Seriously! Why doesn’t someone poll the inmates in our prisons? We’ve polled every demographic in America, swing states (daily), foreign countries who like us, foreign countries who hate us. Why not poll a demographic that really matters?
I’m very happy to say that I have no firsthand experience as to how an inmate might feel about this election, but with a Modicum of Common Sense, I think we could draw some conclusions:
1. I think most inmates would favor the repeal of the 2nd amendment. It presents a fundamental threat to their safety on the job. I’m certain that all criminals would sleep easier if no law abiding citizen could defend themselves.
2. I doubt they would favor the legislation that makes murder of pregnant women a double homicide.
3. Do you think criminals would rather “pay their debt to society” or “be rehabilitated and release back into society” regardless of how many tries it takes for the “rehabilitation” to sink in?
4. Would pedophiles rather be rehabilitated (see number three) or be quarantined from society for life?
5. How do drug dealers feel about being held responsible for the deaths they cause?
When you think about it, criminals pioneered the concept of “wealth redistribution”.
But in an act of true bipartisanship, they do firmly support “trickle down economics”.
In fact if Washington takes enough money from the saps who actually work for a living, they might get a new steam bath for the prison spa. SWEET! They might even be able to add teeth whitening to their dental plan. I mean, what’s the point of getting a free sex change operation if your teeth aren’t white, white, white.
I’m challenged to think of a single issue in which the inmates might vote Republican.
Certainly, some “Loon De La Left” will pop up out of their hole and cry “guns kill people”! I wonder, of the crimes committed with guns, what percentage of the guns were legally owned by the person committing the crime?
Let’s take a poll!
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Enough with Wright and Ayers!
Are we all getting tired of the endless banter about Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers?
I'm way past "tired"!
Especially for a topic that, with a modicum of common sense, can be put to bed in five minutes or less. Let's look at this logically. First, the facts:
1. Senator Obama had a relationship with Reverend Wright for twenty plus years.
2. Senator Obama had a relationship with Bill Ayers for ten plus years.
3. When those relationships were brought to light and examined by the media Senator Obama distanced himself from both as quickly as possible.
I think we can all agree on these three facts.
Senator Obama has offered a variety of versions of what he knew, when he knew and how he knew, but the first rule of A Modicum of Common Sense is "Truth stands on it's own two feet", and his explanations just don't stand up. So, given that we are not being told the truth, we must rely on common sense based on facts. As I see it, it can only play out in one of two ways.
Either:
1. Senator Obama knew the truths about Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers,
or
2. Senator Obama did not know the truths about Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers.
Those are the only options!
If number 1 is true, Senator Obama was privately comfortable with those relationships but was not willing to be associated with them during a presidential election. This raises a serious question of character, honesty and judgment.
If number 2 is true, Senator Obama ranks among the most oblivious people on our little rock and is not the "Eagle Eyes" we want to lead our nation.
It's really that simple!
Now we can move on to more important topics, like, "Will Barney Frank investigate himself"?
I'm guessing "not"!
I'm way past "tired"!
Especially for a topic that, with a modicum of common sense, can be put to bed in five minutes or less. Let's look at this logically. First, the facts:
1. Senator Obama had a relationship with Reverend Wright for twenty plus years.
2. Senator Obama had a relationship with Bill Ayers for ten plus years.
3. When those relationships were brought to light and examined by the media Senator Obama distanced himself from both as quickly as possible.
I think we can all agree on these three facts.
Senator Obama has offered a variety of versions of what he knew, when he knew and how he knew, but the first rule of A Modicum of Common Sense is "Truth stands on it's own two feet", and his explanations just don't stand up. So, given that we are not being told the truth, we must rely on common sense based on facts. As I see it, it can only play out in one of two ways.
Either:
1. Senator Obama knew the truths about Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers,
or
2. Senator Obama did not know the truths about Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers.
Those are the only options!
If number 1 is true, Senator Obama was privately comfortable with those relationships but was not willing to be associated with them during a presidential election. This raises a serious question of character, honesty and judgment.
If number 2 is true, Senator Obama ranks among the most oblivious people on our little rock and is not the "Eagle Eyes" we want to lead our nation.
It's really that simple!
Now we can move on to more important topics, like, "Will Barney Frank investigate himself"?
I'm guessing "not"!
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
On Sen. Obama's Race Discussion
Apparently the discussion Senator Obama wants to have on race is “YOU’RE FIRED”!
This is the edge ________________________ This is OVER the Edge
_______________________________________I’m here!
To be “encouraged to step down” after calling children playing in a tree “monkeys” is the last straw! Politically correct people annoy me. Politically correct people who push their Nazi like agenda on others make me mad! People who push their Nazi agenda on others using children makes me furious!!
Please read this story!
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-carpenter-trustee-both-08apr08,0,568283.story
What happened to the party of choice? The party of “Free Speech”?
If Senator Obama’s response to this issue is any indication, IT”S DEAD!
And before any Loon de la Left pops their head up and says” Obama didn’t make her step down”, may I point out:
1. The “encouragement” to step down came from the Obama camp.
2. If Obama is going to run our country, he should be running his political machine.
3. He could have defended Trustee Linda Ramirez Sliwinski and opened the mythical “conversation on race”.
Is Senator Obama’s “Conversation on Race” “Case Closed”?
Is this conversation merely to point out that we’re not allowed to have it?
If I were a cartoonist, I would draw Curious George, hanging in a tree, holding a NO POLITICAL CORRECTNESS sign!
If Sen. Obama’s criterion for “conversation” is that you must agree with everything he says, it certainly displays leadership potential. But perhaps NOT leadership of free people.
And as an old pinochle player, let me add: “That’s just calling a spade, a spade”!
This is the edge ________________________ This is OVER the Edge
_______________________________________I’m here!
To be “encouraged to step down” after calling children playing in a tree “monkeys” is the last straw! Politically correct people annoy me. Politically correct people who push their Nazi like agenda on others make me mad! People who push their Nazi agenda on others using children makes me furious!!
Please read this story!
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-carpenter-trustee-both-08apr08,0,568283.story
What happened to the party of choice? The party of “Free Speech”?
If Senator Obama’s response to this issue is any indication, IT”S DEAD!
And before any Loon de la Left pops their head up and says” Obama didn’t make her step down”, may I point out:
1. The “encouragement” to step down came from the Obama camp.
2. If Obama is going to run our country, he should be running his political machine.
3. He could have defended Trustee Linda Ramirez Sliwinski and opened the mythical “conversation on race”.
Is Senator Obama’s “Conversation on Race” “Case Closed”?
Is this conversation merely to point out that we’re not allowed to have it?
If I were a cartoonist, I would draw Curious George, hanging in a tree, holding a NO POLITICAL CORRECTNESS sign!
If Sen. Obama’s criterion for “conversation” is that you must agree with everything he says, it certainly displays leadership potential. But perhaps NOT leadership of free people.
And as an old pinochle player, let me add: “That’s just calling a spade, a spade”!
Monday, April 7, 2008
Military Service vs. College Degree
In the article “On Rev. Wright” I took a small swipe at the military:
"Military service is a measure of patriotism.
Every rule has its exceptions, but for the most part: Check!"
Yes, there are those who try to steal the benefits of service with no obligation to actually serve. Oh those pesky wars! These people are their own problems, and beyond saying that they probably don’t keep score at T-Ball, I’ll move on.
This article is about those who serve with honor.
In my humble opinion, a two, four or six year enlistment looks better on a resume than an Associates, Bachelors or Masters degree. I also notice this opinion is catching on in the main stream.
Let’s face it, the T-Ball crowd is gutting our education system. What started so “innocently” in preschool has now spread all the way through high school. It appears that the minimum requirement for graduation from high school is occasional attendance. You don’t actually have to learn anything; you only have to feel good about it!
As a result colleges are dumbing down to accommodate the fresh crops of T-Ballers!
It is VERY possible to complete four years at an “Institution of Higher Learning” and only be marginally qualified for a career in fast foods.
Not to overly bash Colleges! Many of our best and brightest come from “Institutions of Higher Education”. But many of even the best and brightest lack the following important qualities:
The ability to take orders.
The ability to give orders.
The ability to work as a team.
The ability to work alone.
Understand the importance of victory.
Understand the results of defeat.
As a bare minimum any person completing an enlistment will possess these qualities and more! The College of the Americas is available for every enlisted person so they may also educate themselves to any degree they might choose. Any enlisted person that attains a college level education stands head and shoulders above all others!
By my experience, it’s better to hire an attitude and teach a skill than it is to hire a skill and teach an attitude.
The military keeps score at T-Ball!
"Military service is a measure of patriotism.
Every rule has its exceptions, but for the most part: Check!"
Yes, there are those who try to steal the benefits of service with no obligation to actually serve. Oh those pesky wars! These people are their own problems, and beyond saying that they probably don’t keep score at T-Ball, I’ll move on.
This article is about those who serve with honor.
In my humble opinion, a two, four or six year enlistment looks better on a resume than an Associates, Bachelors or Masters degree. I also notice this opinion is catching on in the main stream.
Let’s face it, the T-Ball crowd is gutting our education system. What started so “innocently” in preschool has now spread all the way through high school. It appears that the minimum requirement for graduation from high school is occasional attendance. You don’t actually have to learn anything; you only have to feel good about it!
As a result colleges are dumbing down to accommodate the fresh crops of T-Ballers!
It is VERY possible to complete four years at an “Institution of Higher Learning” and only be marginally qualified for a career in fast foods.
Not to overly bash Colleges! Many of our best and brightest come from “Institutions of Higher Education”. But many of even the best and brightest lack the following important qualities:
The ability to take orders.
The ability to give orders.
The ability to work as a team.
The ability to work alone.
Understand the importance of victory.
Understand the results of defeat.
As a bare minimum any person completing an enlistment will possess these qualities and more! The College of the Americas is available for every enlisted person so they may also educate themselves to any degree they might choose. Any enlisted person that attains a college level education stands head and shoulders above all others!
By my experience, it’s better to hire an attitude and teach a skill than it is to hire a skill and teach an attitude.
The military keeps score at T-Ball!
On Civil Unions
This is another great example of a topic that needs a good Whack a Mole session!
Let’s throw some common sense at it. First, let’s start with some facts.
1. Separation of church and state. The federal government is not to endorse or promote the doctrine of any religion.
2. If you are married in any faith, there are usually TWO ceremonies. The one before God (for faith) and the one immediately after where you sign the marriage license (for the government).
3. You can elect to be married only in the eyes of the government. This requires only the presence of a qualified government employee (I have no idea what the qualifications are) and a witness.
If I remember correctly, this issue first came to the forefront when a man, dying of AIDS, was not allowed to be visited by his partner in intensive care. The dying man either had no family, or worse, had no family wanting to share in his life. All he had was his friend, love and partner! It spotlighted the fact that unless you are “family” or “spouse”, there are limitations as to your legal interactions with another person.
Of all the arguments against Civil Unions, the only one with any validity (in my opinion) is “Gods Law” But God is not the government and the government is not God, despite what the Loons Left and Right would wish for!
The government should hold no prejudice over the unions of peoples. The purpose of a civil marriage license is to stop incest, limit the spread of STD’s and (as always) collect taxes.
As I understand the King James Bible, faith based marriage between same sex couples isn’t happening. But, hey, the King James is a version of a version. Why doesn’t someone write a new version! Really! In the King James, the Old Testament is copied from the Torah (minus three chapters that show women as wise, strong and good leaders), and the New Testament is a collection of personal accounts that served the purposes of King James. If you don’t like the Sodom and Gomorrah parts, write your own and start a new religion. They’ve been doing it for centuries.
What I don’t approve of is holding any document (bible, constitution or other) up as THE doctrine, and then saying “except for the parts we don’t like”.
In for a penny, in for a pound.
To make matters worse, the zealots have now raised the bar. Civil unions are not enough! Now it’s marriage or nothing.
Only zealots TRY to offend as many people as possible to advance their agenda!
I wish everyone who cares about gay rights could learn two small lessons:
1. The smallest victory advances your cause. The smallest defeat sets you back.
2. (This is the big one!) The Democratic Party is NOT your friend! Strong words, I know, but here is my proof. From the day that the Democratic Party lost power, there was a daily drumbeat for gay rights. Since the day they regained power the drumbeat stopped. Why?
Why isn’t President Bush forced to veto a gay rights bill every week? If nothing else, it would vilify the Republican Party (Unless he actually signed it). And don’t try to tell me they’ve been too busy! What do they have to lose? I’ll tell you. It’s your vote that they don’t want to lose! If the gay rights community reaches its dream, it will move on to new agendas. Why mess with a good thing?
The Loons De La Left are a stone around your necks and the Loons de la Right are, well, the Loons de la right. Our only hope to advance gay rights is to avoid the Loons and drive up the middle!
Let’s throw some common sense at it. First, let’s start with some facts.
1. Separation of church and state. The federal government is not to endorse or promote the doctrine of any religion.
2. If you are married in any faith, there are usually TWO ceremonies. The one before God (for faith) and the one immediately after where you sign the marriage license (for the government).
3. You can elect to be married only in the eyes of the government. This requires only the presence of a qualified government employee (I have no idea what the qualifications are) and a witness.
If I remember correctly, this issue first came to the forefront when a man, dying of AIDS, was not allowed to be visited by his partner in intensive care. The dying man either had no family, or worse, had no family wanting to share in his life. All he had was his friend, love and partner! It spotlighted the fact that unless you are “family” or “spouse”, there are limitations as to your legal interactions with another person.
Of all the arguments against Civil Unions, the only one with any validity (in my opinion) is “Gods Law” But God is not the government and the government is not God, despite what the Loons Left and Right would wish for!
The government should hold no prejudice over the unions of peoples. The purpose of a civil marriage license is to stop incest, limit the spread of STD’s and (as always) collect taxes.
As I understand the King James Bible, faith based marriage between same sex couples isn’t happening. But, hey, the King James is a version of a version. Why doesn’t someone write a new version! Really! In the King James, the Old Testament is copied from the Torah (minus three chapters that show women as wise, strong and good leaders), and the New Testament is a collection of personal accounts that served the purposes of King James. If you don’t like the Sodom and Gomorrah parts, write your own and start a new religion. They’ve been doing it for centuries.
What I don’t approve of is holding any document (bible, constitution or other) up as THE doctrine, and then saying “except for the parts we don’t like”.
In for a penny, in for a pound.
To make matters worse, the zealots have now raised the bar. Civil unions are not enough! Now it’s marriage or nothing.
Only zealots TRY to offend as many people as possible to advance their agenda!
I wish everyone who cares about gay rights could learn two small lessons:
1. The smallest victory advances your cause. The smallest defeat sets you back.
2. (This is the big one!) The Democratic Party is NOT your friend! Strong words, I know, but here is my proof. From the day that the Democratic Party lost power, there was a daily drumbeat for gay rights. Since the day they regained power the drumbeat stopped. Why?
Why isn’t President Bush forced to veto a gay rights bill every week? If nothing else, it would vilify the Republican Party (Unless he actually signed it). And don’t try to tell me they’ve been too busy! What do they have to lose? I’ll tell you. It’s your vote that they don’t want to lose! If the gay rights community reaches its dream, it will move on to new agendas. Why mess with a good thing?
The Loons De La Left are a stone around your necks and the Loons de la Right are, well, the Loons de la right. Our only hope to advance gay rights is to avoid the Loons and drive up the middle!
Saturday, April 5, 2008
On Evolution
As long as I’m playing whack a mole with the Loons de la Right over science v religion, let’s talk about evolution.
From my early teen’s I have looked at the loons both left and right and shook my head in amazement. If you bother to read both Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, specifically his theory of Natural Selection and the book of Genesis starting at 1:1 you might notice something very interesting. They copy each other almost word for word!
Here are the links:
http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/genesis.html
I did say “almost”! With so much in common, what do the Loons Left and Right fight over?
Days and clay.
This is another reason why I have no use for Loons! With so much in common, let’s fight, slander, legislate, and even kill over what little divides us!
My slant? Thank you for asking! Let’s throw some common sense at it!
Beware! I’m a deep science buff who also has no choice but to believe in God!
Common Sense:
God didn’t write Genesis! Men did. Don’t get me started on men!
Genesis was written at the dawn of mans ability to communicate.
I feel that both these statements stand on their own two feet.
Now, “what if”?
What if, man (at the time) wasn’t ready to grasp Gods “day”?
What if, Man was not ready to sell, “we’re this far away from monkeys”?
I’m not crying “typo” but “what if”.
If “day” was God’s day, how long would it have been?
If God were a child of Earth, the day would be 24 hours long.
If God were a child of our solar system, the day would be 365 of our days.
If god were a child of our galaxy, the day would be 225 million years.
If God were a child of the universe, the day would be like forever man! Kool!
If we could whack a mole ALL the loons and focus on what we have in common, maybe we could locate God’s I P address! Then we could knock off a quick e-mail and get a ruling on “clay”.
Just thinking out loud here. What do you think?
From my early teen’s I have looked at the loons both left and right and shook my head in amazement. If you bother to read both Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, specifically his theory of Natural Selection and the book of Genesis starting at 1:1 you might notice something very interesting. They copy each other almost word for word!
Here are the links:
http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/genesis.html
I did say “almost”! With so much in common, what do the Loons Left and Right fight over?
Days and clay.
This is another reason why I have no use for Loons! With so much in common, let’s fight, slander, legislate, and even kill over what little divides us!
My slant? Thank you for asking! Let’s throw some common sense at it!
Beware! I’m a deep science buff who also has no choice but to believe in God!
Common Sense:
God didn’t write Genesis! Men did. Don’t get me started on men!
Genesis was written at the dawn of mans ability to communicate.
I feel that both these statements stand on their own two feet.
Now, “what if”?
What if, man (at the time) wasn’t ready to grasp Gods “day”?
What if, Man was not ready to sell, “we’re this far away from monkeys”?
I’m not crying “typo” but “what if”.
If “day” was God’s day, how long would it have been?
If God were a child of Earth, the day would be 24 hours long.
If God were a child of our solar system, the day would be 365 of our days.
If god were a child of our galaxy, the day would be 225 million years.
If God were a child of the universe, the day would be like forever man! Kool!
If we could whack a mole ALL the loons and focus on what we have in common, maybe we could locate God’s I P address! Then we could knock off a quick e-mail and get a ruling on “clay”.
Just thinking out loud here. What do you think?
On Fetal Life
In a previous post, I touched on fetal life. Let’s explore this further.
I believe that many people (and especially zealots) are much too fast to transpose scientific “indicators” into scientific “fact”.
On the topic of fetal life, science has found indicators of possible independent function in fetuses nearly to the point of conception. This is true, but, does that mean that a fetus is an independent life?
Let’s throw some common sense at it!
By my life’s experience I have found many things that “twitch” pre and post life.
Within my own body I have a kidney. Actually I have two but for today I’m just referring to the one on the… Bad Analogy!
Within my own body I have a stomach (Better). If you ask my wife she will tell you that it occupies the space above my navel and below my neck. Left, right and center! On a regular basis, my stomach will twitch. By my observations, it twitches completely independently of my wishes and control. As I hope is common, I give these twitches independent human emotions and qualities: i.e.
OH GOD! FEED ME! or
OH GOD! STOP FEEDING ME! or
OH GOD! STOP IT WITH THE DOUBLE HOT CHILI!
I have a very passionate stomach! But, is it a separate being? Nope.
At what point does a fetus have more “life” than my stomach?
I guess what I’m trying to say is this:
Although I love science, I will never lose site of the difference between fact and indication. Too many zealots will grasp any straw that supports their personal zealotry.
When they clearly record a little fetal inner voice saying,
“MOM, enough with the pickles already!”
I will go Pro Life.
My stomach twitches at pickles too.
I believe that many people (and especially zealots) are much too fast to transpose scientific “indicators” into scientific “fact”.
On the topic of fetal life, science has found indicators of possible independent function in fetuses nearly to the point of conception. This is true, but, does that mean that a fetus is an independent life?
Let’s throw some common sense at it!
By my life’s experience I have found many things that “twitch” pre and post life.
Within my own body I have a kidney. Actually I have two but for today I’m just referring to the one on the… Bad Analogy!
Within my own body I have a stomach (Better). If you ask my wife she will tell you that it occupies the space above my navel and below my neck. Left, right and center! On a regular basis, my stomach will twitch. By my observations, it twitches completely independently of my wishes and control. As I hope is common, I give these twitches independent human emotions and qualities: i.e.
OH GOD! FEED ME! or
OH GOD! STOP FEEDING ME! or
OH GOD! STOP IT WITH THE DOUBLE HOT CHILI!
I have a very passionate stomach! But, is it a separate being? Nope.
At what point does a fetus have more “life” than my stomach?
I guess what I’m trying to say is this:
Although I love science, I will never lose site of the difference between fact and indication. Too many zealots will grasp any straw that supports their personal zealotry.
When they clearly record a little fetal inner voice saying,
“MOM, enough with the pickles already!”
I will go Pro Life.
My stomach twitches at pickles too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)