that can only take you so far. If you cut government programs that greatly benefit society, who is left to pick it up? The private sector won’t because as Sen. Stephenson said they are “hunkering down.” So when education, infrastructure, safety, health, etc get cut the quality we have come to expect drops dramatically. It also is pointless to raise taxes in one area only to reduce them in another. That simply changes taxes by appearance but it won’t help raise revenue because any possible new revenue from the raise gets eaten up by the cut.

I also love how the Senate Republicans plan to meet to decide their positions on the “big issues.” How in the hell can you compromise with people who already have their minds set in stone? I sincerely hope the Senate President won’t be in this meeting because if he is then he might as well take a stance on taxes before he sees any budget numbers too.

I understand that raising taxes doesn’t solve everything but neither do massive cuts in government spending. Especially when the government is the only entity left to spend on certain things because the private sector can’t or won’t fork out the money. If things are so bad that massive cutting is needed then why not tax nonprofit groups? They benefit just as much (if not more) from the government as everyone else does. Even a .5 or 1 percent tax on them would be better than nothing and such a small number won’t completely destroy them.




On a side note, can the world shut up about Tiger Woods? He is human people, just like the rest of us. We are all animals and have basic animal instincts. If we didn’t have a strong urge to have sex and reproduce we wouldn’t be the species we are today (which is debatable on whether that’s good or bad). We are no different than every other species on this planet. We all have basic instincts and basic requirements to live. Evolution doesn’t give a damn about a piece of paper that says “marriage license” on it. Any guy, or girl, who says they have not had sexual urges toward someone other than their spouse, girlfriend, boyfriend, etc is flat out lying. I am not excusing the fact that he cheated, nor am I saying that I have no problem when people do it. All I am saying is that wanting to have sex with as many people as possible is part of not only being human, but of being a living creature. He made his decision and he has to deal with it in his own private life.

Inexcusable!

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/29/bin.laden.2001/index.html

This isn’t “breaking news” but I was on vacation when I heard about it and want to comment about it.

First, this shows that NO ONE has learned from the mistakes of Vietnam. It could have been debated that we had learned earlier, but with this report shows for a fact that we have not. One of the big problems with Vietnam was the fact that high ranking (head of the DoD, heads of intel agencies, etc) officials were too obsessed with the numbers game and were too controlling of the commanders on the ground. Well, that is EXACTLY what this report says the Bush Admin did.

Now I know that hind sight is 20/20 and all that but what seems clear is that at the time, they were seeing with 20/30 vision. Bin Laden has been the SOLE goal of this whole war in Afghanistan and when we could have achieved that goal, Rummy and Cheney decided it was better not to act rather than jeopardize their precious “risk-averse, 'light footprint' model” of war. How much more could they possibly have had their heads up their asses? Did they honestly want him to escape so the war would keep going, or did they simply not have the balls to make the call?

They KNEW he was at Tora Bora, they have evidence that he WAS there before they attacked, so how the hell could they just decide to let him walk out the back fucking door?! Can you imagine what would have happened in WWII if we had left Hitler a wide open escape route into another country or region (Middle East, Asia, etc)? Wars can be, and are, won and lost by a single decision, and I believe that this was our single decision. If Rummy and Franks had given the troops the resources they needed AT THAT MOMENT, this war could have been OVER. Now, because of those dumb asses, not only are we stuck in Afghanistan, but now Pakistan (who just happens to have nuclear weapons) is in a perilous position and we are stuck trying to keep that country from falling.

Now I know I wasn’t in the room when this decision was made, but when you have a chance to nail your ultimate goal and you don’t even TRY, there is something wrong with that. Sure you might have had more casualties than you would like, but IT WOULD BE FAR LESS THAN THE CASUALITIES AFTER EIGHT YEARS OF WAR!

Join the Republican Party: Hard on terror until we get the chance to win then we look the other way until the target escapes.

Terror on Trial

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091118/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_sept11_trial

http://www.cnn.com/US/9801/08/yousef/index.html


For the past few days, debate has been raging on about whether or not Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the “mastermind” of 9/11/01, should be tried in New York City in federal court. Some of the people who oppose it claim that it will make NYC “less safe”, more of a “target”, and that since he isn’t a US Citizens then he doesn’t deserve the right to be tried in a US court.

First off, NYC will be a target tomorrow, it was a target 15 years ago, it will be a target in 20 years, and whether or not a trial is performed there will not change that in the slightest. Also, where were all of these people 10 years ago? The first World Trade Center bomber was not a citizen and yet was tried in federal court in NEW YORK CITY. Was this a problem then? No. Did it make NYC “less safe” and more of a “target”? No. He was tried, convicted, and sentenced to life without so much as a hiccup in the judicial system. So it can be done the same way for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Before Rudy and all these other people bitch moan about something that gets them into the limelight they might decide to do a little research before hand. We wouldn’t want them to make TOTAL asses out of themselves.

That all being said, I believe that he should not be tried in New York, Washington DC, or any other city in the United States. If we truly want to show the world that our justice system works, then we should acknowledge that there is NO WAY an unbiased jury of his peers can be found in any state of this country. If this country wants to set an example then we should say that we have a biased opinion in the matter and as such the world court should be the venue for these trials. The entire point of the World Court is to allow ANYONE of ANY COUNRTY a fair trial when the country in which the crime was committed cannot be unbiased. Now yes, there is a chance that no matter where they are tried, that the case could be dismissed and the perps set free. That is our own damn fault! The leaders of this country know our laws, and the laws of the world, that state precisely what you can and CANNOT do to a person in your custody. Also they know what is and is not admissible in a court of law. They know that if you say….TORTURE SOMEONE, any and all “evidence” obtained by that torture is inadmissible. If a cop kicks the shit out of a murderer to get a confession, he is kicking the shit out of his own case. When you know the rules and don’t obey them then you fully deserve to have the case turn to dust in your own hands. We have laws and if your actions break them then you have to deal with any and all possible consequences of those actions.

Lastly, the perps of 9/11 should NOT be sentenced to death under ANY circumstances! Whether I am for or against the death penalty has nothing to do with this view, but has everything to do with facts. There is a reason why Ramzi Yousef (the first World Trade Center bomber) was sentenced to life in prison and not death, and anyone with half a brain should realize why. If you sentence Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to death you are doing nothing more than giving him EXACTLY what he and his cause want. Martyrdom. If this government and this country cannot realize this simple fact then we truly do not understand our enemy, and that is a very dangerous position from which to wage war.
It is simple to stick to personal principles and the principles of this country when times are good. It is far harder to do that when times get tough.

“…you have to make the choice between what is right and what is easy.”
- J.K. Rowling: Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

Literal Visitor from the Heavans?

Once again my mind has been chewing on religion. This time spurred on by a friend’s recent blog.

History seems to be leaning towards the idea that a man existed in the Middle East 2,000 years ago named Jesus Christ. But what if he was in fact not a man? Not a child of man, nor a “child of god.” What if he was in fact a completely different being that had taken human form to ease communication and reduce fear of its appearance? You can laugh at this idea if you want but I have given the matter serious thought (and I know I’m not the first).

Given the age of humanity, Earth, and the universe itself, the idea of other beings on other worlds is plausible. When you look at how long humans took to evolve, a matter of minutes or seconds to the universe, it is easily possible for other life forms on other planets to have done the same sooner than we did. Thus making them an older and far more advanced species. Is it so hard to believe that, if this is true, an advanced species visited this planet? A species who is/was far beyond the comprehension of ancient civilization. When viewed from this point, the “miracles” performs by J.C. could have been nothing more than technology being used that was impossible for people to understand. What are now considered holy books could be simply stories that were told to try and explain things that could not be explained in any other way.

Take the Aztec Civilization for an example. When the Spanish Conquerors first went to Central America,, the Aztecs believed them to be gods. The Spanish wore strange shining clothes and possessed technology that the Aztecs couldn’t understand how or why it worked. Now as we know the Aztecs were very wrong in this belief and it cost them their civilization, but WHY they thought the way they did cannot be completely faulted. From what they knew of their world and technology, the ONLY way to explain what they were seeing was through their religion. Take any modern medical advance, use and show it to people of the Bronze Age, and I promise you that you would be viewed as a god, miracle worker, or some sort of magician. Just as we would view a being far more advanced than we are, especially if we couldn’t SEE it had a different appearance from us.

So why could this not be an explanation of J.C.? Ancient civilization was brutal and ignorant but also full of beautiful art and advanced technology. What if an advanced species came here, saw what we were capable of (both good and bad), and decided to give us a nudge in a certain direction. Perhaps they had a similar period in their history and wanted to help us avoid the mistakes or tragedies that they themselves had made. Maybe they nearly destroyed their entire species due to war and violence and wanted us to avoid that fate.

Think about it. What people thousands of years ago referred to as the “heavens” was in fact the literal sky above their heads. The stars, planets, etc that they couldn’t touch, explain, or understand but could only simply see with their eyes. What if the “resurrection” was nothing more than that advanced being leaving this planet? The best explorers, scientists, etc know how to reduce or eliminate any sign of their presence. So would it not reason that an advanced species would know how to do the same? Maybe they plan on returning when we have advanced to a certain point. Or are still here observing our growth. Ever hear of the Vorlons that were part of the series Babylon 5?

Sure you can say its an outlandish idea, but reason doesn’t discount the possibility. If people can blindly follow supposedly magical books, then why not take a reasoned explanation seriously? Following a set of beliefs and a book doesn’t necessarily equal comprehension or understanding.

Gotta love politicians

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=8601136

Ok I love how all three Utah Reps voted against the bill and say how much they don’t like it but they don’t say the critical thing. WHAT DO THEY SUGGEST! The ONLY two ideas I have heard out of Republicans that I like are tort reform and allowing people to buy insurance across state lines, but both won’t solve the problem. Tort reform sounds good on the surface, sure, but what will prevent insurance companies from simply pocketing the money they “save”. Nothing! It’s no different than the asinine idea of a “gas tax holiday” during last year’s presidential race. If Representative Chaffetz is “so disappointed” then why didn’t he pull his head out of his ass and introduce a bill that has the same goals as the one the House passed yesterday. I also love how Rep. Bishop and Chaffetz talk about the government “taking control of people’s health care” and yet they claim they fight to protect Medicare. Are they really that dense? They are fighting the public OPTION because government health care is the death of everyone and YET they are fighting FOR GOVERNMENT RUN MEDICARE!? Please! Also, I’m sorry Rep. Chaffetz but if lawmakers don’t understand the bill it’s their own damn fault. What are you paying all of your staffers for? Sit around and suck air? If you don’t know what is in it by now (the ideas have been talked about for MONTHS) then you either dropped the ball or your staffers did. Either way, your lack of attention does not constitute an emergency on our part. Take some damn responsibility for the job you were elected into! As for Rep. Matheson, I say again. Why is spending this much on HELPING PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY, when we are spending far MORE in Afghanistan and Iraq. You can’t have it both ways my friend. Oppose both, accept both, or be willing to raise taxes to pay for both.


http://www.sacbee.com/politics/story/2295363.html

Now I sympathize with the people in Cali who will be affected by this rise in taxes but I would like them to think of the alternative. Most people don’t realize that states CAN NOT have an unbalanced budget. It is a law. It would be far worse for the state government to go bankrupt than it would be to deal with a rise in taxes. Take the current number of unemployed and then add to it people from EVERY state agency, contract, etc. It’s not a pretty picture is it.

Election night thoughts

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/27/health.care/index.html

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Filibuster_Cloture.htm

Just wanted to share a few of my thoughts on this election night of 2009.

From what I have read and seen there is a growing concern over the government deficit, the economy, and jobless numbers. Often the complaints about the growing deficit AND bad jobless numbers are coming from the same group. Well I would like to know which is more important to them: jobs or deficit. Jobs are created by the government and by private industry, but as lay-offs and the unemployment rate attest the private sector isn’t producing enough, if any, new jobs. As a result the government is left to fill in the gap because if it doesn’t then the government AND the economy suffer. In order to create jobs, money MUST be spent. Ergo, the deficit will undoubtedly rise. So would these people rather the government spend nothing and try to reduce the deficit, but as a result unemployment skyrockets, or not? We all know that no jobs means no money to be spent which means a terrible economy. Talking about raising taxes (even on the people who can afford it) is political suicide normally and even more toxic in a recession. We put the government between a rock and a hard place because no matter what it does it pisses someone off, even if those same people benefit from government action.

As for the current state of the health care debate, I have a little to add. First off, I say if Sen. Lieberman (I Rhode Island) wants to try and filibuster the health care bill then Sen. Reid should let him, however, Reid should use his power to limit only one person to filibuster (aka Lieberman) and not the larger group. The leader of the Senate is allowed to make such a requirement when it comes to filibusters. I would love to see Sen. Lieberman speak for hours and hours without a break. Somehow I think the filibuster wouldn’t last very long (the longest was just over 24 hours). Also, I love how people are so anal about the cost of this bill, which saves lives, and yet at the same time they have no problem spending MORE within a matter of months on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. I understand that the idea is to reduce the threats to this country (which may or may not actually be happening) but you are also killing others. Is it really that much easier to spend money on war than it is on something that could drastically improve life in this country?

I don’t think this country, and the world for that matter, can make the next leap forward until we realize that we are ALL human and we are ALL responsible to one another. Until we realize that this person has the EXACT same rights (including the right to medical care without being forced to choose between health and bankruptcy) as a person on the other side of the globe. As an agnostic I think it’s rather sad that I understand this more fully than a lot of people who claim they are devotedly religious. It is self destructing to fight and kill over which book is true or not, what color a person’s skin is, what gender they prefer to bond with, etc. Until we all truly grow up, this world will not change for the better.

Campaign finance

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13603636

Ah my dear Senator Bennet. How you annoy me. let me count the ways! Why is it that everyone, including the people trying to unseat Bennet, refuse to say what is so obvious in the story? Political campaign contributions by corporations, special interests, etc are BRIBES! You can look at any campaign summary for any politician and see a direct link to how he/she does or does not vote. Bennet gets donations from financial institutions, who in turn demand government assistance for THEIR pile of shit when their bets go south, and surprisingly Bennet votes for the bailout. Where I come from that is bribery plain and simple! Mr. Powers and the Shurteff campaign have it half right. You can’t change politics by reelecting the same people over and over, but they miss the bigger point. In order to bring politics and government BACK to the people, politicians have to STOP accepting big campaign donations. Ban gifts, meals, etc and limit donations for EVERY type of donor to $100 or less. Until that happens this problem will never go away on its own, and continue being a self fulfilling prophecy.

Second for the night

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hrNWyEF7txWkMGjOSknmUYRhnZNAD9BANG6G0

Is it any surprise that the people who lose with health care reform are the some of the ones fighting vehemently against it? I mean this latest “industry sponsored study” is a complete joke. How can they, with a straight face, commission a study that miraculously says reform will crank up prices and force the insurance companies to pass those costs onto their policy holders? It is no different than banks, or any other industry, saying that new regulations or new consumer protections will force them to pass costs onto customers.

Since when has an honest living ment making billions off of sick people who may have to decide whether to live or go bankrupt? Doctors do their jobs because they HONESTLY care about helping people. It is one of those fields were you can’t do it simply as a job. The only reason that insurance companies exist is purely out of greed. They are the middle men between doctors and patients and middle men are ONLY concerned with how much money they can milk out of both sides. To these people I say this: if you don’t like people having the fundamental right of health care then get the hell out of the health insurance industry.

To those who aren’t part of the industry but are still paranoid of health care reform that has a government OPTION in it, I repeat my previous statements. Write your Representative and Senator and tell them to abolish Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, and the VA. If it’s such a travesty and abomination then no one should have government health care ESPECIALLY our men and women in the military. Tell those military personnel, and their families, that they now get thrown into the shark tank that is the health insurance industry with the rest of us and if they can’t get covered or can’t afford it then too bad because it’s the best system in the world.

No offense...

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=8297467

I’m sorry but the back-lash from the Mormon Church’s support of Cali’s Proposition 8 is NOT EVEN CLOSE to what blacks went through before the voting rights act. It’s not even on the same plane. To put it simply: if you can’t stand the heat get out of the kitchen. No one barred Mormon’s from voting because of this. No one made them into second class citizens. The Church decided to get involved in a POLITICAL issue and now is whining because of what came of it…please. Welcome to the world of politics people. Not to mention the fact that religion has NO PLACE in politics and determining laws. Religious freedom does not mean that you can force through legislation that supports your beliefs. Religious freedom means that the government can’t force you to be a certain religion or throw you in jail because of your religion. Religions have every right to tell people who FOLLOW their religion how to act and live but they don’t have the right how to dictate that life to others. If ANY religion decides to take a political position (which to me should revoke their nonprofit status) then they need to be ready for the consequences of taking that position. I’m not trying to be an ass. I’m simply saying that when you get involved in politics (especially when in a completely different state) be prepared if people don’t worship the ground under your feet. If you don’t like it then stay mute on ALL politics and laws.

Keith Olbermann on Health Care Reform

Now normally I wouldn't devote an entire blog to only a few sentences but in this case I will. Keith Olbermann from MSNBC did an hour long comment on health care reform. It is emotional, very well done, and should be shown to every person. I give you Keith Olbermann:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33213245/ns/msnbc_tv-countdown_with_keith_olbermann/

Drugs and Unemployment

http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/astvdrugadsincreasesodoconcerns

Why is this story such a huge surprise? Anyone who watches the smallest amount of TV can tell you that drug commercials, more often than not, far out weigh all the other ads. Why are we surprised that prescription drugs are abused when we get bombarded by ads to buy them?

This nation needs to wake up and realize that it's not illegal drugs that are destroying this country. It is in fact the very legal prescription ones. Now if I have an infection, cancer, or some other major issue, sure I will go to my doctor. But some of these drugs "solve" problems that PEOPLE can solve themselves! Rather than shoot up kids with ADD and ADHD drugs, why not just let them be kids. Let them actually PLAY so that they can burn off their energy.

I have ALWAYS wondered why the FCC and FDA have allowed for this mass market advertising of prescription drugs. You can promote all the prescription drugs you want, but legalizing pot (which would be a massive tax influx) can not even be considered in rational discourse. The illegal drug "war" needs to end and the "war" on prescription drug ads needs to begin.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_economy

Another week, another "expert opinion" on where, or where not, the unemployment rate will top off. Can we stop with this bull shit? I understand people ideally want to know when things will happen but sometimes guessing only makes the situation worse. Which is more productive: guessing where the unemployment rate will stop, or trying to put people back to work? The truly sad thing is that the U.S. Congress (to be precise the Senate) is working for the good of the corporations and Wall Street and not for the common man (the people they supposedly were elected to represent). It has been mentioned multiple times that we need a New Deal for this crisis and yet EVERYONE knows that it would die a slow and horrible death once it got into the Senate. It is time this government and this administration MUST take a side! Either chose to do EVERYTHING in their power to put this nation's WORKERS, not investment bankers and corporations, back on their feet OR admit they don't care about middle America and are only concerned about their big money campaign donors!

Hatch Act: Applicable or Antiquated

http://www.osc.gov/hatchact.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatch_Act_of_1939

As a federal employee I am banned from running for a partisan political office (Representative, Senator, etc) because of a piece of legislation called the Hatch Act. Now if I understand correctly the Hatch Act was passed to try and reduce “government corruption” however I feel that it is not only unconstitutional but also antiquated.

In 1947 and 1974 the Act was challenged in the Supreme Court on the basis that it violated the First Amendment. The Court disagreed and upheld the Act. That being said, I still believe that it is unconstitutional. The mistake the other two challenges made was that they challenged the Act based on free speech, but what they should have challenged it on is far earlier in the Constitution. Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 2 states the exact requirements that MUST be met in order for a person to be eligible to be elected as a member of the House of Representatives; Article 1, Section 3, Paragraph 3 states the exact requirements to be a member of the U.S. Senate; and Article 2, Section 1, Paragraph 5 does the same for the President. Since these requirements are spelled out in the Constitution, any change or addition to them MUST be in the form of a Constitutional Amendment and unless the Hatch Act is passed as an amendment it will continue to be unconstitutional.

I also mentioned the Act being antiquated. It was created as a way to reduce government corruption and the “buying” of votes but politicians, interest groups, etc have found ways around it. A comparison of a politician’s voting record and his/her campaign finance report will prove that votes are in effect being bought. Special interests, corporations, etc would not donate hundreds of thousands of dollars to a politician’s campaign unless it got results. It is no coincidence that the NRA pumps tons of money into Republican, pro-gun, campaigns. In this type of environment, the only thing the Hatch Act manages to prevent is a large portion of U.S. citizens from running for office.

What are people thinking?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/28/kill-obama-facebook-poll-_n_302090.html

Seriously, what kind of DUMB ASS pulls a stunt like this?! I mean come on, did he/she honestly think that no one would notice? I would be very interested to see what tv, radio, etc personalities this person follows. If it’s people like Glen Beck, then this is further proof that hate speech DOES in fact get people to act. I’m sorry but as much as Democrats and other liberals hate(d) George W. Bush, they weren’t out there advocating that A) he wasn’t a citizen and therefore not really President, and B) he should be “taken out”. This is seriously getting out of control. People who spread such animosity and hate (calling the President a racist, comparing him to Hitler, etc) should be taken out of their jobs or at the very least be warned that if they don’t shove it they will be fired. This type of talk is down right treasonous! There is absolutely no excuse for it, much less evidence to support it!

I hope that whoever did this is severely punished by the Secret Service. There are some things that you just DO NOT DO and this is precisely one of them. This has gone on long enough and it is time that we as a country stand up and denounce this pervasive hate and animosity that is directed at the President and at government in general. I hate to use the term because I feel it fosters a pissing contest, but this type of poll and thinking are distinctly UNAMERICAN! Honestly people, are we a civilized country and a major beacon in the free world or what? Idiots like this make me wonder…

Cantor grow up!

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/09/23/2078367.aspx

Representative Cantor….can you really be serious? Explain to me, Sir, how you think the health care debate is acting as a “roadblock to Congress” when it is currently only being debated in CERTAIN committees. I would hope that you realize, especially since you are a member of the U.S. Congress, that MOST of the committees in both the House and Senate are debating issues OTHER THAN health care reform. Or are you in fact acknowledging that a middle or high school student knows more about how government functions than a 5 term Republican Congressman? Whether you are simply acting like an idiot, or are indeed one, I have to wonder how in the hell you got voted into office in the first place. If you, SIR, think the health care debate is so asinine and so dominating then why don’t you DO something about it? Go skip back to the committees and subcommittees that you are on and try and make what you are discussing meaningful. Of course in order to do this you would have to ACTUALLY PAY ATTENTION AND NOT PLAY AROUND ON YOUR BLACKBERRY! If it is such a distraction then I’m more than willing to shove it up your ass for you, and at the same time try to pull your head out of it. At the VERY least, please go read a book about how the legislative process works, or if that is too difficult might I suggest you watch the Schoolhouse Rock video of how bills become law.

Ah politicians....

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=148&sid=7895507

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=7997309

I just love when politicians contradict themselves. Even more so when they do it within the same month. First Herbert came out earlier this month stating that he doubts the impacts that humans make on climate change, and suddenly today comes out saying that we should all turn off our engines if we are idling for more than ten minutes to reduce carbon emissions. Umm….Governor I thought you doubted human impact on such things. If humans don’t drastically impact the environment then why are you suddenly promoting a “very liberal” position? Someone make a better campaign donation than your energy donors? This debate is asinine. Anyone can look outside and see that humans DO drastically impact the environment and we ARE changing our climate because of it. What I think a lot of people who argue against climate change don’t understand is that climate is the LONG TERM patterns of weather and as such changes aren’t always noticeable in the short term. Unseasonable rain for a few weeks doesn’t mean that a region’s drought has ended. Also, climate change doesn’t mean that everywhere will be affected in the same ways. A drastic rise (2 or 3 degrees) in temperature in one region can be happening at the same time another region is getting colder or wetter. Climate change is real and at this point it’s a matter of trying to not make it worse. We have the ability to clean up our act so lets do it so we don’t further change the environment for future generations. Just imagine the GLOBAL impact of the “bread-basket of America” getting a lot wetter, hotter, colder, or drier. Even subtle changes can drastically alter crop yields which in turn affects the food supply. What would happen to the world if the Mid-West’s food yield dropped by half or even a quarter. Not a pretty scenario when you consider ALL the consequences. We need to clean up our act NOW, and its time deniers such as Herbert realize this.


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13388802

Why am I not surprised that the majority party would object to a proposal to make redistricting more fair. I am not picking on just the Republicans they just happen to be the majority in this state. Any party who has a majority is against nonpartisan redistricting. Now gerrymandering is technically illegal in this country already but that hasn’t stopped both parties from creating districts where they know their party will almost always win in every state of the union. Now for those who don’t know, gerrymandering is where you draw district lines so that you include voters that benefit your party and try to exclude those who don’t. A very recent example of this happened in Utah’s 2nd Congressional District. Jim Matheson (D), has repeatedly beaten Republican opponents and during the last census, the Republican controlled state legislature redrew the 2nd district to try and increase the number of Republican voters which they hoped would cause Matheson to lose his seat in the next election. Needless to say it hasn’t worked yet but it often does get results. I believe redistricting should be overseen by a nonpartisan group (at both state AND national levels) because gerrymandering has and always will hurt the voter and the legislative process. It allows for polarization in politics to run rampant and reduces the appeal and influence of moderation.

How nice...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090909/ap_on_go_su_co/us_supreme_court_clinton_movie


For all of the corporations that will be able to influence lawmakers EVEN MORE if they over turn campaign finance rules.

This is a serious error on the part of the Supreme Court if they actually decide to overturn rulings that limit what a corporation or union can contribute to a candidates' campaign. I'm sorry but corporations, businesses, unions, etc should never be allowed to contribute to campaign funds. It is no different than lobbying in terms of the returns that these organizations receive for their "donations". Organizations that contribute large sums of money and lobbyists are BOTH guilty of the same thing, BRIBERY! Any politician that says the money they receive for their campaigns, or from lobbyists, are flat out lying when they say it doesn't influence their vote.

In my opinion the laws should be changed. Lobbying should be limited to INDIVIDUALS only, just as it states in the Constitution, and gifts, dinners, etc should be limited to $15 or less. Also, campaign contributions should be limited to INDIVIDUALS only and not to exceed $500. This is about the only way, other than an all out ban, to get big industry, corporate, lobbyist, etc money out of government. If the CEOs, employees, etc of these organizations want to contribute or lobby, then they have to do it within these rules. A corporation should not be treated as an individual and the multi-billion lobbying industry should not be able to buy politicians' votes.

It is time that this country wakes up to the blatant bribery that is going on in all aspects of our politics and band together to stop it! If this country fails, it will be because none of us stood up and demanded a stop to this and allowed corruption to grow exponentially.

On war and Mercenaries

I have been trying to figure out how this country went from being about to win wars in 6 years or less to now taking more than 8 to get the job done.

One reason may be our modern idea of “hedging our bets”. In Korea, WWI, WWII, and earlier wars, the prevailing wisdom seemed to be to hit them with EVERYTHING in the military arsenal. Hit them hard, hit them repeatedly until one side said uncle (basically never us). As history shows, this was extremely effective and got the results we wanted. But now we seem (from Vietnam on) to have a strategy that involved hitting them fast, hope they give up in a dazed state after being “shocked and awed”, but if they don’t give up just wing it while twiddling our thumbs. It’s as if our political and military leaders would rather hope that they can beat our opponent by using a flash-bang grenade, rather than just storm in and kick the shit out of them.

What would the conditions in Afghanistan and Iraq be like now if we had gone in fully mobilized? Or even consider what Afghanistan would be like if we used an invasion force comparable to that of the Iraq invasion. I mean is it at all surprising that Afghanistan has fallen so deep into the shitter when we used an invasion force SMALLER than the one used in Iraq?

The other reason I think is our opponents themselves. In all the wars we have won, both us and our opponents were fighting for something tangible. Our opponents/enemies today, however, are far more obsessed and dangerous. They believe in their religion so blindly that they have no problems fighting to the VERY last man. You could say that the Japanese during WWII were the same but I would argue that they are not even close. In the end the Japanese had enough reason to see the writing on the wall and that surrender was the only way to preserve their country and culture. Whereas the people we fight now have NO reason in their minds. To them the only acceptable outcome is to kill the infidel, or die trying even if it takes every last man, woman, and child to do it. How do you defeat an enemy who refuses to be defeated?

In the end I fear that we will have the same result in Afghanistan as the former Soviet Union. Billions of dollars, thousands of lives, all used in an attempt to “free” and bring reason and democracy to a country who may not even want it. If we do manage to win, I hope this country is willing to accept the fact that if fundamentalists rise to power through DEMOCRATIC vote then we have to ACCEPT that vote.


On a different note:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_AFGHANISTAN_EMBASSY_INVESTIGATION?SITE=UTSAC&SECTION=POLITICS&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_IRAQ_BLACKWATER?SITE=UTSAC&SECTION=POLITICS&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Both of these stories disappoint me, but each in a slightly different way.

The first story about mercenaries (“security contractors”) at the US Embassy in Afghanistan is just ridiculous. I’m sorry but do these dumb asses not understand that since they protect US government property, that they are REPRESENTING the US in the host country! Not to mention the security RISK such actions create! What if the embassy was attack while this idiots were partying like frat boys? Would ANY of them be able to think clearly, much less aim, under heavy fire while shit-faced? I don’t think so…

This just furthers my opinion that mercenaries have absolutely NO BUSINESS being in a war zone, much less employed by the US government. Which brings me to the second story. This contract renewal of “Presidential Airlines”, a subsidiary of Blackwater, is a mistake. This only ENCOURAGES companies like Blackwater. Why should they change how they act if the government continues to pay them? Its insane! Mercenaries are an insult to every single man and woman in the US military. By continuing to hire them, the US government is basically tell them that “you can’t do your job effectively but rather than train more troops we are going to hire civilians instead.” These mercenaries answer to no one, and have PROVEN they are far more of a liability than they are an asset. Not to mention they are FAR more expensive (they make 6 figure salaries which is far more than the average soldier) than our military personnel. These mercenaries are not much more different than the Somali Pirates!

There are only three groups I would trust with my protection in war zones. 1) The US military, 2) the FBI, and 3) the US Secret Service!

Is NASA really full of the best and brightest?

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/366590main_Ares_I_FS.pdf

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/365663main_Ares_V_FS5.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_V

So I am being to wonder if we really have the smartest people at NASA. For the ones who don’t know, the Space Shuttle will be decommissioned next year and “replaced” with the Ares Rockets. The Ares I will be used for crew launches and small payloads, and the Ares V will be for large payloads.

My question is why are they creating two whole new and separate rockets? During the 1960s and 1970s, the Saturn V Rocket did BOTH crew and payload launches. Why is NASA continuing with the Ares program when, with a few technological and other upgrades, they could use the Saturn V? Or why not scrape the Ares 1 and convert the Ares V to carry both crew and cargo? I have a hard time believing that using two separate rockets is more cost effective than the Space Shuttle.

I guess only time will tell with this but I hope that NASA has made the right choice for their sake because if they don’t find a way to be more cost effective I fear they will be the victim of a very big budget cutting axe.

Senator Edward Kennedy

With the passing of Senator Kennedy, politics and the Senate of the United States will never be the same.

Senator Kennedy was a staple of the Senate for four decades. For my entire life he has represented the state of Massachusetts and now that incredible career is over. He impacted the lives of so many and saved countless others with his push for health care reform.

The country has lost a great man and a great leader. Whoever is chosen to fill his Senate seat will have enormous shoes to fill, and I wish him/her luck.

Rest in peace Senator. You will be missed and your impact will never be forgotten.

Torture and the Deficit

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/08/cheney_rejoins.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/04/23/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry4963412.shtml

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/24/cia-probe-is-terrible-politics-for-obama-dem-strategist-says/

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/25/us/politics/25rendition.html?bl&ex=1251259200&en=f907eb5f98d9a753&ei=5087%0A

Ok, DICK, enough is enough. This idea, that has somehow cemented itself into your tiny brain, that torture (or as he calls it “enhanced interrogation”) has made this country safer is absolute lunacy! The recent reports that have come out that you claim have “proved these techniques increase our security” have only made YOUR position more asinine. The “techniques” that were described (the ones not redacted) as being used on prisoners are in a word: disgusting! How in the hell do you justify such bull shit!? What you and your “friends” are too dense and pea-brained to understand is that torture DOES NOT make us safer! It in fact gives everyone out there who hates us, a perfect recruiting tool. Torture doesn’t make us safer you dumb ass, it makes us more of a target! You do realize don’t you, that if we are attacked again the line “it was the previous administration’s fault” slams itself squarely onto YOUR shoulders, and for once it won’t be a baseless statement! Oh but wait, that thought would be WAY too logical to make it even a nanometer into that thick skull of yours, much less make an impact on a pint sized brain. I think instead of fly-fishing for fish, you need to fly-fish your own head out of your ass. But surprisingly you aren’t the only one who has disgusted me this day.

Senator John McCain….how the hell can YOU of all people criticize the decision by the Justice Department and the President to investigate the CIA over these “tactics”? How can you possibly say that you strongly disagreed with the torture approved by the Bush Administration on one hand, and then turn around and call any investigation into it as a “witch hunt”? Are you telling me, Sir, that you would let torturers walk away scot-free? To think that I probably would have voted for you in 2000 if I had been old enough. I like to think that, John McCain would never have put politics ABOVE doing what is right. It would appear that I was grossly mistaken in that thought Senator. Moving on…

I also take issue with these people, such as James Carville, who feel that it is “terrible politics” for the President and Justice Department to investigate these allegations. Who gives a flying fuck if it is “good politics” or “bad politics”? Its not like the President made it a point to have his people dig around for dirt to legitimize an investigation into these torture allegations! The President said himself that he prefers to look forward and not back, but even he can’t deny that this needs to be investigated fully! This report was written in 2004, it wasn’t even written by the current administration! The President may not be thrilled about having to accept the need for the investigation but he seems to realize that, on this subject at least, it is the RIGHT thing to do. The very fact there was torture has already destroyed the prosecution of ANY of these “terror suspects” because anything gained by torture or coercion is INADMISSABLE in ANY court of law. Now I feel I must criticize the President, after praising him.

President Obama, I thought you were smarter than this. To continue the practice of rendition (which I concede was started under former President Clinton) is a gross misstep on your part. The investigation into torture is a step in the right direction, this however is a step back. The very idea of rendition is disturbing. Despite what these countries have said, we have no way to ensure that they won’t torture in these interrogations. Once we send these prisoners into the hands of other countries, we only have as much power there as they give us. Nothing stops them from saying “ok guys we’ll take it from here, now please wait outside.” We are in THEIR territory and if we want to stay there then we have to play by THEIR rules if we want them to continue interrogating our prisoners. Also, why was rendition created in the first place? If we have enough evidence to hold them for questioning, then surely we should have no reason to question them outside of U.S. jurisdiction. Why is it so much better to interrogate someone in a prison in Egypt than it is, on a U.S. military base near where the people we captured? This policy is wrong and has been so from the start and I am truly disappoint that the President has decided to continue it.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125119686015756517.html?mod=rss_com_mostcommentart

Today the CBO and White House, said that the deficit will be far higher than they had predicted. Now I can already guess that everyone is going to have a fit but not offer any solutions to the problem. Therefore, I have some options to offer,

1) Raise taxes. Everyone hates this option and says you can’t do it in this economy. Well, when no one wants to cut government programs because they are popular for one group or another, then what other option is there?

2) Eliminate most, if not all, tax breaks and deductions. This is not technically a tax raise, but it would increase the amount of tax revenue the government receives.

3) Cut services. Cut the budgets of the top 10 government agencies/departments by 30% and cut the remaining 13 by 20% (I just picked those percentages as an example, it could be more or less). This seems just as unlikely as raising taxes. People love their government programs (even the ones who protest our “socialist government”) and all elected officials know that to cut programs that their constituents like is political suicide.

4) Reduce or eliminate the high numbers of contractors hired by the government. I don’t understand why contractors are so popular, they are far more expensive than having civil service employees and I would say are a big reason why costs of government have gone up so much.


http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/2008Performance.pdf

30% CUT
1 Department of Health and Human Services FY 2008 totaled $700 billion
2 Social Security Administration FY 2008 $694.6 billion - graph
3 Department of Defense FY 2008 funding (outlays) totaled $594.5 billion
4 Department of the Treasury FY 2008 totaled $519.1 billion
5 Department of Education FY 2008 $193.9 billion
6 Department of Agriculture FY 2008 $172.7 billion
7 Office of Personnel Management FY 2008 totaled $103.5 billion
8 Department of Veterans Affairs FY 2008 $97.0 billion
9 Department of Transportation FY 2008 $67.0 billion
10 Department of Homeland Security FY 2008 totaled $61.3 billion

20% CUT
11 Department of Labor FY 2008 totaled $59.2 billion
12 Department of Housing and Urban Development FY 2008 $52.3 billion
13 Department of Energy FY 2008 totaled $33.213 billion
14 Department of Justice FY 2008 totals $24.2 billion
15 National Aeronautics and Space Administration FY 2008 totaled $21.3 billion
16 General Services Administration FY 2008 $20.2 billion
17 Department of State FY 2008 $19 billion
18 Department of the Interior FY 2008 totaled $18.571 billion
19 United States Agency for International Development FY 2008 $13.9 billion
20 Department of Commerce FY 2008 is approximately $8.2 billion
21 Environmental Protection Agency FY 2008 totaled $7.472 billion
22 National Science Foundation FY 2008 $6.1 billion
23 Nuclear Regulatory Commission FY 2008 was $926.1 million
24 Small Business Administration FY 2008 totaled $528 million

What my Health Care Reform Bill would include

I know that I have been doing a lot of talking lately about health care, so I decided I would put forth my version of what this reform should look like. I acknowledge that most of these ideas are not my own, but they aren’t necessarily being considered together.

1) Allow for people to buy insurance across state lines. If it is cheaper in one state than it is in another, then people should be allowed to get the most bang for their buck.

2) Tort reform should be built off of what some states, such as Missouri, have already passed

3) Discrimination (monetary and coverage) due to age, health history, current (preexisting) conditions, etc should be banned.

4) The creation of health insurance coops should be encouraged. (I find this one and amusing compromise being considered because coops in their very nature “socialist”)

5) The government should be allowed to negotiate for cheaper drug prices and heavily utilize generic drugs whenever possible

6) Any company. doctor, hospital, etc that is caught defrauding ANY government program or agency, including Medicare and Medicaid, will lose ALL tax breaks and tax deductions for one year. A second offense will result in revocation for five years, a third for ten years, etc.

7) ANYONE making between $25,000 and $150,000 can apply to be covered by both Medicare A AND Medicare B (perhaps having to pay a premium between $25-$100 depending on income)

8) Anyone who makes less than $25,000 can apply for Medicaid

9) Anyone making over $150,000 are ineligible to apply

10) A dramatic increase in government support for preventative health care as well as healthy living

*numbers 7 and 8 would be the “public option”

A step in the right direction

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090824/ts_nm/us_usa_cia_abuse

It would appear that at last the Justice Department is FINALLY doing the job it should have been doing all along. Apparently the Justice Department is seriously looking at reopening investigations about prisoner abuse and torture. This is welcome news although it would have been nice to have come sooner.

The fact that this nation DID torture will remain a stain upon it for years to come, and one of the few steps to stop it from happening again is to prosecute those who did it. Now I know these people were doing what they thought was best for the country but I feel that every last one of them should be punished. From the highest office, down to the lowest ranked person. The excuse "I was only following orders" does not and should not help anyone in these cases. I understand that when an order is given you are expected to carry it out, however, it is also expected that if you KNOW an order is illegal and immoral that you DON'T carry it out. In a normal court case, if a person knows of a crime but allows it to continue and/or helps commit it, then those people are just as guilty as the criminal.

Once again we have to show the world that we mean what we say! If we tell countries its inhumane and immoral to torture, then we have to hold ourselves to the same standard. Investigate and prosecute everyone who was involved, both in planning and execution. I sincerely hope that the Attorney General agrees and that the fullest extent of the law is brought to bear upon ALL of those responsible!

A rare two blog day..

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_RIDGE_TERROR_ALERT?SITE=UTSAC&SECTION=INTERNATIONAL&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT


As if the aura of deception and lies around former President Bush’s Administration wasn’t bad enough already, Tom Ridge comes out with a book.

Supposedly as Director of Homeland Security, he was heavily leaned on to raise the “terror alert level” just before the 2004 Presidential election. This, I feel, merely throws gasoline onto the already blazing fire of illegality that seemed to have plagued the Bush Administration. Not only have we learned that intelligence was “padded” or faked to create a link between Sadam Hussein and Al Qaida, but that government agencies were told to do certain things for ONLY political purposes.

Now Ridge does say that the Department of Homeland Security did not raise the level on this occasion despite the pressure but to me that doesn’t make this any better. In fact it makes me wonder how many times they DID raise it for simply political reasons. That entire election was centered around the idea that if a Democrat got elected to the White House, that the country would be in mortal peril from day one. If there were other times before the election when they were told to raise the threat level and did raise it, they could have very well swung that election.

To be fair, I do thank Tom Ridge, Scott McClellan, and Colin Powell for coming out and saying what they have said about the Bush Administration, however, I also question them. These three all seem to be reasonable, honorable, and righteous men. That being said, I have to wonder why they did not go public about such things while they were IN OFFICE! They were all in positions of power from which they could have drastically altered events. I know that you have to be loyal, especially in politics, to the people have put you into your positions but I also know that at some point you have to say enough is enough. By coming out after the fact, they seem to be saying “yeah there was bad shit going down but my career at the time was more important.” Sure, its easy to fight behind closed doors, but wouldn’t the right thing have been to take it out into the open when the closed door approach wasn’t working? I understand that some disagreements need to stay behind closed doors, but when lies are being weaved the way they were, then you have the RESPONSIBILITY to act! In the business world and in the justice system, anyone who knows wrongs are being, or are going to be, committed but who fail to stop them are often prosecuted along with the actual perpetrators. I admit that standing up to your bosses is not an easy thing, but who ever said that the RIGHT thing was the EASIEST thing.

What were they thinking?!

You know, just when I thought I couldn’t get more disgusted and more concerned about Blackwater and the government, it gets worse.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CIA_SECRET_PROGRAM?SITE=UTSAC&SECTION=POLITICS&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

This story really pisses me off. WHAT THE HELL WERE OUR LEADERS THINKING! What dumb ass goes to a private company and says “Hey can you help us assassinate some of them there terrorists?” I mean seriously what the hell!? I’ve said it before and I will say it again, THIS COMPANY AND ALL THE ONES LIKE IT NEED TO BE TERMINATED! I am not comfortable AT ALL with the idea of a heavily and well armed militia getting government contracts! Hell these guys are probably better armed and have more personnel than some countries have for their armies!


This is another major story and I hope that it paves the way to the elimination of companies like Blackwater. By the way, I hope you all remember the debate a few months ago about the CIA and whether or not it ever deceived Congress:

“Panetta then informed the congressional intelligence committees about the program for the first time the next day.”

Hmmm……now I’m just going to hazard a guess here but if Congress was in the dark about these contracts, then wouldn’t that be the CIA lying to them? If I were the chairman on any of the intelligence committees, I would be demanding a FULL investigation. If the CIA has blatantly lied to Congress about this, then what other skeletons are buried in their closet? Let the “I do no recall that” bull shit begin…

Three things for this day

Ok so this blog is going to jump around because its on three different subjects.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090817/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_protesters_guns

First off, this “trend” of people carrying their firearms to protest President Obama is asinine and frankly down right dangerous! When you have people comparing him to Hitler, calling him “racist”, “socialist”, etc (all of which are in themselves fucked up) at these protests the last thing you want people to have is a LOADED GUN! One guy in Phoenix, where the President was speaking to the VFW National Convention, had a AR-15 (the civilian version of the military’s M-16 Assault Rifle) slung over his shoulder! Seriously, what the hell?! I’m not saying the people with the guns are planning something, but by simply having them near the President, these (I’m sure law-abiding citizens) are creating a huge opportunity for people who AREN’T law-abiding. Do these people not understand that if their weapon was stolen and then used to attack the President, that they would be as guilty of attempted assassination, or assassination, as the person who pulled the trigger? I have no issue with the second amendment but come on people, use your god damn common sense!


http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13135039
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1916656,00.html
http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/pat-advocacy/endoflife/003.html

Secondly, Republicans, and Democrats, need to pull their heads out of their asses and stop this “death panel” nonsense! All of these Senators and Congressmen know what is and is not in the bill, and yet they refuse to flat our say it! It is NO WHERE in the health care bill being discussed, and the only thing that was remotely close was “end of life counseling” which ended up being taken out because of the “death panel” bull shit. By refusing to clearly state this, these people continue to feed this rumor mill that is hurting the debate more than it is helping! To be clear, end of life counseling has nothing to do with killing people! It is simply a plan that you and your doctor talk about, and change whenever the patient wants, that spells out the kind of care you want to receive if/when you can no longer make the decision yourself. It has NOTHING to do with the government telling you what care you can and cannot receive! A “do not resuscitate” order, is an example of what would be part of, and is considered, end of life care. You are telling your loved ones and doctors that in the event your heart stops and/or you stop breathing, to not perform CPR. End of life counseling will HELP families! If a person has laid out all of the care they want to receive before they become incapacitated, it takes A LOT of pressure off of that person’s family It takes away, or at least reduces, the guilt the family could feel for decisions they have to make. What if their loved one didn’t want to be resuscitated, but since there was no documentation the family decided to have that person resuscitated. The family may feel guilty for doing it, and the patient could be upset at them for not honoring his/her wishes. End of life counseling makes tough decisions a little easier, and reduces costs of medical care that wasn’t necessarily wanted by the patient.

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=7582130

The last thing involves the unwillingness of this state it change its liquor laws. This “quota system” for liquor licenses needs to be scraped! It hurts this state’s economic growth by limiting the number of bars and restaurants that can serve alcohol. Now this may not seem like a big deal for people who don’t drink BUT I would bet that some businesses won’t even attempt to come to Utah because of all the hoops they have to jump through to serve alcohol. This system has obviously outlasted its usefulness, and in this time of economic recession this state needs to make itself as enticing as possible. If people are going to drink and drive, the number of places they can drink won’t make one damn bit of difference. The responsibility of reducing drunk drivers rests with the drivers themselves and the places that serve them. End of story! You can have a drunk driving problem, even if you just have one place that serves alcohol, if that establishment refuses to monitor how much a person drinks.

"Good night, and good luck"
-Edward R Murrow

More on Health care

I have a few more points to add to my view on government health care.

First, all of this nonsense about the idea that the government will dictate what procedures a person will and won't be able to receive needs to end. Sure a woman won't be able to get her breasts enlarged to bigger than her head but explain how that is any different than currently private insurance policies. In fact I would bet that most people have policies that won't cover any cosmetic surgery unless it DIRECTLY affects a person's health. If this idea of government dictation is such a concern to people, then why aren't they out trying to destroy private insurance companies?

Also, for those of you who are so against government health care and yet vehemently pro-life, I urge you to think before you speak. By trying to repeal Roe v. Wade, make a constitutional amendment banning abortion, or pushing to allow the states to decide on it on their own is blatantly contrary to your argument. It is extremely hypocritical to argue AGAINST government health care and claim that it will give the government the power to dictate treatment on one hand, and then call for the government to restrict/eliminate a legitimate medical procedure on the other. That is nothing more than RESTRICTING and DICTATING what procedures a woman can or cannot have!

Yes the majority of Americans have health insurance. But what is the harm in sacrificing a little to help those who can't get insurance for various reasons? If this country is such a Christian country, as a lot of people constantly boast, then shouldn't it reason people should be doing unto others as they would have done unto them? How would you feel/react if you lost your job, as well as all of your benefits including health insurance, and then a week later you find yourself in ICU for an extended period (two weeks, a month, etc) but with no way to pay for it? What if it was not only your life but the lives of your family that hinged on choosing to buy food or pay for medical treatment to save your own life? Wouldn't you hope that people around you cared enough to help you out, regardless of whether they knew you personally or not?

Blackwater in the news again...

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=8258915&page=1


Once again we find Blackwater (aka Xe) in the news and NOT in a good way. This reiterates my previous ranting about this company and its roll in our government.

Armed “security” contractors in active war zones are the WORST thing to have ever happened to this nation’s Defense and State Department. They basically answer to no one because, thanks to Former President Bush, they are in a type of limbo in terms of accountability. For example, they don’t have to obey Iraqi laws and they don’t have to answer to the U.S. military so they basically are free to do whatever the hell they want.

This company has enough firepower and manpower to get basically whatever they want and the worst part is that our government is continuing to help them. People are worried about terrorists overseas, and yet if this company wanted they could do far more damage and cause a lot more deaths than the 9/11 hijackers. I’m glad their biggest contracts were cancelled but its not enough. I hope that soon, President Obama will cancel the rest of their contracts.

This company is dangerous and unpredictable and I hope that whoever hears this court case slams the hammer down! These people need to be shut down permanently! If you think I’m over-reacting I again urge you to read the book Blackwater: The Rise of the World’s Most Powerful Mercenary Army by Jeremy Scahill

Healthcare Reform

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html


So I wanted to throw in my two cents about the current healthcare debate.

First off, all of this argument that “socialized medicine will cause this country to go into the shitter” blah blah blah, is getting really annoying, redundant. and somewhat insulting. Canada, United Kingdom, France, etc ALL have government paid healthcare and yet they all seem to being doing just as well, if not better, than we are. According to the Central Intelligence Agency, the U.K., Canada, and France have a LONGER life expectancy than we do in the U.S. In fact, the ENTIRE European Union has a longer life expectancy than what we have. So government run healthcare will be the death of us all and yet people in the U.S. have SHORTER life-spans than people in countries that have it. Now….just to use a little logic on my part, shouldn’t those numbers be reversed if government healthcare is so shitty? Or am I missing something? Sure, countries with government healthcare pay higher tax rates. But are higher taxes really so much worse than paying $150+ PER MONTH for basically the rest of your life (or at least until a certain age at which conveniently you become eligible for *gasp* government paid healthcare)?

Also, if government paid healthcare is SOO bad then why is it we trust the government with the lives and HEALTHCARE of our troops (both active and honorably discharged/retired)? Government healthcare is shitty for everyone, but it’s the greatest thing for our troops? Anyone else confused? Now yes, there are some problems with the system but does anyone HONESTLY believe that our soldiers could get healthcare through a private company. I got denied coverage because of an arthroscopic knee operation (that took place months before I applied), that Altius considered “experimental” or some shit. Are you going to sit there and tell me that if I get denied because of a ROUTINE procedure, that our soldiers are going to be able to easily get healthcare in the private sector? I think not. Plus if they do manage to get a company to cover them, it would be at an insane premium because their jobs are high risk! But even then there is no guarantee that they will be 100% covered! If they have medical issues that cost $100,000 a year and they have to pay 10%, then those soldiers and their families are still stuck with a $10,000 bill. Are we willing to ask them to not only be willing to give their lives in defense of the country but to also go bankrupt due to medical bills? Not me folks!

In addition, lack of at least a government option, severely hurts the economy of this country. One of the biggest reasons that companies ship jobs overseas is because of the fact that healthcare is so expensive for them to pay here. By sending jobs to countries where healthcare is cheap or paid by the government, they save millions of dollars.

So, I have a simple challenge for everyone who is against government healthcare. Write to your government officials and demand that they cut ALL funding for Medicare, Medicade, and tell our soldiers that from now on they will be uninsured until they find a private company that will insure them. If your Senators, Representatives, and President won’t cut that funding, then vote them out of office. For those who see how needed government paid healthcare is, then write to the same government officials and tell them to get their asses in gear and pass healthcare reform!

Just.....wow

http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_12893083

Ok I'm all for freedom of religion but I'm sorry guys this type of practice has gone and continues to go too far. If these people wanted to be LDS, they would have converted while they were living! To convert in this way is, I feel, an insult to the dead. Not to mention, if a person is already dead, isn't it a tad late to change his/her religion? I don't care if they are names provided by families. To me the ONLY time this should be done is if it is expressly stated and legally verified in a person's last will and testament. If I heard about this happening to people of my family, I would be greatly upset. Respect and tolerance for a person's belief DOES NOT END when a person dies.

July 20, 1969

As I look back on it, it seems hard to believe that 40 years ago this nation became the one and only nation to put a man on the moon. It becomes even more impressive when you consider that almost everything had to be invented or perfected in less then 10 years. We have the technology to easily do it today, and yet we can't. With as advanced as the shuttle is, it seems very ironic that in order to get back to the moon, engineers have returned to a launch vehicle similar to the mighty Saturn 5 rocket which sent Apollo 11 to the moon. Even the space suits haven't changed THAT much since 1969.

I also wonder if a President made the same challenge today, as Kennedy did then, would we be able to pull it off just as successfully? They did it in 8 years! That is an incredible achievement. Any "major" change or challenge in today's world, we give a time line of 15 years PLUS. That is a great testament to the people behind the entire space program during the 50s and 60s. It's also an intense slap in the face to our generation. Sure we have greatly advanced society and technology since then, but not our focus, determination, and resolve.

For those who are convinced that it never happened, that it's a "conspiracy", I say you have the right to think it but don't insult the rest of us by talking about it. To say the whole thing was faked is an insult to the memories of every single person who lived and died to put us on the moon. Say that to the families of the three astronauts who were killed in Apollo 1. Tell Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong that they imagined everything. Explain where all the footage, all the pictures, all the ROCKS all came from, if not from the moon. Tell the family of Walter Cronkite that everything HE saw and HE reported that night was a lie.

Landing on the moon was not only one of America's greatest achievements, but also one of the greatest events in all of human history! I am in awe every time I see it replayed, and I can only hope that we as a nation and as the human race can come together and make another monumental achievement as those brave men did and soon!

Another sad attempt at "Immigration Reform"

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=7101481

Congressman Chaffetz is apparently going to cosponsor a bill that would mandate that at least one parent be an American citizen in order for a newborn, born in the U.S. to be given automatic citizenship. Please Congressman, allow me to burst your bubble and bring you back to terra firma.

First, I would like to remind you of a simple set of documents that are merely over 200 years old. The Constitution of the United States of America states that: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside,” Amendment 14, Section 1. As you can plainly read, Sir, the very bill you are cosponsoring is unequivocally UNCONSTITUTIONAL! It is unconstitutional now, it will be tomorrow, and, if for some dumb ass reason it passes, it will be unconstitutional if it passes.

People seem to forget the idea that basically every single U.S. citizen is a descendant of an “illegal immigrant” and that this country would not have the diversity it does if it wasn’t for immigrants (legal or not). I mean, as far as I know, none of the Native Americans said “sure you can settle here.” Our forefathers simply showed up and said “this is our land now, you savages need to take your shit and go.”

The longer this debate on “illegal immigration” goes on, the more asinine it becomes! I mean how pathetic is it that there is so much concern and fear about immigrants from Central and South America, and yet there isn’t a single word about the fact that Cuban’s who make it to U.S. soil are basically given citizenship. A person who gets into the U.S. by land is a “potential danger to National Security” and yet someone who crosses 90 miles of ocean is a saint? Give me a break!

I’m starting to think that this whole debate has been created to be nothing more than a scapegoat. Immigrants are new and different so lets blame their asses for ALL of our problems rather than point the fingers where they really belong. We have screwed ourselves, no one else is to blame! Its OUR fault that we refuse to work certain jobs because they “don’t pay enough”, the jobs are “below us”, or the work is simply too damn hard. We create the job market and appeal to immigrants to come simply because we are too lazy or egotistical. It’s not the immigrants fault. In fact, if it wasn’t for all these people willing, and THANKFUL, to take the shitty jobs we won’t, our entire society would be different.

Also this whole idea that an “unsecured boarder” could lead to another terrible terrorist attack is WAY overblown, if not out right total horse shit. Cite September 11 all you want but don’t waste your breath because most, if not all, of the hijackers got into the U.S. by legal means (they didn’t jump a boarder fence, swim across the ocean, etc). In fact I would argue that it’s far EASIER for an American citizen to be a terrorist than it is for an “illegal.” The 1995 bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, 1996 Olympic Park bombing in Atlanta, Columbine HS, Virginia Tech, and many others were ALL the work of AMERICAN CITIZENS!

The 14th Amendment also states that: “nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” By forcing “illegal immigrants” to hide and live in fear, we are ignoring the Constitution again. By living underground, these immigrants are often abused and taken advantage of because they don’t realize they have rights even though they aren’t citizens. They have the right to be treated fairly, paid fairly, safe work environments, and the same protection from law enforcement as normal citizens do.

I’ve bored you long enough so I will just say two things in closing. The first is that people such as Congressman Chaffetz need to seriously pull their heads from their asses and see the world as it really is. The second, and last thing, is that all of these elected officials truly need to read, reread, and reread the very documents that they have sworn to uphold and protect!

Governor Mark Sandford

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090630/ap_on_re_us/us_sc_governor

Ok, I just want to say that this guy was just a plain dumb ass. If you are coming back from a trip to see your "mistress" and are trying to be sneaky about it, DON'T FLY INTO A PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT!

Also, if this guy was a Democrat, how much do you want to bet that he would have been forced to resign his position already, especially if he did use state funds to visit her. Republicans are the party of "morals" so as long as they apologize its all ok. But if a Democrat (the liberal far left, communist, god hating, blah blah blah) does it, then he/she must resign immediately and barred from all other offices. GIVE ME A DAMN BREAK! Personally, I don't give a damn about what people do in private and their private lives, but when you use tax money wrongly to make it happen, then we have a problem.

The thing that really kills me is that apparently an interview of christian voters was done, and they said they would be willing to vote for him again ONLY if him and his wife stay married...WTF! Are they seriously more concerned over the "institution of marriage" that they don't give a damn he abused tax dollars? Not to mention they fact that a person's marital status should have NO BEARING on whether or not they are elected to office! Give me a single elected who never cheats over a married one who is doing it constantly anyday.

Not to mention the fact that, especially lately, more Republicans have "mistresses" than the Democrats have. Yes, I know that Democrats have "mistresses" too but they aren't the ones who have "I'm a Republican the only people with morals" tatooed to their foreheads!

Iranian Election

So I have been watching the Iranian election the last few days, and also the reaction to it.

First off, to all of those people who say that the President must take a stronger stand on the whole thing, I say shut it. An election is an entirely internal matter for any country. How would we like it if during the 2000 or 2004 Presidential election, other countries tried to get involved? How would we have reacted if France, Italy, Russia, England, etc had come out and said “the election is a fraud” or something similar? I have a feeling it would not have gone over too well. Just because we consider ourselves the “beacon of freedom” doesn’t mean that we have to comment on every single election that any other country has.

I applaud the President’s restraint in his comments about getting involved with the Iranian election in any way. I think people often forget that our interference in Iran is a big reason that Ahmadinejad was even given the opportunity to get into power in the first place. Getting involved in other countries’ elections can lead to very bad things and honestly should rarely, if ever, happen.

What we are seeing in Iran right now, is part of the evolution of becoming a democracy. The people there have had enough, and are finally starting to realize the power that they have. This is how revolutions begin. People get tired of being constantly under the leash and this is the result. We went through the exact same thing, as well as every other democracy in the world. It’s a slow process, and one that isn’t always neat and clean, cut and dry.

The best thing to do is to wait and see. Getting involved will only add fuel to tensions that already existed, especially given past involvement.

Absolutely Unacceptable!

Ok as most of you know, I'm very much for a woman's right to choose and for abortion to be a legal medical procedure. So call me biased if you want.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31029377/

This most recent murder of a doctor who performs abortions, is absolutely unacceptable! This is exactly the problem of constantly hammering the "abortion is murder" bull shit. Eventually some dumb ass is going to get it into his pea sized brain that "I'm going to do god's bidding and kill someone who does abortions and god will reward me for it."

I hope that when they catch the guy who did this they do the following: no plea deals, no insanity plea, and the death penalty. This is obviously premeditated murder and should be treated as such! If this guy gets off with just a life sentence it would be disgusting.

I have no problem with people feeling that abortion is wrong, but I do have a problem when you portray the person who does it, and the person who is getting the procedure, murderers. Its THEIR choice and THEY have to live with it, not you! For those who use the bible, and religion in general, as a platform to get abortion banned listen up. If god truly is the final judge in all matters then you have no reason to try and force people to not do something you don't agree with. If god is real, then we nonbelievers, sinners, blah blah blah, are screwed already so let us live our lives the way we want in peace and we will do the same for you. No one is grabbing your hands and forcing you into an abortion clinic, a bar, porn shop, or whatever so don't grab us and try to prevent us from going in.

2 Things

The first thing involves North Korea and the serious situation that is going on

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090528/ap_on_re_as/as_koreas_nuclear

I hope that cooler heads will decrease the potency of this situation so that we don't find ourselves active in a third major war. If they don't however and we go to war (again) with South Korea, I hope that we do it right. Mobolize the entire country for a major conflict, tell the American people that this could get very bad and there will be sacrifices the country will HAVE to make in order to win. Wars are started with something as simple as a look or a word. Lets hope that things don't get that far.



http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=6634282

This is just asinine people I'm sorry. Part of driving is learning how to deal with the consequences of our choices on the road. Speeding, aggressive driving, or whatever and getting a ticket from it is just part of the process. So what if it allows a parent to talk to the driver? A police car with flashing lights is more intimidating than a parent for a 16 year old. Not to mention the fact that by allowing parents to yell at their kids through this thing DISTRACTS their kids from driving! DUH!

If a kid is going to disobey the rules that are going to no matter what. Whats to stop them from smashing or taking the damn thing off to begin with? This is the REAL world people and in the REAL world no one is going to know anyother person EXACT movements or actions. If you don't trust your kid so much that you use this damn thing, then I have to seriously question your parenting up to that point. Besides if anything its called:

PULL THE KEYS, CAR, AND LICENSE DUMB ASS!

Abandoning religion

So I had a few friends at work ask me why I chose to be agnostic even though I was raised in a semireligious house. This was my response to them and figured I would post it for everyone else who wanted to know. I tried to make this easy to follow lol. This is mostly just the big reasons I chose to abandon religion and become agnostic.

Every religion is FULL of contradictions. For example, how is it that god can have so many human emotions, such as jealousy (one commandment states "have no other god before me" which I interpret as jealousy) and yet some of the very same emotions are "sinful" for humans to have? God can act human but humans can't act human? Makes no sense. Also how can god "love everyone" and yet turn around and condemn them to "hell" for "sinning"? Any parent (god is considered a parent in religion) worth an ounce would NEVER be able to condemn his/her child to pain and suffering. The bible also talks about stoning people who commit adultery, mostly women, and yet by supposedly impregnating Mary (a married woman) god is committing adultery AND rape since Mary was never asked by it. Not to mention if god is so apt at creating life then why does it need to use a human to have a supposed son? God can create life but not without a human? Or why is it "required" that we all have bunches of babies and yet god can't seem to have more than one? So wouldn't it reason that god should in turn be stoned, or punished in some way, as well?

Also with contradictions. How can religions claim to be tolerant of everyone and opposing views and yet turn around and try and convert people? The very act of trying to convert someone is an act of intolerance, because by telling people to convert to this religion or that religion, you are in effect telling those people that EVERYTHING that have believed in up to that point is wrong and they won't be "saved" unless they change their views. If religions truly were tolerant then they would never send missionaries and try to convert others.

Another big reason, is that religion has its hands soaked in blood of innocent people. From the Crusades and the Inquisition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, religions have been constantly fighting each other. How can a religion be pure and the followers of god when their hands are soaked in blood because they all think they are the one "true" religion. We are all supposed to love one another and yet if someone is the wrong religion that opposes us then we must destroy said "infidel"? Please.. To me if any god exists then it would be more impressed with the people who weren't religious because of all the war and bloodshed caused by religion killing in god's name.

Religions also DETEST people who question them. Questioning your religion seems to be the same as "sinning" to most religions. Any organization, religion, or whatever that refuses to be questioned by others and by its members is not worth belonging to in my mind. Questioning is part of life and there is nothing wrong with "I don't know answers" and yet religions refuse to say that. They would rather people be mindless and follow their religion with no ifs, ands, or buts rather than actually fully use their minds. If we are made by a god, then it would fit that we were given a brain to fully use and be independent thinkers, rather than mindless followers who never question.

Thats pretty much the biggest points as to why I'm agnostic. There are some others but they kinda fit into what I have already said. I figure if there is some sort of god that seems to have tons of time to watch every little move we make and made us all, then it can't complain and condemn me for who I am and what I think.

Pakistan

If you read any link that I have posted in a blog to a news story, read this one:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/25/INSJ176CI1.DTL


This story is truly disturbing to me, and what makes it worse is the seeming lack of news coverage or importance. It was not a single front page story on any of the sites I went to, and wasn't even a lead off story on NBC Nightly News, just a 23 second brush over. This despite the enormous impact that this has on the future of the country as well as the rest of the world.

For the last ten years, terrorism has been one of the biggest threats to the world, and yet it seems we now stand on the brink. For all of the talk of keeping nuclear and biological weapons out of the hands of Al-Qaeda, it now seems that we are close to failing on the nuclear side of things.

If you didn't read the article, please do, the Taliban is slowly taking control over Pakistan, and could very well succeed in their efforts. The foremost and gravest issue with this developing situation is Pakistan's nuclear aresenal. I fear that if Pakistan doesn't wake up and take back their own country, that it will only be a matter of time before a mushroom cloud will be over a major Western city or Israel.

The worst part to me is that the US may have had a chance to prevent this altogether, but the Bush Administration literally fucked up. Call me a Bush-bashing liberal all you want, but its true. When you use the bulk of your military forced to invade Iraq, a country that had NO LINKS to Sept. 11, instead of using that same force to drastically increase the odds of eliminating Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan; you really did drop the ball! Even though we have the best military in the world, it is impossible to win a war in Afghanistan with a force that is SMALLER than the force used to invade and stablize Iraq which is a SMALLER country!

I'm afraid that all we can do now is to try and keep Pakistan from falling as best we can. I just hope that we succeed and that the Pakistani people can push out the Taliban and regain their country.

If it fails, however, I can think of only one way to keep most, if not all, of Pakistan's nuclear weapons out of Al-Qaeda and Taliban hands. The US will have to bomb the hell out of all of Pakistan's nuclear installations. Even then, it would be hard to know if we destroyed every single one of their nuclear bombs. But its better to destroy as many as possible than the alternative. . . .

Why is there still a debate...

Ok, why are we STILL having this asinine debate on torture?

Torture is illegal! PERIOD!!! This idea that by using torture has helped keep America safe is just flat out wrong! If anything it has drastically weakened our place in the world. How can we expect to defeat the idea of terrorism, when by using torture we are in fact COMMINTTING an act of terrorism ourselves? Torture has NEVER been proven as a reliable intelligence gathering practice because any person under extreme pain or duress will tell you whatever the hell you want them to, regardless of whether its true or not! Not to mention, by simply using torture to create a crimal case against a person annihiliates any chance of prosecution because nearly EVERY court in the world refuses to take evidence gained while the person was under any form of duress.

The use of torture, even once, in any form degrades not only the United States government; it also destroys our values, ourselves, and every other person on this Earth!