Friday, February 27, 2009

The Obama Watermelon Email Case


So, the Republican mayor of Los Alamitos, a small Southern California city of 12,000, says he will resign after being criticized publicly for sharing an e-mail picture depicting the White House lawn planted with watermelons under the title "No Easter egg hunt this year."

The news reports that Grose says he accepts that the e-mail was in poor taste and has affected his ability to lead the city. Grose added that he didn't mean to offend anyone and claimed he was unaware of the racial stereotype linking black people with eating watermelons...
Yeah, right...

This goes back to parenting. You reap what you sow.
Prejudice is always wrong. Discrimination is useful to discern between green and yellow lights, but wrong when coupled with racial prejudice.
Everybody is racist to a degree, and racial jokes are the great equalizer between cultures that will never disappear or put Chris Rock out of a job, so recognizing that and being sensitive to other people's perception should prevent one from applying humor ignorantly in a hurtful and disrespecting manner (unless everyone can laugh about their own bias).

If someone who is not too smart chooses public life, gaffes, like Bush mentioning his Filipino chef to the Philippine president, are bound to happen.
Apology accepted, lesson learned.
Bush didn't step down, and nobody called for it. This mayor therefore must be smarter than Bush by a brain hair...

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Sunday, February 22, 2009

Brave New Economy

And so we suddenly find ourselves in a new economy. It's not that we didn't see it coming, it's that we didn't want to see it coming. Smart people have been warning us for years, holding up charts and papers filled with calculations and scientific data.
Now we're wrong and they were right. But that no longer matters, as on the tombstone that reads, "He had the right of way..."
We're screwed.
As an entrepreneur I see the effects firsthand of the paralyzing scare that has the world in its grip. My sales have tumbled 60%-70%. Imagine that, suddenly having to make do with 30%-40% of your regular income...
I try to be proactive, like any sensible person, and have started to reduce costs on subscriptions, services, and generally everything that now weighs on me and my business financially.
I created a special website with Free Shipping items. Some have noticed, and placed orders. One of my other websites now advertises "Free Shipping On Orders Over $100." Again, some are taking advantage of that, but it hasn't helped sales and now I'm paying for shipping too, thereby reducing profit substantially.
I don't mind. Better poor than broke.
I will continue to do what I can to keep myself afloat financially, and I bet so will you.
But...
I have yet to see any gestures from the companies that matter in our lives.
The credit card companies haven't cut their exorbitant interest rates.
When I turned in my cable TV tuners, thereby cutting my cable bill 60%, Oceanic Cable, whose customer I've been for nearly twenty years didn't say, "what can we do to keep you as our loyal client?"
In fact, as I went about canceling services, none of the companies asked for a reason, or tried to retain me as a customer.
They don't need us? Well, I found I do just fine without them, and I guess this is the basis for survival—to be able to get by with just the essentials.
If we're all going to hell in a handbag, it is because we refuse to acknowledge what's coming and fail to draft a Plan B. It's for lack of vision.
Businesses that postpone finding solutions until they realize that without customers they don't have a company are screwed.

Saturday, February 21, 2009

Credit Crisis For Dummies (That's Me...)...

The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.

In the midst of this malaise, Jonathan Jarvis deserves credit for making a complex issue easy to understand.

Thursday, February 19, 2009

Winning Words...

"What has happened in technology over the last few years has been about the downturn, not the future of technology. A lot of companies have chosen to downsize, and maybe that was the right thing for them. We chose a different path. Our belief was that if we kept putting great products in front of customers, they would continue to open their wallets." - Steve Jobs, August 2003

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Shoot The Messenger...

One of today's BBC World News headlines reads: "US Muslim TV boss 'beheaded wife'"
The founder of a US TV station aimed at countering stereotypes of Muslims is charged with beheading his wife.

Muzzammil Hassan, 44, is accused of second degree murder of Aasiya Hassan, whose body was found last week at the TV station in New York state.
Both Mr Hassan and his wife worked at Bridges TV, a station aimed at countering stereotypes of Muslims.
Bridges TV, a satellite-distributed news and opinion channel, was founded by Mr Hassan in 2004 and was based in a suburb in Buffalo, in upstate New York.

Monday, February 16, 2009

Woman Freaks Out...


The original headline read: "Chinese Woman Freaks Out In Airport, Gets 600,000 Hits On YouTube"

An innocent headline to many, but I see ignorance rearing its ugly headline. If the woman had been Caucasian, would the headline have read, "Caucasian Woman Freaks Out?"

Now, I know that Chinese is a group, and not a race, but tell that to my Chinese ex-wife...

The woman was not identified as a Chinese national, but as someone looking and sounding Chinese. She could have come from anywhere. So, let's rewrite the headline accordingly:

"A Mongoloid Woman Freaks Out."

Better?

Some anthropologists would argue that there are only three races: Negroid, Caucesoid, and Mongoloid. Thomas Huxley introduced the term "Mongoloid," based on the physical characteristics of Mongolian people, but included American Indians as well as Arctic Native Americans, Laplanders, the Finnish, Eskimos, and Pacific Islanders, but ultimately "Mongoloid" was widely adopted to mainly include the people of South-East Asia, and we recognize Eskimos, American Indians, and Polynesians as different races.

More recently, the Human Genome Project stated unequivocally that "races" do not exist in any biological sense... I'd agree with that more than the tendency to divide people based on their physical appearances. My point is that in the U.S., where race is often mentioned as a distinct feature that typifies the behavior of a group, Caucasians are often excluded from this bias when it comes to the news and their skin color or racial origin is seldom if ever mentioned.

Therefore, "Caucasian Woman Freaks Out," is an unlikely headline in a country where people have grown accustomed to think in racial terms when looking at someone...

Therefore, "Woman Freaks Out," would have sufficed, but I doubt it would have garnered as many YouTube views...

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Beats Bush By Using His Brain...

No, kiddos, not by using Bush's brain, or Karl Rove, but by using his own. In sharp contrast to George W Bush, who used to sign off quickly on troop requests from his commanders without giving it much thought, Obama appears to be taking his time pondering a request by the Pentagon for three Army combat brigades and Marine units for deployment in Afghanistan.

While I personally have my doubts about even the possibility of success with the stated objective of militarily ridding Afghanistan of the Taliban, especially now that the scoundrels seem to become more active in Pakistan, the reality is that the US has a military presence there, but its activities have been hampered with inadequate troop levels, due to obligations in Iraq and minimal support from foreign nations, as the results of the Bush gang's shortsightedness.

Obama is challenged by his predecessor's ineptness to finish what he started in a way that has failure already written in big capitals into the equation. If US troops are perceived as staying too long in Afghanistan it will be served up by the Republicans in huge scoops as failure. If he gets the troops back home before scoring any big successes he will be perceived as failing to stand up to terrorism. Ultimately, his fate rests with an American public that hastily gave Bush another term to get the job done—at which he failed miserably.

A real problem is that America has not won any of its wars in a long time and Desert Storm I was just a prelude to Desert Storm II, not because of the military which just does what it does best, but because of politicians that use it to manipulate a public that has been hammered into a crouched position with fear tactics. These are not wars, they are police actions, or rather cleaning operations in countries the US has no business being or staying in. I hope that Obama realizes that these so-called wars are undeclared and illegal acts of war. Bush went it alone (oops, forgot Poland and Palau) and Obama will have to douse the fires the Bush gang started.

That the GOP, after fanning the flames, now have adopted a strategy of obstructing Obama's efforts tells me that they're not interested in anything but playing politics at the expense of US soldiers and foreign civilians—unless one thinks we're behaving smartly and without incurring wrath by killing Muslim people—always conveniently labeled "terrorists"—by sending drones equipped with missiles from one souvereign country into another. As a video game it may seem engaging, but as a solution to the problem of extremist Islam it's contra-effective. Mind you, this all started with 3,000 people losing their lives on 9/11. Hundreds of thousands of dead later see where our politicians have taken us... Indeed, the people will have to choose for a solution, but they just did that by electing Obama. It is my hope the majority understands that the mess Bush en co. created may not be cleaned up in 4 years. The GOP's obstructionist stance is reprehensible and shameful. We may have thought that by Bush's leaving office the nation ridded itself of the effects of his brain. The crushed GOP, it turns out, while unable to even utter Bush's name, can't come up with a single constructive thought and is still using his rambling brain for its thinking...

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

The Greatest Crime Ever Committed...

In the months leading up to Obama's inauguration the criminal gang that has been busy ruining the lives of American soldiers, Iraqi citizens, and Afghan mountain dwellers decided they were not satisfied with the billions of taxpayers' money siphoned off into black hole accounts of companies engaged in the Wiedergutmachung in Iraq under the protection of Blackwater mercenaries during a regime-change blitzkrieg that to this day is called a "war," but is undeclared, and has as its enemy a vague entity that may or may not be engaged in trying to liberate Arab soil from the infidel invaders that came for oil, so-called freedom, and the spread of Christianity, but settled for torture, corruption, lies, manipulation, and the expansion of the industrial military complex.

So, with an eye on the perceived temporary discontinuation of the dismantling of America during the Obama term the most evil members of the GOP concocted a sublime plan by creating a new 9/11, but this time rather than using explosions and controlled demolitions of tall buildings a series of implosions was proposed that would severely handicap the new administration and perhaps restore Republican popularity come the 2012 elections by manipulating the stock market mechanisms. If the Nazis had succeeded they would have destabilized America's and Great Britain's economies by flooding them with counterfeit bank notes. This time something similar in outcome could be effectuated by processes that started with deregulating the banks and financial institutions and introducing a sophisticated and incomprehensible scheme with worthless loans that were traded deep toward a black hole that would at some trigger point collapse under its own gravity.

While Capitalism has been sold to its last breath as a system that would perpetuate itself with the elimination of weaker companies so that stronger ones can survive, the market economy, once hollowed out from within was not to be tolerated to behave thusly. If Obama pulls it off to "save" the economy it will be a miracle. Most everyone so far is impressed with his royal stature and supreme intelligence. But even he will find it difficult to stop the avalanche set in motion by the Republicans.

Bush (and by Bush, I mean the lying, cheating, conspirators Cheney, Wolfewitz, Rumsfeld, Rice, et al) have pulled off another daring feat, by turning America overnight from a Capitalist into a Socialist society and grabbing billions of the people's monies and turning it over with nary any oversight to henchman and executioner Henry Paulson, a Wall Street insider who has been retained to distribute this new wealth to the wealthiest fat-cats who shamelessly jumped in their private jets to ask Congress for even more free funds to shore up their mismanaged and behind-the-times companies. Trickle-down economy in reverse. Does anyone have any doubt that the Republican Party's main doctrine has outlived its premise?

Supposedly extending the people's credit to failing institutions managed by failing executives will suddenly make the latter humble, make them see the error of their greedy ways, and turn them into social-conscious do-gooders, while a study of these people's faces during laughable public "hearings" tell you that they know only one creed: greed. The companies receiving public funding should have been forced to make the American taxpayers shareholders and the recipients of promised profits when these companies are back on their feet, but that hasn't happened. Your check will not be in the mail.

And so the crime was committed, and all saw that it was good. Markets and financial institutions would continue to be headed by the only ones capable and available to manage them—those that helped getting us into this mess in the first place.
What will change? I predict nothing. Nothing at all.

The much-touted American Dream is shattered.
A wake-up call has sounded as loud as the civil defense siren in your neighborhood, but, once again the American people are paralyzed, conned as they have been by a wide scare, and while they're being robbed, raped, and pillaged, they are ready to go along with whatever sounds like a good idea as alternatives are not being deemed acceptable (the collapse of Wall Street, the banks, and the automobile industry) even though that is just what capitalism and a free market-driven economy should allow to happen.
Afraid that their dollars may no longer support their glutinous lifestyles Americans quietly and uncomprehendingly watch the bailout-scheme unfold on their oversized HDTVs instead of taking en-masse to the streets to yell, rebel, and protest so loud that it would be heard around the world. A world that in turn is devastated by what begun as the actions of a few, headed early on by Phil Gramm and his quest for deregulation and suspending financial oversight. Like everything else the Republicans plan, their execution is flawed, because the premise of their very core is based on denial of equality, amassing personal fortune, and hatred for those who are not them. The results are favoritism, installing cronies in positions of power, bribery, misuse of public funds, voter-fraud, the corruption of public office, the betrayal of the religious base they claim to represent, using soldiers for political ends, and ultimately the destruction of The Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Meanwhile, the Republicans will vote against any attempt by the Obama administration to save the economy they destroyed, as they have already shown us in the last weeks. Obama's failure will be their victory with Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin and Ann Coultier laughing the loudest. After voting twice for Bush I don't give the American people any credit for smart future decisions in spite of Obama's win.

And so, the overall picture is becoming clear. We're watching a looting in progress with as goal total control of the political playing field and the American people by the Republicans. This is a high stakes chess game where the ante will be upped by the player who can see several moves farther into the game. My bet is still on Obama, but he's a nice guy and his opponents are strategic bullies who'll stop at nothing, even as their party seeks to rebuild its dented public facade.

After 8 years of Republican indoctrination I fear that the possibility of a major Republican victory (by counting or buying votes) may effectively dismantle the current 2-party system and leave in place a 1-party system like old Russia, China, or Germany under the Nazis.
The people have other worries, like losing their jobs and homes.
For now.
The conditions will be as ripe as they were when Hitler grabbed power.
This time the enemy has an American face. The ruddy, greedy, contorted, ugly, hateful, and angry face of the Republican Party.

Sunday, February 1, 2009

Low Level Laser Takes 6.5 Inches Off My Body in 2 Weeks...


Not exactly an exciting headline, nor a pretty picture, but I just lost a total of 6.5 inches around my waist, hips, and thighs during a 14 day low level laser treatment with Erchonia’s Zerona low level laser, and I wanted to share my faux-lipo story with you.
Let me start at the beginning of this victorious tale: Like you, I've been putting on weight over the last years and like you I wish it wasn't true, but a sedentary lifestyle, long hours working on a computer, and sneakily snacking from the fridge can make a pumpkin out of anyone. What's your excuse?
Now, I'm also a highly skeptical person. I mean, I don't believe there's a God, can you believe that, with all the overwhelming evidence out there? How more skeptical can one get? So, I wasn't going to be a believer in low level laser fat loss, or any quick weight loss scheme either.

Then my friend Les opened Laser EnergyWorks in Honolulu and not before long I was undergoing low level laser treatment three times a week, 40 minutes each time, for two straight weeks under his Zerona laser. It was as easy as lying on a towel on the beach, except there was no heat or any other sensation. The 5-head laser lights are positioned with flexible arms above your body and make a not very loud noise I can best describe as an electric buzz.

Now, before I subjected myself to this regimen I rudimentary educated myself about this method which targets fat cells with low power laser beams. It's like, straight out of SciFi. Contrary to lasers that are so strong they cut through anything, the low level laser gently tickles the fat cells so that they collapse laughing and release their stored fat. The body then absorbs the fat and by drinking large amounts of water (large for me, I prefer beer) it's flushed out of your system. So far so good, but the big news came when my girlfriend declared after one week of not seeing me, "I believe you lost some weight!"

No, I told her, I had not stopped eating, I was having 2-3 glasses of wine every day, I had not exercised, and I wasn't doing Jenny Craig behind her back. In fact, I had not changed my life one bit. I had not even followed the recommended taking of supplements, the wearing of special compressing garments, or the drinking of at least 8 glasses of water a day.

Anyway, her delight gave me pause and for the first time after starting treatment I checked myself in the mirror. At that point I had undergone only 3 treatments and sure enough, I looked trimmer already.
That got me motivated. I decided to help the process along, so I bought one of the recommended food supplements—niacin pills—and plenty bottled water, and went 3 more times under the laser, as a total of 6 constitute a full treatment.
After the last session my measurements and pictures were compared with those from before treatment and the verdict was I had lost 3.5 inches around the waist, 2 inches around the hips, and 1 inch around the thighs. I had not lost any weight—yet.

All that without any major change in lifestyle.

I was impressed. I was also devastated by the right-before and right-after pictures; each snapped upon an exhalation, so there was no trickery with holding one's breath. Clearly, at 60, my body (or Party Central as I call it) was going the wrong way and it appeared now was a good time to get serious about getting back in shape and to begin thinking about longevity and a healthier lifestyle instead of Dreyer's vs Breyer's ice cream.

As a result, some of my next entries are going to be about how I'm tackling the onslaught of time, bad habits (not that I have any), weight increase, wrinkles, hair-loss, and dementia.
No seriously, vanity goes a long way toward changing my ways, so that I may eventually post better looking pictures.
If you too look at yourself in the mirror the way I do now, you know it's time to say, enough!

When that moment comes, tell Les at Laser EnergyWorks Rudolf sent you. He will give you a nice discount and maybe, maybe help rid me of my double chin, which by the way, is another trick the Zerona has on its, uh, flexible arms. Les's philosophy is that he will only deal with products that are scientifically proven to work. I know, he's a God-conscious man, but that's one philosopy a skeptic like me can believe in...

Monday, January 19, 2009

Bush Protest: Shoes Thrown At White House



It's all very ludical, throwing shoes over the White House fence on the last day of Bush's presidency, but for eight years we've not seen any protests significant enough to speak off. The American people went bravely shopping and let W Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Rice run the country and Iraq into the ground without much criticism. So, throw your shoes in response to a currently being held and tortured Iraqi journalist who showed he had the guts to stand up against Bush and show the world how he felt, but don't congratulate yourself. As a nation, you've been lazy, silent, complicit, and cowardly. Hopefully, Obama will negate this shameful period in world history with intellect, tact, and sincerity, but crimes have been committed and too many have stood by. That didn't happen in the Philippines, Ukraine, Beirut, and other places where the people took to the streets and demanded change they could believe in before it was offered to them on a platter...
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Sunday, December 14, 2008

From Zero to Sixty...

I'm not sure if it's meaningful to write about turning sixty, but since I am rapidly approaching that day I'm giving it some thought for the hell of it. After all, this is a time when everyone seems concerned about their legacy—Bush and Rumsfeld for example, and both are trying to rewrite history to attain a favorable view.
Alas, I don't have the luxury of living in the public eye. My secrets stay where they've been since they entered closet or can.

Of course, we're familiar with seeing our lives in terms of milestones: first steps, first date, first car, first war, whatever... After a while there aren't that many "firsts" anymore, as the initial excitement about fulfilling a life's promise turns to family, duty, work, honing one's skills, surviving tax time, etc., before life's last stages become too dilapidating to attribute any glorious accolades to.
"He remained sharp until the end," may be the best one can hope for.

However, right this moment it appears that sixty is a sweet spot from where one should be able to cast a mild glance backwards while at the same time eyeing the future without the kind of anxiety I felt for example at sixteen, when turning 21 equaled entering the promised land.
At sixty, being alive (something my father did not accomplish) is a success in itself from a very basic viewpoint. So far, so good. I'm breathing for all that it's worth. But there's still a road ahead, even if it's generally not regarded as long or promising as the one already traveled.
Yet, sixty isn't the beginning of the end, unless you believe it is.
To me, the number is representing an opportunity to take the pulse of my life. Life has to be about something. But everything, be they people, things, jobs, or money—to name a few—are elements outside of myself and prone to influences over which I can only pretend to have control.

I guess, what counts the most is, what have I learned, if anything?

Learning is an awkward process. It's based on failures and on finding ways to overcome them. As such it took me the greater part of my life to begin to appreciate failure as an indicator of progress. I've tormented myself on occasions, wallowed in regrets when things didn't turn out as I had hoped. And every time hindsight taught me that it had been for the better. That there were important lessons harvested from failure. Mistakes are a must and we should understand that, but few do in our reward-and-punish society. Without mistakes there's no analysis, no change of plan, no new direction. No improvement.

So, at sixty I can safely acknowledge that I've become pretty good a failing.
However, to avoid becoming too good at it I had to come up with a remedy. Finally I pondered upon a simple slogan which for me sums it up perfectly: Every decision, one of vision.

It sounds simple, but like all mantras just mumbling it is not enough. It takes effort to formulate a vision, but when it's decision time at least you have a tool in hand to measure its validity.
Making every decision one of vision is helping me understand where I'm going and it can even be the mechanism that helps me get there as I no longer have to concern myself with extraneous aspects and influences that lead me astray.
Unfortunately, I was only able to formulate this vehicle for my every day judgments a few years ago. Still, long enough to test it. I'd say that's my #1 insight.

Another thing I've been working on is a possible solution for a problem that we all seem to have: horrible time management. I don't mean the schedule you keep if you work for a boss. I'm talking about dividing your time between catching up with your tasks and accomplishing your goals.
I've noticed that we usually spend most of our time in the past, catching up with yesterdays' tasks, then put off accomplishing our goals because we've run out of time, energy, or are too drunk, to be motivated. We may even think that we've actually accomplished something. If you work for a boss that may be true, but you've done it in the service of another person or institution. You may not have helped accomplish anything for yourself. For that reason I'm a big proponent of building your own business, as it's all about tomorrow.

Now, it's not easy to start the day with dedicating time to your lofty ideals when you have pressing tasks waiting, but without allotting substantial time to realizing your dreams they will remain just that: dreams.
Contrary to popular belief, dreams are hard work. They need consistent attention if they are to become reality. To that end I try to dedicate a portion of my productive hours every day to accomplishing my goals.
Big deal, you may say, but until it entered my consciousness my activities were all over the place. Keep in mind that if you expect your dream to come true 100% that you probably can't accomplish that by dedicating 10% of your time to it. Still, 10% is better than nothing.
If I had to formulate my fantastic insight #2, it would sound something like this: Spend every day x% of your productive time catching up with ongoing tasks, then spend x% on accomplishing goals. Currently I am at 60/40 with my time. My aim is to switch those numbers around. If I can, that means I'm spending more time in the present than in the past.

Now, surely I must've learned something more in sixty years than that, and I have, so if you want more, here's #3:

"Always keep people wanting more."

Thursday, December 11, 2008

In reaction to "George Bush's new-fangled (liberal) Faith"

Today I stumbled over Paul Raushenbush's post at Beliefnet's Progressive Revival blog, titled "George Bush's (liberal) Faith."
In it Raushenbush (what's in a name...) states that in his opinion George Bush revealed that his approach to the bible, evolution and to other religions has more in common with liberal protestants than with his fundamentalist political amen corner, as was "made clear" in what he calls "a surprising ABC Nightline interview on Monday."

When asked if he thought the bible was literally true Bush answered: "You know. Probably not. ... No, I'm not a literalist, but I think you can learn a lot from it, but I do think that the New Testament for example is ... has got ... You know, the important lesson is 'God sent a son,'"

When asked if he prays to the same God as those with different religious beliefs Bush said: "I do believe there is an almighty that is broad and big enough and loving enough that can encompass a lot of people,"

And when asked about creation and evolution Bush answered: "I think you can have both. I think evolution can -- you're getting me way out of my lane here. I'm just a simple president. But it's, I think that God created the earth, created the world; I think the creation of the world is so mysterious it requires something as large as an almighty and I don't think it's incompatible with the scientific proof that there is evolution."

Raushenbush elatedly wrote: "Check, check, check, - Oh, my God, George Bush and I have have the same world view!!!"

Holy Schmoly! Along with Pat Robertson, Michelle Malkin, Karl Rove, Shaun Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and other faux Christians forever trumpeting their smallish, boorish, hypocrite ideas about family, abortion, gays, and God, Raushenbush too can't live with the fact that Bush's set of religious values have nearly destroyed the economy, democracy, the environment, plus the lives of thousands of US soldiers and their families and tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of innocent citizens in New Orleans, Iraq, and Afghanistan. He's leaving behind America as a severely broken and bankrupt stinking shit-hole on a hill—to paraphrase Reagan.

These are some of the reasons religious Americans voted for Obama, risking their Christian and Republican souls for some liberal ointment, perhaps seeing in Obama the Messiah they're always hoping for to put an end to thievery, greed, bribery, adultery, and all those other character traits Republican politicians and evangelical leaders are regularly being indicted for. Throughout history there have been terrible leaders and Bush's name can easily be added to a list that includes Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Franco, Idi Amin, and Mao Tse Tung, if only for alienating a very large segment of the nation and making the world a more dangerous place by being a poster boy for terrorist recruitment.

To Raushenbush that doesn't seem to matter as he continues with, "George Bush was trusted by a large segment of the Christian population because he publicly articulated a profound personal experience of God through Jesus Christ. This interview reveals that someone can have an authentic religious experience without the burdens of Biblical literalism, anti-science suspicions and Christian triumphalism."

That's it? Nothing about how that trust was betrayed? Rather, elation about the fact that in the end George The Merciless's religious experience was "profound." Is this guy for real? Who gives a flying fuck that Hitler went to church? Is that the religious right's ultimate standard by which a man's or woman's character is judged? Oh, I forgot, judging's up to the Almighty... Yet, I've never felt so judged by Republicans, even those among my friends, who project as much disdain as they can into uttering the label "Liberal" as during the last eight years (in which not a single Democrat was appointed by Bush and instead were singled out and ejected from many government posts, only to be replaced by Republican yes men and women—an action not unlike Hitler's reinheit-drive to rid Germany of the "impure").

But Raushenbush appears oblivious of any historical context and ultimately loses me when he states, "Contrary to popular belief, George Bush is no dummy," after first quoting the three above-referenced horrible, awkwardly-worded attempts by George The Theologist at forming complete sentences to do with his "faith." Raushenbush's jubilation at holding the same world view as George The Unrepentable (who at the end of his reign has begun appearing on TV in sheepskin, maybe hoping to erase all our negative memories) only shows what little evidence he needs to feel comforted by all those that engage in, support, vote for, and generally embrace discrimination, war, killing, and walk lock-step with the big corporations that control politics and thus our lives. No matter what myopic worldview George The Blind Bat has, Raushenbush, by comparing Bush to himself only gives validity to the idea that one does not have to be smart to be elected president if there are enough others lacking intelligence. Sadly, there are plenty and for 8 long years George The Decider was their Über-Dummy.

If the idea of an Almighty as one with sensibilities and reason was what many saw reflected in George Bush I'd proffer that as a mighty insult to the Almighty. As a result of having our own Gang of Four at the helm (Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rove) we have witnessed quite the opposite of everything commonly attributed to Jesus's teachings, and still Raushenbush goes back to crawl up the apparently cozy rectum of George The Warmonger who sarcastically (others might say "humbly") stated in his ABC interview that he's "just a simple president."
Sure. Someone you'd like to have a beer with. The Other Son of God. The Man with a Mission who wanted to be a Uniter but became a Divider by seeing himself as The Decider. The Chosen One who'd set the world straight on the path to Armageddon.

To his credit, Raushenbush finally had me laughing when he revealed himself as totally inadequate to grasp what the elections had wrought by saying, "Hopefully other political and religious figures on the right will follow suit. Governor Huckabee?"

Raushenbush, dude, the religious right got it royally wrong, and that includes that has-been Huckabee who'd sent gays straight to hell if he could! Except for you, no one's waiting for the televised remodeling of the collapsed Republican and religious right wedding cake. Certainly not redressed with some liberal sauce du jour. America finally woke up and grabbed power from the greedy grubby Republican and religious right dead-wrong hands. We're no longer interested in their or your misguided, juxtaposed, miserable, and entirely backward world views.

About Religion
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Monday, December 8, 2008

Bush's Environmental Chief: There's "Not A Clean-Cut Division" Between Religion And Science


First, I'd say, consider the source. However, as these statements are dispensed as official news it pays to post a retort.
Ask yourself, if everything we know to be scientifically true today could fit in a book, would you not reference it like a good Christian does the Bible?

Now ask yourself, if someone today published a book based on quasi-historical assumptions, unexplainable events, would you suspend your disbelief and start trying to convince others that everything in the book is true, or would you label it entertainment or sci-fi?

There's no proof that burning bushes and snakes can talk, that seas can part or that anyone can walk on water (except maybe Chris Angel, a renowned trickster). So, what would happen today to anyone seriously claiming witness to such incredible incidents? What would happen if a long-awaited Messiah returned and had to resort to what may appear to many as illusions to convince us of his godly status?

You can belief anything you want, but it only proves you're gullible (I don't want to use stronger words) and lack the mental capacity to figure things out by using your rationale. We just had 8 years of that and it lead to nothing, and certainly not compassion, but rather near-totalianarism and gut-wrenching ineptness.

People have believed in the unexplained for thousands of years. I can't predict the future, but at some point I fathom science will have explained nearly everything, including why some people rationally insist on the irrational... To me, though, that just goes over my head.

About Religion
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Friday, November 28, 2008

Black Friday Stampede Kills Worker At Wal-Mart

Today, the news reports that a Wal-Mart employee has been trampled to death by shoppers smashing through the doors of a Long Island Wal-Mart the morning after Thanksgiving—commonly known as "Black Friday." The unidentified victim, employed as an overnight stock clerk, tried in vain to hold back a crowd of hundreds just after the Green Acres Mall store opened at 5 a.m.
I have long been dismayed by mindless shoppers whose state of consciousness appears to be little more than that of preprogrammed buybots, often obstructing my aisle as they gaze uncomprehendingly at a box of cereal that's about as half-empty as the cranium cavities in which their discount options percolate in lieu of actual thoughts. As America's system of voracious capitalism teeters on the brink of collapse and presidential appointees pay ad-hoc homage to socialism by siphoning off hard-earned taxpayers' money by the billions to mismanaged monolithic mega corporations, the shopaholic masses know little better to do than to spend their quick-devaluing dollars on cheap "luxury" goods manufactured in friendly dictatorships with low wages that will soon fail, become outdated, or are carted off to self-storage facilities as closets, basements, and attics clutter with earlier acquired crap.

Wal-Mart, as one of the most predatory and anti-worker enterprises, has become a mecca for minions of susceptible lower-income earners, where they can exercise their lack of education, culture, and purpose by unloading shopping carts stocked with big brand boxes into their gas-guzzling SUVs, only to return hungry for the next sales event. Just as they can't see themselves as unfulfillable voids with a unsatisfiable appetite for soon useless stuff they can't be expected to see other lifeforms as more indispensable. By clearing the doorway of human debris Wal-Mart avoided a riot and possibly more casualties, conveniently citing consumer safety as priority #1. Save for a minor incident Black Friday was carried out around the nation for what is was intended: to shovel as much money into the pockets of retailers as possible and ring in the Christmas shopping season during which we are expected to commemorate the miracle birth of Jesus whose image personifies suffering, forgiveness, kindness, compassion, and an appeal to the best in us...

I give the American Dream as the backdrop in this unfortunate mall clerk's fading nightmare on Main Street another ten years before its fairy-tale veneer will have entirely peeled back and exposed an utterly subdued, intoxicated, on credit living nation that's just as easily manipulated by power-grabbing politicians as by the morally bankrupt multi-national corporations that control them. Lofty shopping mall names like Green Acres may foreshadow a future of empty storefront facades they once adorned if todays' relentless consumerism continues to indiscriminatingly feed the all-devouring locust called Capitalism.

About Holiday Sales
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Sunday, November 23, 2008

Bush's Parting Gift, Another Great Depression?


Many comparisons have lately been made between our current economy and the Great Depression. While future historians may have a better view of the severity of both incidents, a real comparison can of course not be made unless we strain ourselves to give equal weight to a majority of causes. The comparison is not only questionable, but seems to suggest that we'll be facing the same hardship now as the nation did back then. There's no doubt that both times a financial crisis spearheaded what some would call a catastrophy, but what I see as a collapse of Capitalism. I'm not saying this will be the end of Capitalism, as it can recover and I'm sure it will, but right now it's flat out on its back and if that isn't a collapse then what is...

Indeed, the patient is Capitalism and its recovery is not expected any time soon. It's all too clear now that pure, unadulterated greed lies at the core of a system that sprouted from the industrial revolution and turned the globe into a mine field of interdependent economies and a landfill for the results of glutinous consumerism. In the end just promises of future product availability turned out to provide the strength that held up the house of cards the economy had become. Capitalism, which after all believes in itself and free markets, deserves to be left to its own devices to recover—however painful that process may be. All the money now thrown at it will be wasted if it's only used to keep the machine running without looking at what it exactly produces. But, the people now protesting, the taxpayers, should also realize that they have been feeding the private jet uppercrust by indiscriminately buying their spit & shine crap, useless mass-produced trinkets, and stuff that doesn't work, is badly designed, badly engineered, and produced by poor suckers without shoes in dictatorships. So, in the end it's us that are sick and we better understand that real medicine never tastes like sugar water.

Under Bush, regulations that were in place to control corporate behavior have been relaxed to the point where Wall Street ran euphorically wild with the bulls until all was exhausted and greedy CEO's got into their private jets to beg in Washington for more party money from you, the taxpayer. It's a scam that has been played by the Republicans since they took control of the White House. We were promised victory in Iraq, lower gas prices, Obama's, uh, Osama's head, national security, and ended up getting bilked for billions of dollars while being spied on domestically. They controlled everything until two subsequent elections taught them that America had enough of these out-of-control control freaks that call themselves conservatives but conserved nothing, except for their hatred of gays, immigrants, and the French.

Now, I have no doubt that the greedy corporate bastards that got us in this mess will be the same that get us out, as they control the government, global resources (that may include you!), product manufacturing, infrastructure, media, and market (that certainly includes you!). Of course, they will also be the ones shaking things up by buying failing companies for a fraction of their worth and letting others die. In the process, many may die, either physically, or figuratively (and I hope that isn't you, or me!), before the markets stabilize and then it will begin a new cycle with the kind of outcome that will lead to comparisons with the Great Depression.

Only the people at the base, the workers, citizens—consumers all—can change the course if they are beginning to think and shop differently. As we've seen now—and I hope it's a lesson—it's our money that controls the players at the top, not the other way around, as "trickle-down" Reagan-onomists and rightwingers have had us believe for too long. Luckily, as has been proven by Obama's election, the books he wrote, and the discourse that took place in blogs and other media helped turn hapless citizens into informed buyers. The Obama brand may still disappoint, but its emergence stands in sharp contrast with the old-school baseless attacks the political right depended on. This is a different time and this time we know better. We're no longer the unshaven great unwashed from the Great Depression era. We've got blog power!

Let us hope that we can do better and that an open dialog about what our real needs are may lead to better products that address real needs at prices that reward everyone in the product cycle fairly. To follow what things are heading in that direction I recommend treehugger.com.

About Financial Crisis
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Huckabee: Gays Haven't Crossed Civil Rights Violence Threshold


While Mike Huckabee holds on to the view that gays haven't yet crossed the Civil Rights Violence Threshold, he apparently doesn't realize that such statement sounds like an invitation to turn gay-bashing up a notch, now that Newt Gingrich has also publicly declared that there is a "gay and secular fascism prepared to use violence." Oh, boy! The gays and seculars are coming, armed to the teeth with rakes and clubs!

Seriously, ultimately all issues of race, gender, equality, etc., will need to be settled by the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, it's stacked with conservative political appointees. At the core of all arguments against equality is either stupidity, bigotry, faith or a combination of all three, which is what is commonly projected by those publicly airing their fearful opinions. What we see here is only the beginning of the battle. The "concerned" citizens need to be separated from their biased fears and begin accepting that any form of discrimination is hurtful and shameful for a nation that sees itself as civilized, modern, and advanced.

We're not talking about "others" who happen to be "different." We're talking about our children, born from our blood. To deny them anything less than what we reserve for ourselves is selfish, loathsome, and despicable.

Religion and State must be separated as per the Constitution. Religious groups are nothing but cults, even if they belong to big brand name cults. The Law ought to be fact-based, and since marriage is recognized under the law as a contract (whatever you think about it from your cult perspective) it should be applicable to all citizens, regardless of age, sex, gender, etc. America has a terrible past when it comes to discrimination and still voices ring out loud and clear to continue doing just that. It is what made Dick Cheney and his wife so evil in my eyes, having a gay daughter, yet denying her equal rights.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Friday, November 14, 2008

Netflix Rocks With Roku...

This year circumstances prompted me to buy a new HDTV. I settled on the Series 5 Samsung 32" after reading nothing but great reviews on the web and although it was more than I wanted to spend, Cirquit City extended a $100 discount, just because I asked and maybe also because I heard rumors they're going bankrupt. They may be giving even more discount now that it's official. After looking at the different sizes I settled on 32" because broadcast picture quality is not always great as often extreme video compression leads to blocky and blotchy on-screen artifacts especially when motion is involved—something that's just amplified on a larger screen. So, I figured the 32" size and the fact that the Samsung has an extreme high response rate this model delivered the most bang for the buck in terms of features, sharpness, rich blacks and color fidelity. I briefly had an LG in the same size that I returned because there were things that bothered me where the Samsung more than delivered.

If, like me, you're not all that interested in the HD broadcast channels (Bikini Destinations [implants galore], or cooking shows) the next best thing is playing a DVD. Now, recently Netflix made Watch Instantly available for Mac owners and I had tried it, but since I work all day on my Mac using it also for movie watching is not appealing to me and certainly can't compare to watching a movie together in bed.
Alas, a trip to Netflix revealed that there's also a $99 device (a small box by Roku) available for instant watching on your HDTV. I decided to give it a shot.

Now, I also own the Apple TV, a device I've had for a few years and which last year became capable of renting and watching movies on. Unfortunately a recent issue HD movie rents for $5 and is good for only 24 hours, whereas the Netflix Watch Instantly feature is free and affords unlimited watching movies and TV shows with any 1 DVD at-a-time plan of $8.99 or higher.

While not as good as the screen quality of Apple TV (which cost $229, has a 40Gb hard drive while Roku only streams and with which you can do so much more, like playing and buying music, TV shows, watching YouTube, etc.), the Roku delivers higher quality on your HDTV compared to watching Netflix on your computer. Supposedly, within months the service will begin including HD quality as well, at which time it should be very competitive with the Apple TV, except for price, where Netflix is the winner. Still, that's not where it all ends, as not all Netflix content available on DVD are (yet) available as Watch Instantly content. The same goes for Apple TV, where Hollywood reigns supreme. However, where Apple TV has been lacking in independent movies, the free Netflix movies have a decent offering of those.

Of course, within time all this technology will change again, but for now the combination HDTV-Netflix-Roku is pretty irresistible for movie fanatics I think, especially with the same box soon being able to stream HD content. Netflix seems to have out-competed Blockbuster and surely Tower Video and positioned itself for online streaming at affordable prices. Even though there are competitors, such as Hulu, with Netflix's vast customer base my money's on Netflix.

I hope my experiences have given you something to consider if your situation is somewhat like mine—technology-wise, of course.
Ciao!

A dinosaur bailout...

Towards the end of the presidential election the McCain camp attacked Obama on his liberal socialist agenda in the midst of a period in which Wall Street, lenders, and the auto industry is begging for citizens' tax dollars. It's not that the people want socialism, it's the capitalists that in their crumbling greed have discovered that when vision fails, innovation lags, and products miss the mark, government by and for the people affords one last money grab before extinction or survival of the fittest prevails. Before they got on their knees they have fought unions, wrecked the environment, bought politicians, and distanced themselves as far as they could from the common man, dangling a world of soulless luxury in front of us to get us to max out our credit just to keep up with the Joneses. The dinosaurs had grown too big for their brains and moved too slow and ultimately demise was their fate. A different world emerged in which smaller, smarter, and better adapted to the environment creatures existed. Let these mammoths die and watch smaller, smarter, and better adapted to the environment companies emerge. People have to learn to do things themselves again and not have dinosaur corporations do the thinking for them.

Monday, May 5, 2008

Death of the DC Darling

The DC Madam is dead. She did what few women chose by way of suicide; she hung herself. While it's unclear if she did this alone or may have had some "help," one thing we know: she was recently convicted for running a call-girl operation.
She maintained she was merely a single mom trying to make ends meet. Many single moms have chosen for the sex trade in order to keep their economy afloat. In America, that means engaging in illegal practices. Prostitution is a no no, but as we've seen when politicians are involved hardly any ever serve time, and the only victim is their spouse having to flank her man as he publicly sobs and promises to seek help for his deviant behavior.
Sex can't be a crime, if it's something everyone does. It should not be a crime to make an arrangement with another consenting adult. The US has a terrible record of criminalizing its citizens and publicly exposing anyone suspected of a crime. Lives are destroyed and reputations tarnished because by criminalizing sex between adults there can't be protection of individuals on either side of the transaction. There are cultures where prostitution is much more accepted, such as in The Netherlands. When I lived there a long divorced friend surprised me one day by announcing she'd been working in a brothel for the last 3 months. She was enjoying the extra money, enjoying the sex, and enjoying the friendships with other women, most of them divorced mothers. She was taxed as a sex-worker, and no one in our circle of friends ever spoke ill of her choice. In fact, her new line of work seemed to have empowered her. We all know that her situation isn't uncommon for many women that find themselves without adequate income. Most of us prostitute ourselves for the gain of our "Johns" by engaging in the trade of time and energy. The bodily fluids we exchange for wages is our sweat. Rationalize for yourselves why one form of physical exploitation is accepted and the other one is not. It doesn't make sense. Legalize it, legalize pot and other victim-less behaviors and America's overcrowded prisons can begin being used for people who actually commit crimes.

John McCain, hero or traitor? Some straight talk...

2008 presidential nominee, Republican Senator John McCain (born August 29, 1936 in Panama) is repeatedly being called an "American hero" by people on all sides of the political spectrum and all walks of life. He's often being thanked for his service to his country.
Not much thought seems to go into such words of praise. After all, since 9/11 almost anyone in public service who wears or wore a uniform is now customarily being labeled "hero," or "heroes" in the case of an entire group or profession.

Most know bit and pieces of McCain's story, as it's been widely publicized. He comes from a family of four-star admirals in the US Navy. He became a Navy pilot and in 1967, on his 23rd bombing mission over North Vietnam, he was shot down and captured, badly injured, by the North Vietnamese. He spent five and a half years as a prisoner of war during which time he was according to his own statements tortured before being released in 1973.

While he survived 5 airplane crashes (4 while piloting!), his hero status is mainly attributed to the time he spent as a POW, and during which he claims to have suffered emotionally and physically at the hands of his captors. It's well-documented, including by McCain himself in various books he wrote and in interviews, that he ended up divulging military information to his captors and signing "war-crime confessions," acts commonly associated with treason, but long since forgiven by many (but not all) due to his ordeal, which by his own account, included two years of solitary confinement.

If the above description contains the information necessary to define him as an "American hero," so be it, but it's a far stretch from how the idea of "hero" came to be understood.
Let's first make it clear that McCain has never referred to himself as a hero, but rather that he "was privileged to serve in the company of heroes, but never, never have I described myself as having done anything heroic." Indeed, reference to his capture on his own website is limited to the following paragraph: "John McCain spent much of his time as a prisoner of war in solitary confinement, aided by his faith and the friendships of his fellow POWs. When he was finally released and able to return home years later, John McCain continued his service by regaining his naval flight status. His naval honors include the Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit, Purple Heart, and the Distinguished Flying Cross."

Does McCain know better than anyone that flying technically advanced aircraft over the city of Hanoi on his 23rd bombing mission, releasing tons of bombs on a predominantly civilian population during a misguided war in which America was the aggressor was a far cry from the kind of behavior that sets a true hero apart? Moreover, the man who first saved him from drowning after he crashed in the Hanoi lake and then shielded him from being killed by bystanders, a peasant (and hero, by every definition!) by the name Mai Van On, died without a mention in any of McCain's publications, or a token of his gratitude other than a photo op.

Not that McCain was without valor, again, by his own account. In 1968, after the North Vietnamese discovered he was the son of an Admiral and offered to release him (which in itself is questionable, as he was a golden catch for their propaganda), he says he refused. He would only accept the offer if every man taken in before him was released as well. We have only McCain’s word for it.
Yet, this incident itself is hardly ever mentioned as the reason for his widely perceived status as hero. It's certainly overshadowed by his own testimony in U.S. News and World Report, of May 14, 1973, in an article written by former POW John McCain, in which he states that "On October 27, 1967, four days after being shot down, (McCain) called for a North Vietnamese guard. (McCain) told the officer, "O.K., I'll give you military information if you will take me to the hospital." And he did, from ships' positions to personnel readiness, attack package routes, and targets... Maybe that's why it's not odd that on a 1993 visit to Vietnam, McCain pleaded with his former captors not to release any records they hold pertaining to returned U.S. POWs. Many believe McCain's records could prove so damaging to his reputation as a Senator they could eliminate his chance to become president.

As outlined above, and as publicly stated by McCain, so far there's nothing classically, or traditionally, heroic in his tale. To the contrary.
I'd go further and express that today America suffers from an inferiority complex that's being compensated for (and smartly exploited for political gain) by bestowing the title of hero haphazardly on just about anyone in uniform. Protesting it is tantamount to being seen as “anti-American,” or “unpatriotic.” Then, should we not ask why Americans need to turn deeds performed in the line of duty into acts of heroism? Can't that be called a superiority complex?

If you act on an impulse and run into a burning barn to save someone, is that the same as having trained for just such an event and go in with experience and full support of other firefighters, wearing special equipment designed to help you see, breathe, communicate, and survive? I don't want to minimize a firefighters virtue, but someone can't be a hero just for putting on a firefighter suit (or a fly-suit as Bush tried for his infamous "mission accomplished" statement).

If definitions are changing when it comes to what makes a hero, is it really just up to those intended on manipulating our emotions for political gain to create modern mythology, and invent a quintessential "American" branded kind of heroism, or do the centuries-old definitions of heroism still apply today?
By comparing tales of heroism from ancient to recent we can establish the common traits of the hero. History seems to indicate that among other things there must be perceived risk and selfless intention to become a hero. In the example of John McCain, his choice to enter the US Navy be considered selfless act, but once enlisted, just doing his job—and by extension being captured while doing it not very well—doesn't necessarily make him a hero.

In the classic sense, the title of "hero" is reserved for those who do something extraordinary that goes far beyond the call of duty. Someone who saves others with disregard for his or her own life or limb is by definition a classic hero. John McCain saved no one and instead engaged in the brutal act of raining fire and brimstone from the sky on civilians in a country that had never threatened the US. This is a man who cheered on the US's Christmas Bombing of Hanoi from his confinement, knowing very well that while aimed at breaking the North's resistance it would also wreak great havoc among civilians. That in itself seems selfish rather than selfless and shows that at the time he had learned little about the cruelty of war and remained a stout supporter of the US's involvement in the Vietnam war—all the while collaborating with his captors and acting as a war criminal for their propaganda purposes.

America's cult of celebrity worship may have more to do with how we perceive modern day heroes. A Harris Poll conducted in 2001 delivered Jesus and Martin Luther King as #1 and #2 heroes. John Wayne and Michael Jordan were in the top 10. I don't want to diminish the personal contribution and sacrifices these individuals have made to society, but what does that tell us about the quintessential American hero? That celebrity status is more valuable to us than the performance of actual heroic feats?
What some of these individuals exhibited can certainly be attributed as traits that at least partially characterize a hero, such as courage; or not giving up until a stated goal is accomplished; or doing what’s right regardless of personal consequences; or doing more than what's expected of them; or changing society for the better; or exhibit a willingness to risk personal safety to help others...
However, most of these traits have to do with character, which is supposedly already present prior to the performing of any act of heroism. In that respect, McCain has exhibited character more than anything else, and I would present that his character falls in one of two camps for judgment: those that agree with his behavior as a POW and later as a Senator, and those that don't.

While heroes may have a strong character on the outset, often a hero's character develops during the journey toward hero-dom, and can be the result of it, as may be the case in the example of an otherwise as ordinary perceived individual surprising everyone by running into a burning barn to perform a heroic feat. In that respect, heroes don't sit by the fire waiting to be called into action. Rather it's a set of circumstances that propels an ordinary individual into action with heroism being the extraordinary result.

Is then bravery alone enough to be labeled a hero? The press today likes to paint our soldiers in Iraq as quintessential "American" heroes at every opportunity, but while they can certainly be viewed as brave for going into combat and risking their lives, they do so in the line of duty, a duty which often have them empty their weapons almost indiscriminately in the general direction the enemy, often killing and maiming innocent bystanders, afterwards conveniently dehumanized with official terms such as "collateral damage," or "casualties." Heroism in itself it is not, as argued earlier, even though heroic moments may ensue when for instance comrades are rescued under fire. For the recognition of those specific moments there are medals, but a soldier’s presence alone in a combat arena cannot be used to label them as heroes. It's simply not how heroism has been defined throughout time.

In McCain's case we're looking at a man who initially performed in line with the duty he signed up for. Loss of life, injury, capture, and imprisonment were and are risks that are well understood by anyone engaging in combat and are also part of training and the military code of conduct. Collaborating with the enemy is not being taught as a survival technique. On the contrary, the entire military machine hinges on the principle of honor. It is difficult then to rhyme the military's notion of honor with McCain's willingness to divulge military secrets during his captivity. For that reason alone, McCain is probably the most unsuitable person to ever have gotten this close to the presidency. What man in his right mind would declare it's "fine by me" to see our military remain in Iraq for a hundred years? As argued before, a hero is someone opposite from the idea of putting more lives at risk. Oddly enough, McCain has not shown to be particularly occupied with the soldier's or veteran's well-being, and his dealing with POW cases and families raises more questions than it answers.

To this day, there are plenty that see McCain as a traitor instead of a hero. Many of them served in the military the same time he did. They remember him as the man who as soon as after four days in captivity (during which he claims he was tortured, a claim contested by other POWs) made a deal with his captors and did the opposite of what a hero would've done. There are pictures of McCain warmly embracing his former interrogators (and torturers?). Apparently he's either very forgiving, or has his own reasons as touched on earlier.

So then, in light of the aforementioned, is John McCain the quintessential American hero or a traitor? A strong case can be made that he was and is not a hero by any standards, but has become someone with celebrity status Americans often confuse with that of a national hero, like Michael Jordan. On the other hand, if a traitor is someone who aids and abets the enemy willingly and repeatedly, an equally strong case can be made that it applies to McCain, enforced by his own statements, and the question then is if such a person ought to be President of the United States...

Monday, April 28, 2008

Obama Intelligent Enough For You?

The Jeremiah Wright controversy is one of Obama's own making and I'm sorry to see an otherwise brilliant man fall victim to the God-hoax he thinks he has to keep embracing in order to be electable in this country.
As I write this his future is uncertain as it pertains to seeking the presidency. Personally, I hope he'll be able to overcome these adversities, as I regard him at this moment in the race as the only viable candidate who exhibits the poise, the calm, and the vision of someone able to lead America away from the self-destructive path it's been on for eight years. Both Hillary Clinton and John McCain represent the old school thinking that has brought us to the brink we now find ourselves on and they will certainly not be able to deliver the changes we need as a people and as a nation, and which we needed yesterday.

In Obama we have a man who at this moment has proven to many that he's intelligent, seeks new ways of governing, and appears to be the kind of charismatic individual that can bring people together and can get things done. He indeed represents the "hope" that his campaign runs on. However, I'm troubled that Obama in all his brilliance has not been able to figure out something even my son already came to terms with at an early age, namely that there's no proof there is a God, either Christian, Muslim, or otherwise denominated, and that there's no proof Jesus existed or if he did "said" anything currently attributed to him (as if a scribe was always by his side), or that raging men in long gowns somehow have earned the distinction to explain to the rest of us how everything fits together if only you are willing to believe that there's someone omnipresent at the helm of our ship balancing precariously on the cusp of a steep waterfall.
I would have had more respect for Obama if in his new thinking he also could've done away with the ancient, trivializing, tribal rituals that have spread across the world in the form of religion of one ilk or another. If he'd been able to do that he could've made a case for why all the crappy divisive political bickering has taken us into a reality of war, debt, environmental disasters, etc. That the political pandering to the Jerry Falwells, Pat Robertsons, and luminaries of the Catholic church has at every turn exposed the dirty underbelly of America, where Jesus's mythical message of love is curiously absent when it comes to women's rights, acceptance of gays, sexual abuse of the innocent by priests, greed, power, etc.
As a thinking man Obama could have distanced himself not only from the hocus pocus of Jeremiah Wright's designer-brand of Trinity Christianity, he could have easily figured out that everything Jeremiah Wright's Church stands for can be achieved politically. Why do we continue to leave the most important decisions of our time to an unseen, unacting, uncaring God when it's us and our hope (the very definition of Obama's message) that can make all the things happen that need to happen in order to survive the coming period of global warming, unnatural disasters, food scarcity, and mass migrations.
So, in that sense, yes, the chickens have come home to roost in the form of Obama's negligence to trust his intelligence, and it's to his detriment that he could not inspire those of us who have long abolished the silly sermons, crappy leaflets, and devastating dogmas of the men and women "of the cloth," who haven't been able to create an inkling of paradise on earth even in their own homes.
Had he been just a tad more intelligent and less calculating, by counting on those afflicted by the God-hoax, he could have found plenty of like-minded free thinkers congregating in the audience of almost every comedian who isn't afraid to speak his mind, be his name George Carlin, Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert, John Stewart, Larry david, Keith Olbermann, and countless others who appear much wiser, free-er, and insightful than most any politician. And because we don't carry bibles, pray in groups, or build club houses at every street corner, and can't be counted easily doesn't mean our numbers don't run in the millions. We are the ones who look through the bullshit of a God who can't be seen, heard, felt, tasted other than as dictated by organized religious practitioners; we are the ones who see through the bullshit of old style politics, the bullshit of promises that can't be delivered on, and are well aware that Jesus won't come back to save us (sorry to have to break it to you).
Maybe Obama can save us, but I'm still doubtful he possesses just that tad more intelligence that is needed to denounce the dumbest of dumbest among us who insist to believe in something that doesn't exist, which includes John McCain being any different than George Bush.
Jeremiah Wright personifies old dogma's, conflicted thinking, and leaving important decisions to a higher being. That describes George Bush as well. And because of that analogy Obama stands a lot closer to George Bush and everything that has gone wrong with America in the last eight years than he may be aware of.
My advice to Obama: You are currently our only hope for change within government. Realize your destiny and see that religion is the enemy of us all. Maybe then you can replace all those believers that may turn their backs on you with the intelligent people we're always told by politicians make up America but no one ever appeals to...

Sunday, May 6, 2007

Keith Olbermann's anger...

It has been reported that Rudy Giuliani's campaign expressed its dismay at NBC News reporter Keith Olbermann's commentary on April 25, in which he accused Giuliani of using the language of Osama bin Laden with "the same chilling nonchalance of the madman" to argue that Republicans would keep Americans safer than Democrats from terror.

Luckily, Keith Olbermann can defend himself better than anyone, but that should not be necessary. If only America had more political parties, there would be room for more views, including those of a "rogue" reporter. As we've seen under Bush and his "mandate" a one percent majority of those that did not stay home to watch "Days of Our Lives" and got out to vote can lead to a near-dictatorial chokehold, not unlike a communist party's rule in China, or previously, Russia. People like Olbermann have dared to stick their neck out to keep the power-grab hungry politicians in check that will squander their own beliefs and our vested hope for a better future for dollars and a nod from the dummies that believe their fear-monging diatribes. Only now journalist are becoming a little more courageous and begin looking for the hard facts, but not long ago they sheepishly reported the propaganda coming from Karl Rove's keyboard. Olbermann, Colbert, Stewart, and others who dare to expose the Giulianis, Roves, DeLays, Cheneys, Bushes, Rumsfelds, Rices, McCains, Frists, etc., do that with wit and an uncanny instinct for truth and truthiness, venting our combined anger and frustration as we witness the rape of decency, democracy, and humanity that shamefully parallels what once took place in Germany in 1933. We applaud that these "news entertainers" are not easily scared into the kind of self-censorship that was prevalent after 9/11, as illegal eaves-dropping programs and other highly questionable government campaigns to manipulate the masses became in effect.

Monday, April 23, 2007

Simmons Wants To Ban Words Widely Used by Rappers...

In today's news: "Hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons said Monday that the recording and broadcast industries should consistently ban three racial and sexist epithets from all so-called clean versions of rap songs and the airwaves. Currently such epithets are banned from most clean versions, but record companies sometimes "arbitrarily" decide which offensive words to exclude and there's no uniform standard for deleting such words, Simmons said..."

I think people may miss the point that Simmons' suggestion pertains only to the "clean" versions of songs. Those with the label "explicit" will remain just as the artist intended. Once again, it comes down to leaving educating your kids to record companies or other outside institutions. Why favor censorship when it can only lead to other kinds of censorship? There are many words that can be offensive in context. If your kids gravitate towards abusive language in music or otherwise you have missed some opportunities to teach them values and you can't blame it on whatever they are exposed to. The world's a messy place that you can't clean up by banning words. Niggers, ho's and bitches have every right to be associated with, just like you have every right to distance yourself from those definitions. That said, I welcome the discussion because only when we can use words may we be able to understand each other. I respect Mr. Simmons' initiative, but I respectfully disagree with the idea of banning or censoring language.

About the Imus controversy...

To all those ganging up on Imus as if he's the epithomy of racism in America—for calling a dominantly black basket ball team members "nappy-headed hoes"—while it'd be easy to join you because I personally don't like Imus, you're obviously comfortable calling for censorship, something I'm not comfortable with. Censorship flies in the face of the Constitution, the way I see it. Imus wasn't calling for actions against black women. He insulted them. Bad call. If you want to censor the airwaves, vote with your dial. I have long decided that Imus, Limbaugh, Hannity, Stern, and a whole bunch of others have every right to be assholes and that it's my right to tune them out. That said, I welcome the discussion about race and who can and cannot use certain words, because America isn't done yet with its past. Maybe it will lead to liberating the word "nigger," "niggah," and all its derivatives, currently held hostage by members of the black community, sanitized for your protection with the nomer "N-word." Being Caucasian (you know, from the Caucasus, where the white people come from), I can buy rap music with lyrics containing these words, but not sing along in public. How idiotic is that? How racist is it that black people can say "nigger" and white people can go to jail for it? Chris Rock can say nigger, bitch, and ho 500 times in his show and get away with it. Should he be banned? Everyone in the audience is laughing, because it can all apparently be taken with a grain of sugar. So why not Imus? Ask yourself, have you alway been politically correct? Even in your thoughts? Stop censorship. Accept we are all assholes at times.

I just learned that Imus has been dropped by MSNBC. Is this the beginning of the great sanitazion of the airwaves? I bet not. Imus did not break any laws. The aforementioned assholes will stay on, trumpetting their bigot attitudes to their bigot audiences, protected not just by the First Amendment, but by those profitting from or aiding and abetting bigotry, for political reasons or otherwise. Racism is as alive in America as it's ever been, and as long as no one is actually hurt by it, we have to acknowledge that it can be pretty funny as well, as evidenced by Martin Lawrence's, Chris Rock's, David Chapelle's and a host of comedians ability to cater to their audiences' sense of humor and relevance. If Imus had had the ability to wrap his remarks in a comedic sense, something he utterly failed at, he'd still be bazooning his sour commentary at MSNBC, a broadcaster that like many other broadcasters has failed to give equal air time to non-white talk show hosts...

posted by Rudolf Helder at Thursday, April 12, 2007

In response to "When Black Republicans Go Bad" by Trey Ellis

I think the posting of Trey Ellis's view "When Black Republicans Go Bad" contains some disturbing elements that appear to escape most responders. Now, Mr. Ellis makes it obvious that he is dark-skinned by posting his picture along. I guess that makes him somewhat of an authority on matters of race, although last time I checked I was still labeled "Caucasian" so by the same token that should make me an authority of whatever sums up us "white" folks.

Now then, I hereby willfully distance myself from that notion and rather go by the merits as Mr. Ellis presents them. If I get this right, Mr. Ellis's major gripe is with "blacks" that don't act "black" politically and his references focus on Claude Allen and Justice Clarence Thomas, who, as I perceive it act according to him— perhaps along with Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell—as "blacks" suffering from an Uncle Tom syndrome.

The gist of Mr. Ellis's rant is the question of "why are we so surprised that Claude Allen, until recently the President's chief domestic policy advisor, is being accused of scamming Target out of over $5000?"
Well, he may be surprised, but mainly it seems because Mr. Allen is " a black man who got his start working for Jesse Helms, the former Senator who had the delightful habit of calling all black people, "Fred."

In my personal opinion, anyone, from any background has the right to associate themselves with whomever they choose, even if that may lead to their downfall. So, as a "liberal" I simply accept that Mr. Allen apparently feels some kind of ideological kinship with Jesse Helms. Perhaps Mr. Ellis will next ponder the insanity of many "blacks" that associate themselves with Jesus—who is not being portrayed as "black" by church or media, while he most certainly was not as "white" as he's commonly depicted...

Then, Mr. Ellis introduces the nigger/Fred parable as further evidence that Mr. Allen is not only "black" but also crazy (a crazy nigger). Yet, Mr. Allen has no accusations as such levied against him. Rather, he's being charged with defrauding Target of $5,000. What's unfortunate is that he's "black" and now Mr. Ellis not only holds it against him that here is a "black" man who plays Uncle Tom to his "white superiors," but also conforms to the biased view that "blacks" would more than anyone engage in crime and violence. More than Republicans, or almost as much as Republicans? I'm missing the point.

Yes, Mr. Allen must be crazy and criminal because he also associates with other crazy Republican "blacks," one of whom "sees pubic hairs in a can of Coke."
Hell, and that happens to be a Justice of the Supreme Court. Mind you, still an Uncle Tom anyway according to Mr. Ellis. (By the way, the Coke phrase originated from Senator Orin Hatch's questioning during Thomas's confirmation hearings and is not on record as confirmed by Thomas)

Poor "black" people! They just can't shake the stigma of being stereotypically "black," no matter how hard good-willing nigger-anecdoting "blacks" like Mr. Ellis try to explain their duty to other "blacks" to not think for themselves but align without restraint with the spineless Democrats that have failed to grasp power in the previous two and possibly next elections. How about "blacks" that think for themselves and want to associate with winners? Are they like Jews for Christ? How screwed up is that?

Mr. Ellis goes on to expose "black" Republicans like Mr. Allen and Justice Thomas that subscribe to a "hyper-whiteness," by "staking out positions that even whites in the South grew out of in the Fifties." Excuse me? Justice of the Supreme Court? Chief Domestic Policy Advisor to The President? Here Mr. Ellis's reasoning begins to fall apart, but he blindly continues by asserting the stereotypes "blacks" and "whites" (and Asians, and Arabs, and Eskimos?) apparently have when he states that it's "no wonder" that [black Republicans] "every now and again snap" by associating "petty criminality with 'blackness' and [romance] with "the size of [their] schlong[s]."

And there we have it. Mr. Ellis's own views don't seem to reach beyond these stereotypes and he certainly doesn't offer any other views here.
Therefore, his final wag of the finger whereby he lectures Mr. Allen and Justice Thomas not to associate " blackness" with crime, violence and sexuality is as lame as an, uh, lame dick.
Mr. Ellis seems quite content with the example he chooses of a Willie Horton whom he calls not "the sum of us [blacks]." His article does nothing for the "black" psyche of a free people, free to choose, and free of being a slave to their own history. In a way, Mr. Ellis has described himself, or rather summed himself up as someone who is confused about his own blackness. That's fine. The finger points back.

If I may then sum it up myself: there are plenty assholes, and they exist on either side of the very narrowly defined American political aisle, no matter what the color of their skin is. So, where's the hype? A greedy bigot Republican ought not to be defined otherwise than for what he or she stands for. Mr. Allen has merely operated in agreement with the current neo-con culture of deception, corruption, misinformation, murder, and torture. One day, he and his ilk may face greater consequences than being accused of stealing $5,000. Mr. Ellis, in my opinion, has written a racist piece and that's what I accuse him of.

posted by Rudolf Helder at Saturday, March 11, 2006

Intelligent Divide...

When you have a headache do you rather take a pill, or pray to the Almighty? If you answer, pray to the Almighty, this blog’s for you, Bud.

Let’s travel back to 1925. Darwin's evolution was put on trial by a bunch of creationists. They accused a Tennessee teacher of lecturing that humans descended from a single cell. The idea! Creationists believe they’ve been modeled from play dough by a really big hand, sometime in the year numero uno. The teacher won. Darwin won, and science created the headache pill.
Now, in 2005, the whole shebang is getting a makeover, this time under the headliner, “Intelligent Design vs. Science.”

Sorry, Bud, but it was on the news. I guess you know, you don’t belong to the most informed nation in the industrialized world. Jay Leno even had you on Jaywalking a few times, to make a point that ordinary Americans are a hilariously under-educated bunch. As a subscriber to Darwin-principled science I’d go even further by saying your Intelligent Designer doesn’t seem to have favored you with that which has helped the rest of us evolve as a species: a large brain.

Of course, you may disagree, so let me sucker-punch you: besides my native Dutch I was taught three other languages in public school: French, German, and English. Right off the bat we learned there were more countries than our own. Made it easier for me later to pick up some Chinese and Indonesian—languages, dude, not food. You, on the other hand, still can’t differentiate between "your/you're," "its/it's," “were/where,” “hear/here,” “their/there,” “quit/quite/quiet,” and “to/too.”
And that makes deciphering your blogs hard work, mon!

Now, when we meet, you immediately notice I have “some kind of European” accent even before I have finished my first sentence. Besides not hearing what I said you fail to find The Netherlands on the map. Granted, it’s not a big blob like your country, but since you assert that I’m “from Scandinavia” I at least expect you to point to those countries that unlike The Netherlands make up that geographical group. You can’t. That spot your finger’s on is the Czech Republic. No, no, Turkey ain’t correct either.

During the eighteen years I’ve lived in the U.S. I’ve experienced you repeatedly assume I must be a political, cultural, religious, or economic refugee, someone you graciously shelter and share your “American Dream” with—which, by the way, may be a dream for you, but is a nightmare for many outside of your borders. Dude, I'm no refugee! The Netherlands is so advanced, they have national healthcare, multiple political parties, liberal drug policies you can only dream of, bicycle lanes, and sophisticated systems to keep the ocean out of their back yards.

Meanwhile, knowing squat about other countries, you thumb your nose at an increasingly more sophisticated world in which brown-skinned people, once they’re done stitching your Nikes, wipe their ass with every grade level of private education you so proudly support on your SUV’s Ivy League bumper stickers. If your Harvard can deliver a nitwit to the White House, don’t be surprised if I tell you Indians (no, not native Americans, you dummy) are running universities, businesses, and institutions that rival America’s. Now, they’ve had a “No Child Left Behind” policy for the last hundred years, enforced by every parent who could afford to buy their kids shoes and a schoolbag.

Sorry! I know, right now I have maneuvered you dangerously close to your threshold for criticism, and the little neurons in your brain have begun firing off pre-programmed pulses that translate into “Euro-trash,” “America-hater,” “Socialist,” “Communist,” or... Or what? Running out of labels already? How about “Moron,” “Asshole,” or “Prick?” After all, you feel only you have the right to criticize America, but how? Admit you’re not very creative when it comes to introspection. It’s always easier to just point your finger at your political opponents, be they “Liberals,” or “Conservatives.”
Well, you’re neither liberal, as in “free from bigotry and authoritarian dogmas, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others," nor conservative, as in "moderate, cautious, tending to conserve and preserve the use of natural resources.”

Is it because you basically live under a near-totalitarian regime, a frail and continuously faltering two-party system, in which the ruling 51% makes life miserable for the 49% that lost the last election? Is it because your idea of democracy is to relentlessly sabotage the other side’s political efforts, unrestrained by lies, treason, bribery, and character assassination? Is that why you have been trading in your hard-earned civil liberties lately without nary a stir from a population too preoccupied with reality shows to notice?

Still, you behave as if U.S. branded democracy and freedom are commodities no country can be without. Especially no Muslim theocracy. Yet, you are rapidly turning the U.S. into a Christian theocracy yourself, complete with the similar insane fanatical fundamental neoconservative religious extremists you say we must fight “over there.” Well, I wish you would learn to recognize their vermin counterparts “over here,” like fanatical right wing “religious” leader Pat Robertson in 2005 calling for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. Did anyone protest? I mean, any Christians? Is it because “kicking butt,” has become second nature to you, and you need little incentive to start spreading mayhem that may cost the lives of tens of thousands?

Is it because you have long forgotten how to have a decent and entertaining discussion, now that you’ve been conditioned to see everything in black and white, good and bad, left and right, red and blue? I have watched you quietly disintegrate during conversations, when confronted with facts like, for instance, Henry Ford supporting Hitler and the Nazis. Is it because you don’t know your own facts? That when it comes to ethics, freedom, democracy, and justice, America often behaves like a Mafia Don, more than a dove with an olive branch? Could that begin to explain why you could have helped create the very terrorists that are now defecating on your flag? I’ve tried Bud, but instead of looking for an answer you ask with tearful eyes, “Why does everyone hate us?”

And here lies the rub, dude; most people don’t hate America and Americans. There’s much to admire you for after you wiped out the buffalo and the Injuns, but no one cares for your ignorance of the facts and your standard “fuck you” response. Most people may even think Americans are funny and a little odd with their “best country in the world” syndrome. Dude, many of you have never even crossed state lines, let alone visited Belgium! You know, their neighbors, the French, are crazy about Jerry Lewis, and the Germans will always laugh at Dick und Dumb (Laurel and Hardy). The Dutch? Well sorry, Pal, they think you’re pussies for not being able to keep your backyard dry.

Which brings me to another thing: will you ever look abroad for solutions you desperately need at home? You think you know everything. True, Tommy Ridge taught us that duct tape can protect you from chemical terror attacks, but you couldn’t find any WMD’s after you started a whole war just to locate them. I’ve met you while traveling. You’re usually lost, and that while you’re just trying to find a MacDonald’s so you don’t have to eat the local food. Now that you are in Iraq, have you learned anything about the culture? Ate a falafel? Rented an Iraqi DVD (hint: they’re in the foreign movie section)? Or, explored Iraqi music at your local record store? See, you don’t give a shit! How can you liberate a people you don’t care about? You’re like the boy scout carrying an old lady through traffic, while all she did was wave at her grandchild on the school bus—you know, that smoke-belching pre-WWII yellow scrap you carry kids around in. What’s up with that old shit, dude? Aren’t your kids the future? Don’t they deserve modern buses? That reminds me of your furniture: most U.S. designers seem to get their inspiration from the All In The Family set and create furniture for Archie Bunker’s behind. That’s a long run for the La-Z-Boy, boy.

Maybe that’s the reason why America, while arguably more modern than Cuba, still seems mired in the past. Your roads are in need of repair, lacking sidewalks, street lights, and street signs; old ugly utility poles litter your skyline, your offices and living rooms have fake veneer walls, and your vinyl siding is made to look like wood.
Is that the American Dream you speak of at every opportunity: everything just like the real thing? Fake tits, fake pearls, fake dog testicles, fake orgasms, fake Christians, and now fake science: “Intelligent Design…”

No wonder, you live in a fantasy world in which you’re king; Mattress King; Tire King; Grocery King. And next, Oil King! But hold on buster, you’re an emperor with trillions in debt—you don’t actually own anything and have to borrow from the Saudis and your grandchildren’s social security funds. And yet, calling you on your bullshit is tantamount to treason. Well, I have news for you; your country’s being kept afloat by other nations that haven’t quite collected the last bloody dollar from your Treasury Bonds.

These nations used to be friends, but on your last escapade few came along, because you resorted to lies, name-calling, and French fries renaming. You are no longer welcome where you used to be. You’ve isolated yourself. So then, prepare to live out your days in the gated community that America has become, complete with Mexican guards. You will have to eat your unsigned Kyoto Treaty, choke on your own pollution, your chemical rivers, your acid rain, and the genetically engineered tasteless micro-waved crap you call food. And if you aren’t killing each other first with your gazillion handguns, Uzis, AK-47’s, and other assault guns, you might as well just sit tight and wait until the terminally-pissed-off terrorists get a hold of the WMD’s you yourself have stockpiled within your own borders.
Yep, it’s all working out quite neatly for you, isn’t it, dude?

Could you have done anything differently? Probably not. I’m afraid you religious creeps have become so predictable there’s not an original idea coming out of you anymore, but then you surprise everyone with a rerun of creationism, this time deceptively relabeled “Intelligent Design.”

By now you may have concluded, along with the rest of the world, that “America,” “Intelligent,” and “Design,” are words that don’t go well together in one sentence. Don’t understand me wrong, I do know that you have some smart folks amongst you that in the past have engineered stupendous stuff, like the Chrysler Building, the atomic bomb, and telescopes that can fly past the moon, but these folks are a dying breed, and you know it. They’re the bespectacled intelligentsia; engineers, architects, and scientists—coincidentally, once your ‘A’ students, children every parent would be proud of. In theory they could fix some of the humungous problems you helped create, like global warming, or improve levees that keep out the ocean, but where you are going intellectuals and their stem-cell research are not needed, because from here onward you’re riding the A-Train to Armageddon.

After all your hard thinking, you have concluded that life’s too complex for your burdened brains and that only some super being like, let’s say, the omni-present, yet invisible, terminally-pissed-off and cruel Almighty of the Catholic Circus could have been tinkering with the little cells, veins, fins, flapping wings, leaves, and trees. Oh, suddenly everything in nature fits neatly your “My Pet Goat” story for grownups called “Intelligent Design,” a thinly disguised version of Genesis that contains none of that confusing evolution stuff that first has fish crawling onto land and turn into birds. Oh no! As evangelical realists you put your faith instead in a talkative snake, a babbling bush, and a lone rib that turns into a complex woman. Makes for a great movie. Something Tim Burton could sink his twisted teeth into.

So, gradually it's coming to this: after Pol Pot in Cambodia, Hitler in Nazi Germany, Stalin in Russia, and slews of dictators, madmen, and syphilis-crazed kings before Bush, you are now about to muffle the U.S. intelligentsia, its thinkers, its innovators, engineers, programmers, architects, teachers, chemists, professors, and every scientist you can chase down. Before you ship them off to your concentration camps, to your mental institutions, your gulags, and labor camps, you may offer them to save their hide by denouncing Darwin’s theory of evolution and instead go with the Pope’s and Pat Robertson’s sanctioned legend of a carpenter, a fisherman, and a whore who, if they visited today would be appalled to learn what evil has been and is about to be committed in their name.

Just like the Muslims can’t forget that the Crusaders kicked their cottoned heinies hundreds of years ago, so have the idiot fundamentalist abortion clinic bombing Christians been brooding on kicking the collective ass of intellectuals with an open mind and a critical attitude that makes short work of their ancient cult, its priests’ abusive practices, and detrimental influence on society’s progress.
The idiots among you that are now challenging evolution do that 80 years after the first Monkey Trial and 313 years after the Salem witch hunts, right at a time when we have made enormous progress by applying Darwin’s principles in every aspect of science, be it medicine, biology, biophysics, biochemistry, or anything else with which we try to explain our physical existence. Scientists are about to find a cure for cancer when your prayers could not; and scientist will be the ones to find a cure for AIDS—not your Intelligent Designer you suspect of giving it to us in the first place to punish us for our sins, something He seems to be quite fond of.

Unlike religious fanatics whose narrow world view is based on an old book with cryptic contributions from many writers, for a scientist life is ever evolving, based on forever questioning, and ever inching closer to discovering another truth, revealing itself like layers of an onion being peeled back, promising a cure, a new possibility, a different view. Science is a state of constant wonderment, and much has been accomplished by the curious.
Your Christian demagogues on the other hand may lead you into Bible prayer groups (and into forking over money), but don’t seem to know how to interpret Jesus’ words without creating war upon war, slavery and oppression, discrimination and inequality, and constant suffering wherever they bring the “good news.” Your religious leaders ask you to make sense of a God that can ask you to slaughter your first-born son, but if you actually hear His voice, like Pat Robertson claims he does, you'll find little sympathy even among your fanatical peers if you carry out such an insane request, and you will go to jail, or more likely, a mental institution. That’s because reasonable people have devised laws that protect us from religious fanatics.

Still, the stakes are high, as we edge closer to a totalitarian theocracy with every victory you extreme fundamentalist evangelical Christians score. This time, the deluded "scientists" who defend intelligent design during your new Monkey Trial are well-groomed debaters, but nevertheless they are effectively saying not to bother with research because hey, it’s way too difficult.
Crap!
As species we got as far as we have by applying logic and cleverly bypassing the church’s ominous and stifling influence whenever possible. Otherwise the world would still be flat, the sun would be turning around the world, and we would be riding horse-drawn buggies, wear tall black hats and long beards. Not to mention, many scientists would have died a natural death, rather than burning at the stakes that you always seem to keep preheated. If you want proof of what a theocratic society looks like, look no further than Arab countries and how time has largely stood still there.

Now America’s powerful and political religious zealots want to return to biblical times as well and drag us all along. Soon, Hollywood will burn. Hemlines will drop to below the knee, and de-liberated women can start growing hair again in previously undesirable regions. Men will go on crusades to spread the freedom you’re denying our own women, our own homosexual children, and try to steal the oil that keeps our economy moving. Meanwhile, your greedy eyes are fixed East for the return of the “Son of God.” As if you deceptive, lying, cheating, and murdering bastards of all people would know how to treat someone who makes that claim. Hopefully, you’ll recognize Him before he’s picked up for behaving suspiciously near The Green Zone, sent to Abu Grahib, crucified by the CIA, and raised from the grave for an autopsy.

If you find that scenario even remotely plausible, you’re showing to have a sufficiently large brain after all. Doubt is the way to salvation, Pal, not dogma. Why not debate how our brains’ size may have evolved over supper? If you turn out to be an entertaining and interesting guest it doesn't have to be our last one...

© 2005 Rudolf Helder