No … I’m not talking baseball … the NY Transit workers strike. Unions are getting ridiculous. I’m not just talking about the Transit workers union in NY, but fairly much all unions across the board … they seem to be in it to kill the companies rather than protect their members.
I don’t recall if it was Eastern Airlines or United that the Head of the Union stated in an interview that his goal was to bring down the company … and he did … and you know what … all the union members found themselves out of work … THAT’S what I call looking after the members best interests … yup … I’m sure that all those un-employed mechanics, pilots, stewardesses and everyone else in the company REALLY appreciated that help.
Now I believe that in many instances (particularly in the airlines) management plays a large part of the problem as well … but when you start to put some of the union demands in perspective … well they start to sound like spoiled brats that always get their way.
Presently NYC Transit workers make, on average, a better annual wage than most police officers and teachers. For a job that requires less education (a transit worker position requires a High School diploma (or, I believe, a GED) while law enforcement generally requires 2 years of college and teachers require a full bachelor degree at the least) and is often less demanding.
But they want more money … Of course they’ve been offered a raise (between 3 and 4%) – just not a large enough raise in their minds. And they don’t want to pay more toward their pension (currently they pay 2% … the Transit Authority wants them to pay 6% … 6% is better than most workers in this country are offered.) … and from what I can see that increase would ONLY apply to new hires and only for the first 10 years of employment.
They cite the large surplus of funds that the Transit Authority has … some $1 Billion (45% of which is earmarked for the Transit Workers Pension Fund) … but that surplus is the result of tax money, not increased Transit Worker work … they didn’t DO more to earn that surplus there was simply more collected in city TAXES than originally predicted when the budget was made out.
The Union’s view on this is simple … since the government collected more taxes than they expected then they should give more of that tax money to the transit workers … no they shouldn’t lower taxes or do anything else that might benefit the people that actually PAID those taxes with that extra money … no … that wouldn’t be right … no … better to give it to the union members who came in and worked the same 8 hour shift with all the mandatory breaks and such … after all … they WORKED … um … wait a tick … actually they did the same thing they would have done if there was a $1 billion dollar short fall because the city collected LESS taxes than it expected …. And you can bet they wouldn’t take a pay cut or anything in THAT situation…
Of course … you also have to keep in mind that the strike is, in fact, illegal. “The strike by the 33,000-member Transport Workers Union is illegal under a New York state law that bars public employees from walking out.” [Jail Threat Ups Ante for NYC Union Heads] … mind you in the mind of a Union Leader … the LAW isn’t important, no, they’re more interested in the rule of the mob, not the rule of law.
Currently the employees on strike are loosing 2 days pay for every day that they remain on strike and a judge has ordered fines on the union of $1 million a day.
Every day that this strike continues it puts more stress on the people of NY … not the Transit Authority or the Transit Unions (though both of those parties are loosing money) but on the citizens of New York … a city that relies heavily on it’s mass transit, a city where some people do not have viable alternatives to get to work some of whom may loose jobs or pay because some union leader in a suit and tie living on the sweat of others decided that a 4% raise wasn’t enough.
Personally … fire the lot and start the replacements at 60% of the current salary … then take that extra 40% and give it to the police departments, since they’re the ones working over time through this transportation crisis.
The times that we needed unions are long gone … they’ve grown fat in the excesses and only take, and take, and take. They are a lead weight on the gossamer balloon of the economy and we really need to cut them loose before they drag us down.
The biggest problem is that the unions have grown too big … the have gone from small organizations whose leaders were the working men … the leader was ‘ole Gus’ working on lathe 231 … and Gus had the interests of the other guys in the shop at heart because he worked next to them, sweated with them … he saw how things effected them. Now, many union leaders may never have even DONE the job that the union represents … they are lawyers, not workers, and many of them don’t have a single clue about the concerns of the members … they don’t know the names of the members … they don’t know their families … and they don’t give a rat’s ass about how this strike is effecting the members or how their demands will effect the over all picture in the long term.
Thinking long term … realizing that constantly taking more and more will eventually end up with a situation where there’s nothing LEFT to take … where you’ve taken to the point that you’ve taken everything, and lost everything because the people that you were taking FROM collapsed and disappeared leaving you holding an pension from a fund that is bankrupt.
Some myths say that a vampire that completely drains his victim dies with them … their bodies slowing and falling into that cold empty chasm of death … I think they were speaking of unions and, hopefully, predicting their fall.
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
Profiles
[Disclaimer – any numbers, percents, age groups are grabbed from thin air as examples in order to make a point and are not the result of any form of scientific study or research unless a specific source is linked.]
Okay, what is it that people have against profiling? If, statistically speaking, it was to be shown that 75% of terrorists were white males in the 25-40 age range, what is the big problem with paying a little more attention to white males aged 25-40? Oh, wait … if it was white males no one would have a problem with profiling in the first place … they’d call it good police work.
So why is it no longer good police work when the majority of terrorists fall into another ethnic group? Why is it that people have to be so adamantly against profiling that they actually end up making law enforcement pay LESS attention to the people that are MORE LIKELY to be the cause of problems for fear of being accused of ‘profiling’?
Certainly I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be looking at everyone, even in the above example 25% of terrorists would NOT fall into the ‘white male aged 25-40’ category. But I mean come on … if 75% of terrorists come from a specific ethnic group, then, in my opinion, something close to 75% of the attention of law enforcement and security personnel needs to be focused on the people that MATCH THAT DESCRIPTION.
It’s not a matter of racism … I don’t believe that my race is better than their race … Though I’m sure that someone reading this will probably call me a ‘racist’ because I believe that one of the best ways to catch criminals is through the use of profiling. I’ll just call them an ignorant slob and be done with it.
I don’t know the exact numbers, though I’d be willing to bet you that the numbers are out there. The FBI and other law enforcement agencies collect data regularly on people that commit pretty much any type of crime and so can tell you what type of person is most likely going to commit any given crime.
Last I knew middle aged white males were the highest percentage of serial killers … so, if you’re looking for a serial killer then you should probably spend a majority of your time on middle aged white males … concentrating your investigations on old ladies in wheelchairs is, most likely, only going to lead to more dead bodies.
So why is it that people wildly outside the ‘terrorist’ profile seem to be the most commonly picked for ‘closer investigation’? Very simply … if you take an Arabic male for screening then you can probably expect to be accused of ‘profiling’ and/or being prejudiced …
Profiling makes sense … it works, and it has a greater success rate than ‘random’ checks. Is there still a chance that someone can be overlooked? Sure, but there is ALWAYS that chance. Remember profiling doesn’t mean ONLY checking those that ‘match’ the profile …
The side effect of profiling might also be that the people belonging to that ethnic group might, oh I don’t know, start to put pressure on to distance themselves from those elements that create the problem.
Can’t call them Islamic terrorists … that would be insensitive to those followers of the religion of Islam that aren’t terrorists. Well maybe if we stop being ‘sensitive’ to them all the time then maybe it would encourage them to do things in order to distance themselves from their more radical elements.
Let’s just get rid of the whole concept of ‘political correctness’ as it seems to be aimed at mucking up our ability to use common sense in this country.
Okay, what is it that people have against profiling? If, statistically speaking, it was to be shown that 75% of terrorists were white males in the 25-40 age range, what is the big problem with paying a little more attention to white males aged 25-40? Oh, wait … if it was white males no one would have a problem with profiling in the first place … they’d call it good police work.
So why is it no longer good police work when the majority of terrorists fall into another ethnic group? Why is it that people have to be so adamantly against profiling that they actually end up making law enforcement pay LESS attention to the people that are MORE LIKELY to be the cause of problems for fear of being accused of ‘profiling’?
Certainly I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be looking at everyone, even in the above example 25% of terrorists would NOT fall into the ‘white male aged 25-40’ category. But I mean come on … if 75% of terrorists come from a specific ethnic group, then, in my opinion, something close to 75% of the attention of law enforcement and security personnel needs to be focused on the people that MATCH THAT DESCRIPTION.
It’s not a matter of racism … I don’t believe that my race is better than their race … Though I’m sure that someone reading this will probably call me a ‘racist’ because I believe that one of the best ways to catch criminals is through the use of profiling. I’ll just call them an ignorant slob and be done with it.
I don’t know the exact numbers, though I’d be willing to bet you that the numbers are out there. The FBI and other law enforcement agencies collect data regularly on people that commit pretty much any type of crime and so can tell you what type of person is most likely going to commit any given crime.
Last I knew middle aged white males were the highest percentage of serial killers … so, if you’re looking for a serial killer then you should probably spend a majority of your time on middle aged white males … concentrating your investigations on old ladies in wheelchairs is, most likely, only going to lead to more dead bodies.
So why is it that people wildly outside the ‘terrorist’ profile seem to be the most commonly picked for ‘closer investigation’? Very simply … if you take an Arabic male for screening then you can probably expect to be accused of ‘profiling’ and/or being prejudiced …
Profiling makes sense … it works, and it has a greater success rate than ‘random’ checks. Is there still a chance that someone can be overlooked? Sure, but there is ALWAYS that chance. Remember profiling doesn’t mean ONLY checking those that ‘match’ the profile …
The side effect of profiling might also be that the people belonging to that ethnic group might, oh I don’t know, start to put pressure on to distance themselves from those elements that create the problem.
Can’t call them Islamic terrorists … that would be insensitive to those followers of the religion of Islam that aren’t terrorists. Well maybe if we stop being ‘sensitive’ to them all the time then maybe it would encourage them to do things in order to distance themselves from their more radical elements.
Let’s just get rid of the whole concept of ‘political correctness’ as it seems to be aimed at mucking up our ability to use common sense in this country.
Of Spies and Freedom
Okay … I’m sure that you’ve read the stories about the President being raked over the media regarding his authorization of wire taps without a warrant. Oh the shock, oh the horror … oh the humanity.
First off, well, I’ve personally believed for ages that the government was doing this anyway, and there is at least one news article claiming that Clinton used the power of the White House in a similar manor (Clinton Used NSA for Economic Espionage). I have no doubt that you can likely find similar uses during the Senior Bush administration, Regan, Carter, and on down the line … especially during the cold war era.
Should we be horrified by this? Should we be outraged? They’re invading our privacy!
Ah … But where is this right to privacy? Where is it guaranteed? I will admit that I’m not a Constitutional Scholar or a Lawyer so I may be over looking something, but the closest I can come is the 4th amendment to the Constitution which reads:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (4th Amendment to the Constitution, 1791)
However … a phone tap is not technically a search OR a seizure … nothing has been taken and it would be a broad definition of ‘search’ that would include monitoring phone conversations.
Now, certainly I believe that there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in many things … but talking on a phone is iffy … emails are very iffy … cell phones, oh we’re so far into the realm of ‘iffy’ that it isn’t even funny. Communication in such ways is transmitting a private conversation through public lanes. If I’m having a conversation in a restaurant I accept the fact that what I say can (and likely will be) overheard by someone else … chances are pretty good that anyone who overhears it isn’t going to pay it any attention, but say the right phrase and trust me, they’ll pay attention.
Certainly there are differences between a spoken conversation in a restaurant and a conversation with anther person over the phone, but the fact of the matter is you’re transmitting your voice over a wire that you don’t own or control … through routing stations, switches, etc. … it’s possible to be overheard even if someone isn’t trying to.
It would be, of course, illegal for me to go and tap into someone else’s phone lines and listen to or record their conversations … but this is (aside from simply being rude) partially due to the fact that I would have to in some way alter something that didn’t belong to me it in the first place. The phone company itself would probably be considered in breach of contract in that the people involved pay for the phone service (besides any phone company that got a reputation for doing that would find itself without any customers in fairly short order).
The government (and law enforcement more generally) has a responsibility to protect the citizenry. Sometimes this is going to mean doing unpleasant things in order to protect the greater good. This would not be the first time that law enforcement had tapped a line without a warrant to gather enough evidence to get a warrant.
If evidence is deemed, by the judge, to have been obtained without proper legal authorizations then the judge can prevent the evidence from being used during the trial. This is part of the checks and balances built into our entire governmental system. Will some innocent people get their lines tapped … but then again there are times that innocent people get arrested for murders, robberies, etc.
The question has to be judged on a case-by-case basis … and in the case of an incorrect tap being placed and nothing is ever done with information, then is it really an issue?
‘You have the freedom to seek happiness, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and freedom from oppression. None of these can exist without the fifth freedom … the freedom to protect all other freedoms by any means necessary.’ [Opening to Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell – note I will have to get the exact quote and edit this later]
The world is not black and white … not all enemies confront us openly … there are times when extreme measures must be used in order to protect the freedoms of many.
As citizens we must make certain that the proper checks and balances are in place to insure that the power … any power … that we give to that government is not abused … at the same time, however, we must make sure that we don’t tie their hands to the point that they are unable to protect us ….
First off, well, I’ve personally believed for ages that the government was doing this anyway, and there is at least one news article claiming that Clinton used the power of the White House in a similar manor (Clinton Used NSA for Economic Espionage). I have no doubt that you can likely find similar uses during the Senior Bush administration, Regan, Carter, and on down the line … especially during the cold war era.
Should we be horrified by this? Should we be outraged? They’re invading our privacy!
Ah … But where is this right to privacy? Where is it guaranteed? I will admit that I’m not a Constitutional Scholar or a Lawyer so I may be over looking something, but the closest I can come is the 4th amendment to the Constitution which reads:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (4th Amendment to the Constitution, 1791)
However … a phone tap is not technically a search OR a seizure … nothing has been taken and it would be a broad definition of ‘search’ that would include monitoring phone conversations.
Now, certainly I believe that there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in many things … but talking on a phone is iffy … emails are very iffy … cell phones, oh we’re so far into the realm of ‘iffy’ that it isn’t even funny. Communication in such ways is transmitting a private conversation through public lanes. If I’m having a conversation in a restaurant I accept the fact that what I say can (and likely will be) overheard by someone else … chances are pretty good that anyone who overhears it isn’t going to pay it any attention, but say the right phrase and trust me, they’ll pay attention.
Certainly there are differences between a spoken conversation in a restaurant and a conversation with anther person over the phone, but the fact of the matter is you’re transmitting your voice over a wire that you don’t own or control … through routing stations, switches, etc. … it’s possible to be overheard even if someone isn’t trying to.
It would be, of course, illegal for me to go and tap into someone else’s phone lines and listen to or record their conversations … but this is (aside from simply being rude) partially due to the fact that I would have to in some way alter something that didn’t belong to me it in the first place. The phone company itself would probably be considered in breach of contract in that the people involved pay for the phone service (besides any phone company that got a reputation for doing that would find itself without any customers in fairly short order).
The government (and law enforcement more generally) has a responsibility to protect the citizenry. Sometimes this is going to mean doing unpleasant things in order to protect the greater good. This would not be the first time that law enforcement had tapped a line without a warrant to gather enough evidence to get a warrant.
If evidence is deemed, by the judge, to have been obtained without proper legal authorizations then the judge can prevent the evidence from being used during the trial. This is part of the checks and balances built into our entire governmental system. Will some innocent people get their lines tapped … but then again there are times that innocent people get arrested for murders, robberies, etc.
The question has to be judged on a case-by-case basis … and in the case of an incorrect tap being placed and nothing is ever done with information, then is it really an issue?
‘You have the freedom to seek happiness, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and freedom from oppression. None of these can exist without the fifth freedom … the freedom to protect all other freedoms by any means necessary.’ [Opening to Tom Clancy’s Splinter Cell – note I will have to get the exact quote and edit this later]
The world is not black and white … not all enemies confront us openly … there are times when extreme measures must be used in order to protect the freedoms of many.
As citizens we must make certain that the proper checks and balances are in place to insure that the power … any power … that we give to that government is not abused … at the same time, however, we must make sure that we don’t tie their hands to the point that they are unable to protect us ….
Monday, December 19, 2005
Time
Time ...
Where does it go? … Tomorrow marks the one year anniversary of starting my blog. Well … technically the 17th is the one year mark of the first post, but it didn’t exactly say much of anything so I don’t really count it as the first post … it was more of a place holder.
Of course, the blog didn’t start off here on blogger, rather it started over on the guild portal blog site, and was mirrored there for a while after I moved over here to blogger. So, why did I move it in the first place? Simple really, the blogger site was part of the Scales of Pain guild site, and since I wasn’t talking about things relating to EQII I really didn’t feel right keeping my rants over there, so we ended up here.
And it’s been a good home too … comfy and welcoming. Certainly in the time I’ve been posting here I’ve never really had any problems. I’ve had a few friendly comments and shared my thoughts on a variety of subjects over the year past. Hopefully you have at least enjoyed the journey through some of the caverns of my mind. I think I’ve shown you at least a few gems mixed in with the coal and general detritus.
Looking back to that post on December 20th, 2004 (It’s the Holiday Season…) I have to say that I still agree with everything I said then. I might have said it differently had I written it today, but I think the sentiment would be the same.
In fact … looking back up the Word document that I’ve written all of this down in I have written 87 pages of rants, over 44,000 words. Not all of them have been as well organized as I would have liked, and in fact I think some of them failed to get the point that I was going for across … though I have a feeling that I got something across in all of them.
If I’ve offended you … oh well … you’ll live. After all … if you keep coming back and reading then I have to assume that SOMETHING interested you in what I have to say, and that means that there’s hope that I’ll get you thinking about things. That is, after all my main goal. I truly feel that it is a disturbing lack of thought that causes a great many of the problems in the world. Or, more accurately, a lack of ability to think about things logically, or a tendency to place importance on personal issues rather than important issues … to think long term.
“No, this is just personal. Personal’s not the same as important, people just think it is.” –Terry Pratchett “Lords and Ladies”
Over the year I have often quoted … though I think that’s the first time I’ve quoted Pratchett … quotes are the sound bites of print … a way for me to say what I’m trying to say, probably in a more articulate way than I would manage on my own. More often than not, anything I want to say has already been said better by someone else.
But really … where does the time go? I can hardly believe that it’s been 12 months gone already. I swear they don’t make months like they used to … there was a time when I could get stuff done in a month … when a month was a significant amount of time. Now … it seems hardly more than a week … or a day … you turn around and *poof* another month has passed and you’re left wondering where in the devil it went.
Some people say time is relative to age … the older you are the less significant a month or year is … when you’re 5 years old 1 year is 1/5th, or 20%, of your life … when you’re 35 years old 1 year is 1/35th, or 0.286%, of your life. The older you get the less significant time itself becomes, but the more important it becomes to you.
Another likely part of the equation is that as you get older, and become an adult with adult responsibilities, your life becomes busier. There are more demands on your time … work, play, sleep, family, friends, hobbies … as your life fills up with things to do and as you get caught up in doing them you stop paying attention to the time slipping away around you … and then one day you come to find, 10 years have got behind you, no one told you when to run … erm … sorry about that … couldn’t resist…
Time itself is an illusion … mankind forcing measurement on the series of events that make up life. We aren’t happy if there is something that we can’t find a way to measure and quantify. We slice it into little bite size chunks so that we can better handle it … we don’t have to consider the eternity of time, we need merely worry about the next second, or next minute, or hour, or day … and there was the trap we laid for ourselves. We ceased to look to the future, ceased to think about what may be … in favor of looking at the now, we act on what seems good now … often without consideration to what effects it may have in the future.
In any case, however, together we have completed the first cycle of this blog … With a bit of luck it will just be the first of many.
[In case any of you are wondering … no, I didn’t have any point to this rant … I was just writing what came to mind ... hopefully you got some entertainment out of the ramblings of my thought process … if not, I hope I didn’t bore you too badly.]
Where does it go? … Tomorrow marks the one year anniversary of starting my blog. Well … technically the 17th is the one year mark of the first post, but it didn’t exactly say much of anything so I don’t really count it as the first post … it was more of a place holder.
Of course, the blog didn’t start off here on blogger, rather it started over on the guild portal blog site, and was mirrored there for a while after I moved over here to blogger. So, why did I move it in the first place? Simple really, the blogger site was part of the Scales of Pain guild site, and since I wasn’t talking about things relating to EQII I really didn’t feel right keeping my rants over there, so we ended up here.
And it’s been a good home too … comfy and welcoming. Certainly in the time I’ve been posting here I’ve never really had any problems. I’ve had a few friendly comments and shared my thoughts on a variety of subjects over the year past. Hopefully you have at least enjoyed the journey through some of the caverns of my mind. I think I’ve shown you at least a few gems mixed in with the coal and general detritus.
Looking back to that post on December 20th, 2004 (It’s the Holiday Season…) I have to say that I still agree with everything I said then. I might have said it differently had I written it today, but I think the sentiment would be the same.
In fact … looking back up the Word document that I’ve written all of this down in I have written 87 pages of rants, over 44,000 words. Not all of them have been as well organized as I would have liked, and in fact I think some of them failed to get the point that I was going for across … though I have a feeling that I got something across in all of them.
If I’ve offended you … oh well … you’ll live. After all … if you keep coming back and reading then I have to assume that SOMETHING interested you in what I have to say, and that means that there’s hope that I’ll get you thinking about things. That is, after all my main goal. I truly feel that it is a disturbing lack of thought that causes a great many of the problems in the world. Or, more accurately, a lack of ability to think about things logically, or a tendency to place importance on personal issues rather than important issues … to think long term.
“No, this is just personal. Personal’s not the same as important, people just think it is.” –Terry Pratchett “Lords and Ladies”
Over the year I have often quoted … though I think that’s the first time I’ve quoted Pratchett … quotes are the sound bites of print … a way for me to say what I’m trying to say, probably in a more articulate way than I would manage on my own. More often than not, anything I want to say has already been said better by someone else.
But really … where does the time go? I can hardly believe that it’s been 12 months gone already. I swear they don’t make months like they used to … there was a time when I could get stuff done in a month … when a month was a significant amount of time. Now … it seems hardly more than a week … or a day … you turn around and *poof* another month has passed and you’re left wondering where in the devil it went.
Some people say time is relative to age … the older you are the less significant a month or year is … when you’re 5 years old 1 year is 1/5th, or 20%, of your life … when you’re 35 years old 1 year is 1/35th, or 0.286%, of your life. The older you get the less significant time itself becomes, but the more important it becomes to you.
Another likely part of the equation is that as you get older, and become an adult with adult responsibilities, your life becomes busier. There are more demands on your time … work, play, sleep, family, friends, hobbies … as your life fills up with things to do and as you get caught up in doing them you stop paying attention to the time slipping away around you … and then one day you come to find, 10 years have got behind you, no one told you when to run … erm … sorry about that … couldn’t resist…
Time itself is an illusion … mankind forcing measurement on the series of events that make up life. We aren’t happy if there is something that we can’t find a way to measure and quantify. We slice it into little bite size chunks so that we can better handle it … we don’t have to consider the eternity of time, we need merely worry about the next second, or next minute, or hour, or day … and there was the trap we laid for ourselves. We ceased to look to the future, ceased to think about what may be … in favor of looking at the now, we act on what seems good now … often without consideration to what effects it may have in the future.
In any case, however, together we have completed the first cycle of this blog … With a bit of luck it will just be the first of many.
[In case any of you are wondering … no, I didn’t have any point to this rant … I was just writing what came to mind ... hopefully you got some entertainment out of the ramblings of my thought process … if not, I hope I didn’t bore you too badly.]
Thursday, December 15, 2005
A Historical Day
Yup … it was a historical day in Iraq today with millions turning out to vote in the elections today. The voting was peaceful with even the Sunnis turning out in large numbers. True, this is not the first vote that the Iraqi people have turned out for … but today was the day they voted to elect a new parliament of 275 representatives which will begin the process to select the President, Prime Minister, the Cabinet and so on.
Today the Iraqi people elected their new representatives in their new governmental structure. History is being made today and, history that will likely affect the politics in a major area of the world that we now live in. While it may not affect some people directly … it marks a major change in the world that may well mark the beginning of something larger.
This isn’t a small story … it is a story with wide reaching ramifications … and yet, going to most of the network news sites tonight and what is their lead story? For most it’s the ice storm in the south eastern United States. OMG an ICE STORM …. 450,000 people in Georgia and the Carolinas are without power!
Yes, I was one of those 450,000 that lost power today … lost it for … oh … about 8 hours maybe? Give it a rest folks … okay, that story may be news, but … even for those affected by the storm (which was hardly that bad) it isn’t the biggest news story of the day … not even close. Heck, there are other national stories that are more important than the ice storm (like the things going on in DC … immigration bills, and such) and I don’t believe that most of them are of more importance than what’s happening (well, happened at this point) in Iraq today.
This is what we’ve been fighting for … a free Iraq … and we’re winning (despite what Howard Dean and the many of the Democrats would like you to believe), we’re succeeding in the mission, and we’re having a positive impact in the lives of MILLIONS of people. And yet most of the news media is treating it as a ‘page 2 or 3’ story.
Why is this? Is the media afraid to show our success in Iraq? Are they afraid that it would cause the current President (and thus his political party) to look better in the eyes of the American people?
Bias is showed both in what you chose to say, and in what you choose not to say, by what you choose to give importance to, as well as what you choose to downplay. Even as our goals in Iraq are being accomplished the media chooses to focus on other stories.
But what would you like to bet that if there had been wide spread violence during the elections that the news would be the top story of the day … edging the ice storm to a (likely) distant second or, perhaps, even farther down the list. I would almost quarantine that 25 people being killed in a car bomb at a poling place would have made headlines and front pages across the country.
Now I could be wrong … tomorrow’s news papers could have large banner headlines about the success of the elections in Iraq … but I’m not holding my breath. Particularly in the case of the Atlanta paper which I’ll be amazed if the front page even mentions that there WAS an election in Iraq ….
You will hear about every gun fight, every car bomb, every US soldier killed (rarely will you hear about the Iraqi soldiers dying, unless it’s in a car bomb, or other mass attack) you won’t generally hear about the schools being built, the bolstered economic growth and increased standard of living. You will rarely hear how the life of the average Iraqi is already better than it was before the invasion and overthrow of Saddam. You see a lot of reports of certain politicians saying ‘we can’t win in Iraq’ and that we should ‘withdraw our troops now’ … but rarely do you hear the reports of the soldiers IN Iraq saying that we are winning the war … the stories of the troops volunteering to go back for second tours in Iraq because of the positive effects that they are seeing in that country.
Now our troops aren’t going to be shipping out of Iraq tomorrow, but we’re closer to a point now where we can start cutting back our presence. Every day more Iraqi soldiers are trained, and with the government in place the Iraqi people will be in a much better position to begin managing their own security. I expect that next Christmas we will still have a military presence in Iraq, and it will still be a significant number of troops. But it will likely be less than what we currently have deployed and that number will be dwindling further as more and more Iraqi troops are able to replace them in their duties.
As for the ‘War on Terror’ itself I believe that we are at a point best described by Winston Churchill, “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”
The ‘War on Terror’ is a far reaching goal … it may be that human nature itself dictates that it can never truly be won because there is no decisive enemy to face, no capital that you can topple to end the power of the enemy. Even should we find Osama Bin Laden and destroy Al Qaeda there will be others to take their place.
That does not, however, mean that we should pack it up and call it quits … that would only encourage the terrorists further because they work on the mindset that if we back down in any way, they’ve won.
Again a quote of Churchill comes to mind “Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.”
So long as terrorists confront us with force we must never back down … never give in … because to do so is to hand them victory on a silver platter, and in so doing we may as well cuff ourselves in chains and toss them the keys. We can not seek to appease them for each victory they accumulate through appeasement will only encourage them to try for more. We can not negotiate with terrorists, for such action will be seen as weakness and exploited further in their next action. We must forever be ready to defend ourselves and our freedoms from those that would take them from us … be it through force, terror, or guile.
Today the Iraqi people elected their new representatives in their new governmental structure. History is being made today and, history that will likely affect the politics in a major area of the world that we now live in. While it may not affect some people directly … it marks a major change in the world that may well mark the beginning of something larger.
This isn’t a small story … it is a story with wide reaching ramifications … and yet, going to most of the network news sites tonight and what is their lead story? For most it’s the ice storm in the south eastern United States. OMG an ICE STORM …. 450,000 people in Georgia and the Carolinas are without power!
Yes, I was one of those 450,000 that lost power today … lost it for … oh … about 8 hours maybe? Give it a rest folks … okay, that story may be news, but … even for those affected by the storm (which was hardly that bad) it isn’t the biggest news story of the day … not even close. Heck, there are other national stories that are more important than the ice storm (like the things going on in DC … immigration bills, and such) and I don’t believe that most of them are of more importance than what’s happening (well, happened at this point) in Iraq today.
This is what we’ve been fighting for … a free Iraq … and we’re winning (despite what Howard Dean and the many of the Democrats would like you to believe), we’re succeeding in the mission, and we’re having a positive impact in the lives of MILLIONS of people. And yet most of the news media is treating it as a ‘page 2 or 3’ story.
Why is this? Is the media afraid to show our success in Iraq? Are they afraid that it would cause the current President (and thus his political party) to look better in the eyes of the American people?
Bias is showed both in what you chose to say, and in what you choose not to say, by what you choose to give importance to, as well as what you choose to downplay. Even as our goals in Iraq are being accomplished the media chooses to focus on other stories.
But what would you like to bet that if there had been wide spread violence during the elections that the news would be the top story of the day … edging the ice storm to a (likely) distant second or, perhaps, even farther down the list. I would almost quarantine that 25 people being killed in a car bomb at a poling place would have made headlines and front pages across the country.
Now I could be wrong … tomorrow’s news papers could have large banner headlines about the success of the elections in Iraq … but I’m not holding my breath. Particularly in the case of the Atlanta paper which I’ll be amazed if the front page even mentions that there WAS an election in Iraq ….
You will hear about every gun fight, every car bomb, every US soldier killed (rarely will you hear about the Iraqi soldiers dying, unless it’s in a car bomb, or other mass attack) you won’t generally hear about the schools being built, the bolstered economic growth and increased standard of living. You will rarely hear how the life of the average Iraqi is already better than it was before the invasion and overthrow of Saddam. You see a lot of reports of certain politicians saying ‘we can’t win in Iraq’ and that we should ‘withdraw our troops now’ … but rarely do you hear the reports of the soldiers IN Iraq saying that we are winning the war … the stories of the troops volunteering to go back for second tours in Iraq because of the positive effects that they are seeing in that country.
Now our troops aren’t going to be shipping out of Iraq tomorrow, but we’re closer to a point now where we can start cutting back our presence. Every day more Iraqi soldiers are trained, and with the government in place the Iraqi people will be in a much better position to begin managing their own security. I expect that next Christmas we will still have a military presence in Iraq, and it will still be a significant number of troops. But it will likely be less than what we currently have deployed and that number will be dwindling further as more and more Iraqi troops are able to replace them in their duties.
As for the ‘War on Terror’ itself I believe that we are at a point best described by Winston Churchill, “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”
The ‘War on Terror’ is a far reaching goal … it may be that human nature itself dictates that it can never truly be won because there is no decisive enemy to face, no capital that you can topple to end the power of the enemy. Even should we find Osama Bin Laden and destroy Al Qaeda there will be others to take their place.
That does not, however, mean that we should pack it up and call it quits … that would only encourage the terrorists further because they work on the mindset that if we back down in any way, they’ve won.
Again a quote of Churchill comes to mind “Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.”
So long as terrorists confront us with force we must never back down … never give in … because to do so is to hand them victory on a silver platter, and in so doing we may as well cuff ourselves in chains and toss them the keys. We can not seek to appease them for each victory they accumulate through appeasement will only encourage them to try for more. We can not negotiate with terrorists, for such action will be seen as weakness and exploited further in their next action. We must forever be ready to defend ourselves and our freedoms from those that would take them from us … be it through force, terror, or guile.
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
So whats up
With all the entries lately? Why the sudden burst of Blog entries after such a dry spell? Well I’m in training, so to speak.
Starting in January I will be taking on a personal challenge to write … to write more than I have ever written before. I am taking the NaNoWriMo challenge (though not during the usual NaNoWriMo month)
The long and the short of it is this … 1 novel …. 50,000 words … 31 days to write it.
Many of you know me … and you also know that I’ve always had a desire to write. I write little short stories that never get finished … that get a good start going and get people interested and then vanish into the abyss of my laziness never to be heard from again.
My wife has occasionally hounded me about this and invariably I get fired up and start writing … or start working toward writing. Either I dig up a story that I started writing before, or I start planning out a story that I’ve got running laps around my skull at the moment. In the case of the first option I usually end up re-reading my previous work and set down to edit it … the most common result is that I may add one or two pages onto the work, but most often I just finish re-writing it before something comes up that pulls me away for a couple of days and the writing momentum is lost. Or in the case of the second option, I outline and plan, write out character backgrounds and descriptions, define the world and then something comes up that pulls me away and that usually means that it gets filed away with the other projects.
This time, however, I am trying something different. This time my wife came across the NaNoWriMo site and pointed me to it. I was interested and she suggested that I pick up the book ‘No Plot, No Problem’ by Chris Baty (Also the founder of NaNoWriMo).
Chris lays out an outstanding argument in the book. While the book is aimed at helping people through the concept and completion of writing a 50,000 word monster in a month, the concept itself actually applies quite well to any creative endeavor.
Chris’ argument is basically that the only thing standing between me and getting a book finished is a deadline, or more accurately the LACK of a deadline.
Certainly he doesn’t paint the project as a cakewalk … and he points out many of the pitfalls that people face during the ordeal, and suggests ways to get around them. He talks about his experiences participating in NaNoWriMo since its founding in 1999, and he has snipits of advice and stories from other NaNoWriMo successes.
So after reading the book and seeing that I firmly fall into many of the pitfalls that he describes befalling what I call the ‘casual’ writer I decided … you know what … I can do that.
And I can and will make it. I’ve set the month of Jan for my novel in a month insanity because putting it off any farther than that is simply procrastinating and not accomplishing what I’m trying to do. One of the main points in NaNoWriMo is that there is no advanced preparation … the idea is to go into it blank. (the main reason for this is that the more advanced preparation that you do, the more attached to the story you become, and therefore the more likely you are to want to write it right and therefore will fall into the trap of editing … the idea is to get a complete first draft down, not a finished manuscript.)
What does this have to do with all the rants and rambles lately? Call it training … I’m getting used to the idea of writing on a nightly basis. And practicing sitting down at a set timeframe and writing without a significant amount of preparation. Of course these blog entries are significantly different from writing a novel in that I’m not going for an ongoing cohesive storyline. But they still get me used to using this timeframe for writing, used to focusing on something and putting my thoughts onto paper (or in this case on the monitor).
The next question becomes … what will happen to the blog in January? Well, blogging will probably slow down significantly as much of my ‘free time’ will be devoted to pouring my story out of the fires of my mind’s forge and beating it into some semblance of shape. I will, however, try to get some entries put up throughout the month … if nothing else to try and keep my regular readers informed on the status of the experiment. And of course if I get pointed to, or otherwise find a juicy article to rant about I may be able to spare some time to burble a few thoughts on the subject as well.
I will tell you now that I won’t tell you about my story … at least not until Feb … and more likely some time in March after I’ve had a chance to go through and chisel off some of the rougher edges. Not that I wouldn’t like to talk to you all about my story, but it’s one of the steps that they recommend to help keep from feeling pressured to perform (this is one of the main things that creates a lot of the pitfalls to the ‘casual writer’ … the feeling that it has to be right).
So … by the end of January I will be a novelist … not a published novelist to be sure, and the monster I write may never see the light of day, but I will be a novelist none-the-less. My plan from there is to take the same deadline concept and apply it (though with a longer deadline, or more likely a series of deadlines to keep myself going) to getting some of my other stories written, edited, and published (even if it’s just self published on a small scale.)
What will become of the one month monster? Only time will tell … I plan on taking Chris’ advice on the matter and waiting at least two weeks after the Jan 31st deadline before reading it over again and deciding if the beast is something that can be dressed up and taken out, or just needs to be buried and forgotten.
It’s going to be a rollercoaster … lets hope that I meet the height requirement….
Starting in January I will be taking on a personal challenge to write … to write more than I have ever written before. I am taking the NaNoWriMo challenge (though not during the usual NaNoWriMo month)
The long and the short of it is this … 1 novel …. 50,000 words … 31 days to write it.
Many of you know me … and you also know that I’ve always had a desire to write. I write little short stories that never get finished … that get a good start going and get people interested and then vanish into the abyss of my laziness never to be heard from again.
My wife has occasionally hounded me about this and invariably I get fired up and start writing … or start working toward writing. Either I dig up a story that I started writing before, or I start planning out a story that I’ve got running laps around my skull at the moment. In the case of the first option I usually end up re-reading my previous work and set down to edit it … the most common result is that I may add one or two pages onto the work, but most often I just finish re-writing it before something comes up that pulls me away for a couple of days and the writing momentum is lost. Or in the case of the second option, I outline and plan, write out character backgrounds and descriptions, define the world and then something comes up that pulls me away and that usually means that it gets filed away with the other projects.
This time, however, I am trying something different. This time my wife came across the NaNoWriMo site and pointed me to it. I was interested and she suggested that I pick up the book ‘No Plot, No Problem’ by Chris Baty (Also the founder of NaNoWriMo).
Chris lays out an outstanding argument in the book. While the book is aimed at helping people through the concept and completion of writing a 50,000 word monster in a month, the concept itself actually applies quite well to any creative endeavor.
Chris’ argument is basically that the only thing standing between me and getting a book finished is a deadline, or more accurately the LACK of a deadline.
Certainly he doesn’t paint the project as a cakewalk … and he points out many of the pitfalls that people face during the ordeal, and suggests ways to get around them. He talks about his experiences participating in NaNoWriMo since its founding in 1999, and he has snipits of advice and stories from other NaNoWriMo successes.
So after reading the book and seeing that I firmly fall into many of the pitfalls that he describes befalling what I call the ‘casual’ writer I decided … you know what … I can do that.
And I can and will make it. I’ve set the month of Jan for my novel in a month insanity because putting it off any farther than that is simply procrastinating and not accomplishing what I’m trying to do. One of the main points in NaNoWriMo is that there is no advanced preparation … the idea is to go into it blank. (the main reason for this is that the more advanced preparation that you do, the more attached to the story you become, and therefore the more likely you are to want to write it right and therefore will fall into the trap of editing … the idea is to get a complete first draft down, not a finished manuscript.)
What does this have to do with all the rants and rambles lately? Call it training … I’m getting used to the idea of writing on a nightly basis. And practicing sitting down at a set timeframe and writing without a significant amount of preparation. Of course these blog entries are significantly different from writing a novel in that I’m not going for an ongoing cohesive storyline. But they still get me used to using this timeframe for writing, used to focusing on something and putting my thoughts onto paper (or in this case on the monitor).
The next question becomes … what will happen to the blog in January? Well, blogging will probably slow down significantly as much of my ‘free time’ will be devoted to pouring my story out of the fires of my mind’s forge and beating it into some semblance of shape. I will, however, try to get some entries put up throughout the month … if nothing else to try and keep my regular readers informed on the status of the experiment. And of course if I get pointed to, or otherwise find a juicy article to rant about I may be able to spare some time to burble a few thoughts on the subject as well.
I will tell you now that I won’t tell you about my story … at least not until Feb … and more likely some time in March after I’ve had a chance to go through and chisel off some of the rougher edges. Not that I wouldn’t like to talk to you all about my story, but it’s one of the steps that they recommend to help keep from feeling pressured to perform (this is one of the main things that creates a lot of the pitfalls to the ‘casual writer’ … the feeling that it has to be right).
So … by the end of January I will be a novelist … not a published novelist to be sure, and the monster I write may never see the light of day, but I will be a novelist none-the-less. My plan from there is to take the same deadline concept and apply it (though with a longer deadline, or more likely a series of deadlines to keep myself going) to getting some of my other stories written, edited, and published (even if it’s just self published on a small scale.)
What will become of the one month monster? Only time will tell … I plan on taking Chris’ advice on the matter and waiting at least two weeks after the Jan 31st deadline before reading it over again and deciding if the beast is something that can be dressed up and taken out, or just needs to be buried and forgotten.
It’s going to be a rollercoaster … lets hope that I meet the height requirement….
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
On death penalties and timeframes....
Okay … I’m sure that most of you probably already know about the whole Tookie Williams story and the controversy surrounding his execution last night. I’m not going to discuss the details of the conviction here or the years of appeals or the last minute fight for a stay of execution. Those details can be readily found elsewhere. No, I’m here to talk in broader terms about the situation …
Tookie Williams was a thug … plain and simple. He was convicted of the murder of 4 people with overwhelming evidence and sentenced to death by a jury of his peers. This conviction was upheld by the courts through a full battery of appeals. Despite the claims at his execution that the state ‘executed an innocent man’ Tookie was far from innocent. He was the co-founder and leader of the Crips street gang in Los Angeles … he has never apologized or shown remorse for his acts … he has at least 10 accounts of extreme violence and threats to guards during his stay in prison.
‘But he wrote children's books and spoke out against gang violence.’ True … and I hope that it had a positive effect on some children in the society. But it doesn’t change the fact that he still praised militant black leaders, and it doesn’t change the fact that he was convicted of 4 counts of murder and sentenced to death.
The problem in this particular case is the timeframe. Tookie Williams was tried and convicted in 1981 … his execution took place in 2005 … 24 years later. The only time that someone should sit and rot in a prison for 24 years is if they have been sentenced to 24+ years in prison … not if they’ve been sentenced to death.
The appeals process … particularly in death penalty cases … needs to be short. Personally I say give them … I’ll be nice … 5 years (personally I feel it should be shorter … like a week but most people wouldn’t agree to that). If they can not come up with convincing evidence that they are innocent within 5 years then it’s time for them to get their ticket punched.
One of the problems of allowing them to ‘chill’ for 24 years is that people forget. It’s one thing to forget the passion of the moment and look at things from a more rational perspective … it’s something completely different to forget the evidence and the case as has largely happened with this particular case.
Of course you’ve got the fringe groups and the Euros that oppose the death penalty all together … but that’s not something I can agree with. I’m sorry, call me a barbarian, but I believe that the harsher penalties have greater effect on maintaining social order than the softer penalties.
It is the fear of punishment that prevents most people from doing things … be that punishment from a deity or punishment from government or other social structure. And face it … the ultimate punishment is death … no earthly force can do anything to you beyond that … now lets just move up the time frame to something a bit more reasonable.
Tookie Williams was a thug … plain and simple. He was convicted of the murder of 4 people with overwhelming evidence and sentenced to death by a jury of his peers. This conviction was upheld by the courts through a full battery of appeals. Despite the claims at his execution that the state ‘executed an innocent man’ Tookie was far from innocent. He was the co-founder and leader of the Crips street gang in Los Angeles … he has never apologized or shown remorse for his acts … he has at least 10 accounts of extreme violence and threats to guards during his stay in prison.
‘But he wrote children's books and spoke out against gang violence.’ True … and I hope that it had a positive effect on some children in the society. But it doesn’t change the fact that he still praised militant black leaders, and it doesn’t change the fact that he was convicted of 4 counts of murder and sentenced to death.
The problem in this particular case is the timeframe. Tookie Williams was tried and convicted in 1981 … his execution took place in 2005 … 24 years later. The only time that someone should sit and rot in a prison for 24 years is if they have been sentenced to 24+ years in prison … not if they’ve been sentenced to death.
The appeals process … particularly in death penalty cases … needs to be short. Personally I say give them … I’ll be nice … 5 years (personally I feel it should be shorter … like a week but most people wouldn’t agree to that). If they can not come up with convincing evidence that they are innocent within 5 years then it’s time for them to get their ticket punched.
One of the problems of allowing them to ‘chill’ for 24 years is that people forget. It’s one thing to forget the passion of the moment and look at things from a more rational perspective … it’s something completely different to forget the evidence and the case as has largely happened with this particular case.
Of course you’ve got the fringe groups and the Euros that oppose the death penalty all together … but that’s not something I can agree with. I’m sorry, call me a barbarian, but I believe that the harsher penalties have greater effect on maintaining social order than the softer penalties.
It is the fear of punishment that prevents most people from doing things … be that punishment from a deity or punishment from government or other social structure. And face it … the ultimate punishment is death … no earthly force can do anything to you beyond that … now lets just move up the time frame to something a bit more reasonable.
Monday, December 12, 2005
Kids
Okay … most people that read this on the regular basis probably know me and already know that I have exactly zero children (unless you count my 2 dogs, Kodo and Pepper). As such this is what one would call a ‘my view as an outsider looking in’ ramble. My observations both from public observation of other parents and their children and through talks with people that I know that have children of their own.
Yeah … it isn’t exactly political, or reactionary, or maybe not even relevant in the world at large, but it’s what’s on the plate for today … it’s better than cold leftovers after all.
This ramble was brought about through a combination of things … the time of year (who doesn’t think of kids around Christmas), a good article that my wife linked to me a week or so ago about kids in public places/stores, and talking to a co-worker about his two kids at home.
Since there’s a plethora of things in the article I’ll start with that and just try to weave other things into the ramble as I go along while still keeping it coherent. The article ran on MSNBC Dec 6th and was titled “Behave or else! Unruly kids in public stir debate” It was, as the title says, the issue of children misbehaving in public places … primarily restaurants, café’s and coffee shops, but it applies equally well across the board.
It starts by talking about the controversy surrounding a sign placed on the door to a café in Chicago which read “Children of all ages have to behave and use their indoor voices.”
Personally I don’t see anything ‘controversial’ about that statement. He isn’t ‘banning’ children from the café as some of the upset people in the community say … he is simply stating that he requires that they behave. And in my opinion I believe that children should behave in public … period … and their parents should enforce that … too few seem to these days (which would be what prompted the posting of the sign in the first place).
One mother says, however, that “…there are certain moments that all kids and parents have — and sometimes your kid is going to lose it in a public place.”
But the problem here is that she’s missing the point. Everyone understands that ‘stuff’ happens … that isn’t the problem … the problem isn’t that your kid ‘looses’ it in a public place … its how you HANDLE the situation when they do. Yes, there are going to be times when a child, even the best behaved child in the world, is going to act up in a public situation (unless of course you never take them into a public situation until they’re like 16 or so) and people (even us non parents) understand it … the problem is when the parents of the child in question either don’t try to remedy the situation, or worse aren’t around (or are just too oblivious) to even realize that there IS a situation.
As the owner of the café in question says “It’s not about the kids, it’s about the parents who are with them. Are they supervising and guiding them? I’m just asking that they are considerate to people around them.”
Whoa … now THERE’s a controversial opinion. He wants people to be considerate to others! I mean the nerve! Doesn’t he know that these people are taking their kids out to public places to let them run wild while they have other matters to attend to? Doesn’t it take a village to raise a child?
No.
Certainly it helps … but it’s not a requirement … especially when the other people in the village didn’t sign up for child rearing duty.
But that’s one of the main problems today … people want the kids (or think they do) … but they don’t want to raise them … they ship them off to government schools to be raised and given an education (well, given what passes for an education in a government school). I’m tempted here to turn this into a rant about some of the wonderful stories of American Government School System and its glorious failings, but I’m going to refrain from that mess until I have some more recent news articles (or updates on older ones).
Then again … I’m of the opinion that sending any child to the government to be educated is a horribly BAD idea … but that is, in part, because I am largely distrustful of government in general and also in part due to the astounding failure of the government to handle most things that it tries to handle. (Both of these reasons are also why I shudder at the thought of governmental health care.)
Back to the question of children in public … I look back at my parents and how things were when I grew up. I know that my parents never allowed me to misbehave in public the way that I see many parents letting their children behave … I was taken from the store/restaurant/theater and out into the parking lot at the least … I may also have received a sharp smack on my backside to go with it. And you know what I learned pretty quick … that acting up in public was a BAD idea.
Of course, I was raised in a different time … a time when parents COULD discipline their children … these days if you look at your child cross-eyed then social services will be knocking on your door within 24 hours. You can’t discipline children … OMG that might lead to them having something akin to moral foundation or something … can’t let that happen. Worse even … they might, *gasp*, feel bad about something, that’s not good for kids to feel bad about anything … and if they DO feel bad about something, well there’s probably a prescription for that.
You know … my parents spanked me … not every day … and looking back, probably not even every time I deserved it … but certainly when they felt it was warranted for a punishment. And you know what? I haven’t turned into a mass murdering psychopath or an anti-social hermit … I wasn’t scared for life. What I did learn was discipline … and that breaking the rules had a price … and that the only one responsible for my actions was me.
There are family restaurants, and there are ‘non family’ restaurants … there are places to take you kids where you can let them ‘be kids’ and there are places where you take them that they need to learn to behave and be respectful of others … that’s part of growing up … and teaching them the difference is part of being a parent. Knowing the difference is part of being a considerate adult.
Yeah … it isn’t exactly political, or reactionary, or maybe not even relevant in the world at large, but it’s what’s on the plate for today … it’s better than cold leftovers after all.
This ramble was brought about through a combination of things … the time of year (who doesn’t think of kids around Christmas), a good article that my wife linked to me a week or so ago about kids in public places/stores, and talking to a co-worker about his two kids at home.
Since there’s a plethora of things in the article I’ll start with that and just try to weave other things into the ramble as I go along while still keeping it coherent. The article ran on MSNBC Dec 6th and was titled “Behave or else! Unruly kids in public stir debate” It was, as the title says, the issue of children misbehaving in public places … primarily restaurants, café’s and coffee shops, but it applies equally well across the board.
It starts by talking about the controversy surrounding a sign placed on the door to a café in Chicago which read “Children of all ages have to behave and use their indoor voices.”
Personally I don’t see anything ‘controversial’ about that statement. He isn’t ‘banning’ children from the café as some of the upset people in the community say … he is simply stating that he requires that they behave. And in my opinion I believe that children should behave in public … period … and their parents should enforce that … too few seem to these days (which would be what prompted the posting of the sign in the first place).
One mother says, however, that “…there are certain moments that all kids and parents have — and sometimes your kid is going to lose it in a public place.”
But the problem here is that she’s missing the point. Everyone understands that ‘stuff’ happens … that isn’t the problem … the problem isn’t that your kid ‘looses’ it in a public place … its how you HANDLE the situation when they do. Yes, there are going to be times when a child, even the best behaved child in the world, is going to act up in a public situation (unless of course you never take them into a public situation until they’re like 16 or so) and people (even us non parents) understand it … the problem is when the parents of the child in question either don’t try to remedy the situation, or worse aren’t around (or are just too oblivious) to even realize that there IS a situation.
As the owner of the café in question says “It’s not about the kids, it’s about the parents who are with them. Are they supervising and guiding them? I’m just asking that they are considerate to people around them.”
Whoa … now THERE’s a controversial opinion. He wants people to be considerate to others! I mean the nerve! Doesn’t he know that these people are taking their kids out to public places to let them run wild while they have other matters to attend to? Doesn’t it take a village to raise a child?
No.
Certainly it helps … but it’s not a requirement … especially when the other people in the village didn’t sign up for child rearing duty.
But that’s one of the main problems today … people want the kids (or think they do) … but they don’t want to raise them … they ship them off to government schools to be raised and given an education (well, given what passes for an education in a government school). I’m tempted here to turn this into a rant about some of the wonderful stories of American Government School System and its glorious failings, but I’m going to refrain from that mess until I have some more recent news articles (or updates on older ones).
Then again … I’m of the opinion that sending any child to the government to be educated is a horribly BAD idea … but that is, in part, because I am largely distrustful of government in general and also in part due to the astounding failure of the government to handle most things that it tries to handle. (Both of these reasons are also why I shudder at the thought of governmental health care.)
Back to the question of children in public … I look back at my parents and how things were when I grew up. I know that my parents never allowed me to misbehave in public the way that I see many parents letting their children behave … I was taken from the store/restaurant/theater and out into the parking lot at the least … I may also have received a sharp smack on my backside to go with it. And you know what I learned pretty quick … that acting up in public was a BAD idea.
Of course, I was raised in a different time … a time when parents COULD discipline their children … these days if you look at your child cross-eyed then social services will be knocking on your door within 24 hours. You can’t discipline children … OMG that might lead to them having something akin to moral foundation or something … can’t let that happen. Worse even … they might, *gasp*, feel bad about something, that’s not good for kids to feel bad about anything … and if they DO feel bad about something, well there’s probably a prescription for that.
You know … my parents spanked me … not every day … and looking back, probably not even every time I deserved it … but certainly when they felt it was warranted for a punishment. And you know what? I haven’t turned into a mass murdering psychopath or an anti-social hermit … I wasn’t scared for life. What I did learn was discipline … and that breaking the rules had a price … and that the only one responsible for my actions was me.
There are family restaurants, and there are ‘non family’ restaurants … there are places to take you kids where you can let them ‘be kids’ and there are places where you take them that they need to learn to behave and be respectful of others … that’s part of growing up … and teaching them the difference is part of being a parent. Knowing the difference is part of being a considerate adult.
Thursday, December 08, 2005
But the Supreme Court said we could!
Okay, this isn’t what I had intended on writing tonight … maybe I’ll cover it in a section to this rant later, maybe I’ll run out of time and put it into an article tomorrow. While looking around for interesting tidbits I came across two of the words I most hate to see together … Eminent and Domain.
You may be sick of hearing me ramble on about it, but if you want me to stop you’re going to have to do one of three things:
Now the basis of Eminent domain is not the problem … the problem is in the abuse of the power by government. The power to seize land for governmental use, it seems, wasn’t enough … they needed the power to seize land for private development in order to increase their power (ala tax base … spending power). The idea being that the government knows what the best use of all land is, and ownership grants no rights.
And there in lies my problem with the situation – The government does not generally care about what is best for the citizens, rather it cares what will give it the most money and power while still getting it re-elected.
If you strip away the right of ownership then what does freedom become? If I am free to say what I want, but the government can walk up and take my house away at their whim, am I really free?
[‘But it’s not at their whim’ some say … ‘they have to have a project that needs the land … and they have to compensate the owners.’ … Yeah, right, whatever. If they don’t want to buy at the price I set, then they don’t get to buy, but the government can come in and say, ‘here’s compensation now get off Property_Developer_03921734’s property’ … considering that they are not even required to pay the ‘appraised value’ used for property taxes the amount of compensation could be (and usually is) a small percentage of the market value of the property in question.]
The latest governmental land grab to make the news is Riviera Beach, Florida where the mayor is saying that they are going to “rescue and relocate individuals” like some urban wildlife conservation project.
Another, often used justification, is that the areas are ‘slums’ … but then what happens when all the ‘slums’ have been redeveloped into high rise, expensive, condos and restaurants and some developer comes along and wants to develop a new luxury condo, but there are all these middle-class suburban homes in the way whose owners don’t want to sell at the cut rate price he’s offering?
Another reason that the ‘poorer’ sections are often targeted is that they can rarely afford any legal counsel in the matter, are less educated, and don’t garner as much ‘sympathy’ as people of more means generally want the areas cleaned up anyway and therefore are willing to turn a blind eye to the abuse of power because it isn’t them being effected.
The fact of the matter is that these people OWN these homes and the property on which they are built. It should be their choice if they wish to sell or not, if the price is appropriate or not … this should not be the choice of the government. But that is where we stand in this country.
The Supreme Court has spoken on the matter and their ruling was that it was acceptable for state and city governments to seize private property for the sake of private development. Thankfully this has sparked a LOT of debate over the issue of eminent domain, and has prompted many states to pass constitutional amendments to prevent (or at least curtail) the abuse of this power.
Where this will go from here remains to be seen, but I fear that if people do not wake up and realize that the government is slowly gathering all of the power of wealth and ownership to itself, then we will soon find ourselves living at the whim of the government. Employed by the government, housed by the government, fed by the government, slaves to the government.
You may be sick of hearing me ramble on about it, but if you want me to stop you’re going to have to do one of three things:
- Stop reading the blog
- Revoke the right to freedom of speech so that the government can lock me and any others that speak out against eminent domain, or
- Do something to stop the governmental land grab.
Now the basis of Eminent domain is not the problem … the problem is in the abuse of the power by government. The power to seize land for governmental use, it seems, wasn’t enough … they needed the power to seize land for private development in order to increase their power (ala tax base … spending power). The idea being that the government knows what the best use of all land is, and ownership grants no rights.
And there in lies my problem with the situation – The government does not generally care about what is best for the citizens, rather it cares what will give it the most money and power while still getting it re-elected.
If you strip away the right of ownership then what does freedom become? If I am free to say what I want, but the government can walk up and take my house away at their whim, am I really free?
[‘But it’s not at their whim’ some say … ‘they have to have a project that needs the land … and they have to compensate the owners.’ … Yeah, right, whatever. If they don’t want to buy at the price I set, then they don’t get to buy, but the government can come in and say, ‘here’s compensation now get off Property_Developer_03921734’s property’ … considering that they are not even required to pay the ‘appraised value’ used for property taxes the amount of compensation could be (and usually is) a small percentage of the market value of the property in question.]
The latest governmental land grab to make the news is Riviera Beach, Florida where the mayor is saying that they are going to “rescue and relocate individuals” like some urban wildlife conservation project.
Another, often used justification, is that the areas are ‘slums’ … but then what happens when all the ‘slums’ have been redeveloped into high rise, expensive, condos and restaurants and some developer comes along and wants to develop a new luxury condo, but there are all these middle-class suburban homes in the way whose owners don’t want to sell at the cut rate price he’s offering?
Another reason that the ‘poorer’ sections are often targeted is that they can rarely afford any legal counsel in the matter, are less educated, and don’t garner as much ‘sympathy’ as people of more means generally want the areas cleaned up anyway and therefore are willing to turn a blind eye to the abuse of power because it isn’t them being effected.
The fact of the matter is that these people OWN these homes and the property on which they are built. It should be their choice if they wish to sell or not, if the price is appropriate or not … this should not be the choice of the government. But that is where we stand in this country.
The Supreme Court has spoken on the matter and their ruling was that it was acceptable for state and city governments to seize private property for the sake of private development. Thankfully this has sparked a LOT of debate over the issue of eminent domain, and has prompted many states to pass constitutional amendments to prevent (or at least curtail) the abuse of this power.
Where this will go from here remains to be seen, but I fear that if people do not wake up and realize that the government is slowly gathering all of the power of wealth and ownership to itself, then we will soon find ourselves living at the whim of the government. Employed by the government, housed by the government, fed by the government, slaves to the government.
It's Christmas, deal with it
What is it with people taking offense to Christmas? I’m sorry, but guess what, it’s a holiday and this is a free country, deal with it. There is no ‘right to not be offended’ and there is no law against the public display of religion. Christmas is a religious holiday and it is a holiday widely celebrated by elaborate displays of ornaments and lights. I am not Jewish, but I’m not offended by public Hanukah displays, Kwanza displays, or any other displays … yet every year there are reports from across the country about people getting bent out of shape over Christmas displays.
Last year there was several reports, but one I remember specifically hearing about was the demanded refusal of a donated manger scene from the front of a county office. Of course the display was cited as ‘offensive’ and ‘in violation of the separation of church and state.’ … Now, if the county refused to display donated Hanukah displays, or things along side the manger scene, then fine they can’t display the manger either … but that wasn’t the case, and county spokesmen welcomed people of other beliefs to donate displays for various holidays … not just Christmas/Hanukah. In other words the ‘offended’ people were ‘offended’ because it was a public display of religion, and the ‘violation of church and state’ people were just uneducated.
[For those that don’t remember or haven’t read some of my past articles I have previously pointed out that ‘separation of church and state’ as most people try to define it, doesn’t exist. The constitution simply states that the government can not pass a law that REQUIRES the worship of a specific religion, or a law which BANS a religion, nor can they prosecute people based on their religious beliefs (since a religion can not be against the law) … thereby a religious display on government property is allowable, provided that equal treatment is allowed for all religious beliefs.]
This year there have been reports of major retailers purposefully removing ‘Christmas’ from all store displays … even to the extent of labeling their trees ‘Holiday’ trees. (I believe that at the time of this writing this has been officially denied and at least one hardware store chain has changed their ‘holiday trees’ back into ‘Christmas trees’.) There is also a report of a homeowner’s association requesting the removal of a nativity scene from the front lawn of one family.
Normally I’d say, well they more than likely agreed to the rules of the association when they moved in (whether they realized it when they signed it or not), but in this case the rule that they are cited as being in violation of (which prohibits lawn ornaments, statues or outdoor art from being placed on the lot without prior approval of the board of directors) is being selectively enforced. That is the association is only asking that the nativity scene be removed, not the other statues that are technically violations of the rule as well.
To their credit, the management company that enforces the rules did say that they would not pursue the issue unless they received another complaint.
Oh, and the complaint?
“Although I'm not offended by it, I take issue about advertising personal beliefs and interests by putting them on display whatever the belief or interest may be."
Translated this works out to ‘even though I’m saying that I’m not offended by it, I’m offended by it.’
Guess what … it’s a free country … deal with it. The founding fathers gave us freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.
Reference:
It's away with the manger - Thanks, Ssark.
Last year there was several reports, but one I remember specifically hearing about was the demanded refusal of a donated manger scene from the front of a county office. Of course the display was cited as ‘offensive’ and ‘in violation of the separation of church and state.’ … Now, if the county refused to display donated Hanukah displays, or things along side the manger scene, then fine they can’t display the manger either … but that wasn’t the case, and county spokesmen welcomed people of other beliefs to donate displays for various holidays … not just Christmas/Hanukah. In other words the ‘offended’ people were ‘offended’ because it was a public display of religion, and the ‘violation of church and state’ people were just uneducated.
[For those that don’t remember or haven’t read some of my past articles I have previously pointed out that ‘separation of church and state’ as most people try to define it, doesn’t exist. The constitution simply states that the government can not pass a law that REQUIRES the worship of a specific religion, or a law which BANS a religion, nor can they prosecute people based on their religious beliefs (since a religion can not be against the law) … thereby a religious display on government property is allowable, provided that equal treatment is allowed for all religious beliefs.]
This year there have been reports of major retailers purposefully removing ‘Christmas’ from all store displays … even to the extent of labeling their trees ‘Holiday’ trees. (I believe that at the time of this writing this has been officially denied and at least one hardware store chain has changed their ‘holiday trees’ back into ‘Christmas trees’.) There is also a report of a homeowner’s association requesting the removal of a nativity scene from the front lawn of one family.
Normally I’d say, well they more than likely agreed to the rules of the association when they moved in (whether they realized it when they signed it or not), but in this case the rule that they are cited as being in violation of (which prohibits lawn ornaments, statues or outdoor art from being placed on the lot without prior approval of the board of directors) is being selectively enforced. That is the association is only asking that the nativity scene be removed, not the other statues that are technically violations of the rule as well.
To their credit, the management company that enforces the rules did say that they would not pursue the issue unless they received another complaint.
Oh, and the complaint?
“Although I'm not offended by it, I take issue about advertising personal beliefs and interests by putting them on display whatever the belief or interest may be."
Translated this works out to ‘even though I’m saying that I’m not offended by it, I’m offended by it.’
Guess what … it’s a free country … deal with it. The founding fathers gave us freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.
Reference:
It's away with the manger - Thanks, Ssark.
Friday, December 02, 2005
The keyword is Legal
Okay … I’ve been quiet too long but I’ve just been too lazy to put fingers to the keys and actually rant lately. Not that there hasn’t been suitable material to rant about, or that there haven’t been things in the past weeks and months that got my blood boiling. There is always something worth a good rant … rather this was a plethora of excuses to procrastinate, a slew of ‘I’ll rant about that when I get a little more time’ or ‘well my work schedule is changing in a few weeks, it will be more convenient after that.’
True to life, however, things passed by and in the end most of the things I had been waiting on to start writing again ended up not happening … work didn’t lighten up and the schedule change that was supposed to free up more time fell through.
None of that, however, is here nor there in turns of what I set out to write about today….
Immigration … it’s been in the news … the President gave a speech on it a couple of weekends ago. There are as many opinions out there on the issue as there are people to ask … and likely even more than that given most politician’s propensity for double talk.
First, I am pro-immigration. That is to say that I believe it would be a horrible disservice to the founding concepts of this country to adopt a closed boarder policy. I have nothing against people immigrating to this country and working hard to achieve a better life. That is one of the principles on which this country thrives.
What I don’t have any use for are those that come here illegally … yes most come here for the same reasons … to work hard and earn a better lives for themselves. But they do so without any respect for the dream that they are striving toward, because they have disrespected the legal in favor of the easy, much as a thief will break into a house to steal rather than work, save, and purchase the item for themselves.
(And if you just thought to yourself, ‘Oh, he just called all ‘undocumented workers’ thieves!’ take a 2x4 and slam it into your head a couple times and try reading that again …)
The President says that he wants to strengthen the boarders … more fencing … more patrols …. Arrest and deport those found entering the country illegally. And that would be a good start, hopefully ‘we the people’ will keep the feet of the politicians to the fire and actually get some follow-through on this issue, but it’s only half the problem.
What is the Presidents plan to handle the millions of illegals already in the country? A ‘guest worker program’ that he says is not amnesty. Okay … Technically speaking it may not be amnesty, but it’s as close as you can get without becoming it. The plan would allow any illegal holding a job in the US to continue working for up to 3 years, at which point they must leave the country.
Now … let me get this straight … they break our laws and come here illegally … and they get a job (technically breaking another law) … and their punishment is they get keep the job and stay here and we’ll come back to deport you in 3 years.
Raise your hand if you actually believe that they’ll be gone in 3 years …
No … sorry … doesn’t work. Sends the wrong message both to prospective immigrants (legal and illegal) and to employers.
No … what you need to do is be tough on the illegals and on the employers that enable them. If you are found in this country illegally you should be immediately deported back to your country of origin, if you are found guilty of a crime while in this country illegally your sentence should immediately be the maximum sentence and you should be deported once you have served out your sentence. (Of course prisons in this country are a completely different rant) If you are found employing an illegal you should face stiff fines and/or jail time … say $2.5 million per illegal and/or up to 10 years in prison (compounded for each illegal).
The idea is to make hiring an illegal so unattractive, so risky, that an employer is going to do everything possible to make sure that his employees are in this country legally. Now I’m willing to be lenient in a case where the employer is able to show due diligence in their hiring, but was taken by forged documents, but this would have to be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Now, some people will yell and scream that the immigration system is outdated, archaic, and too slow. I would probably agree with all of the above, and I would certainly agree that there needs to be some massive reform to the system, but that is no excuse for willingly and knowingly entering the country illegally or remaining in this country illegally. If I get pulled over for speeding, should I not have to pay the ticket because the county I was pulled over in doesn’t accept electronic payment and requires me to pay in person, in cash, on the appointed court day? No.
We should come down hard on those that have no respect for our country and our laws, and embrace those that show us that they respect us and wish to follow the American dream.
“In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
This was sent to me as a quote by Theodore Roosevelt, though I haven’t been able to confirm if Roosevelt actually ever said it. Who said it or didn’t say it, however, does not change the truth in the statement. Sadly the realms of political correctness erode this country and strip from it even its identity … it divides us into groups and subgroups and pits us against one another weakening us from within.
True to life, however, things passed by and in the end most of the things I had been waiting on to start writing again ended up not happening … work didn’t lighten up and the schedule change that was supposed to free up more time fell through.
None of that, however, is here nor there in turns of what I set out to write about today….
Immigration … it’s been in the news … the President gave a speech on it a couple of weekends ago. There are as many opinions out there on the issue as there are people to ask … and likely even more than that given most politician’s propensity for double talk.
First, I am pro-immigration. That is to say that I believe it would be a horrible disservice to the founding concepts of this country to adopt a closed boarder policy. I have nothing against people immigrating to this country and working hard to achieve a better life. That is one of the principles on which this country thrives.
What I don’t have any use for are those that come here illegally … yes most come here for the same reasons … to work hard and earn a better lives for themselves. But they do so without any respect for the dream that they are striving toward, because they have disrespected the legal in favor of the easy, much as a thief will break into a house to steal rather than work, save, and purchase the item for themselves.
(And if you just thought to yourself, ‘Oh, he just called all ‘undocumented workers’ thieves!’ take a 2x4 and slam it into your head a couple times and try reading that again …)
The President says that he wants to strengthen the boarders … more fencing … more patrols …. Arrest and deport those found entering the country illegally. And that would be a good start, hopefully ‘we the people’ will keep the feet of the politicians to the fire and actually get some follow-through on this issue, but it’s only half the problem.
What is the Presidents plan to handle the millions of illegals already in the country? A ‘guest worker program’ that he says is not amnesty. Okay … Technically speaking it may not be amnesty, but it’s as close as you can get without becoming it. The plan would allow any illegal holding a job in the US to continue working for up to 3 years, at which point they must leave the country.
Now … let me get this straight … they break our laws and come here illegally … and they get a job (technically breaking another law) … and their punishment is they get keep the job and stay here and we’ll come back to deport you in 3 years.
Raise your hand if you actually believe that they’ll be gone in 3 years …
No … sorry … doesn’t work. Sends the wrong message both to prospective immigrants (legal and illegal) and to employers.
No … what you need to do is be tough on the illegals and on the employers that enable them. If you are found in this country illegally you should be immediately deported back to your country of origin, if you are found guilty of a crime while in this country illegally your sentence should immediately be the maximum sentence and you should be deported once you have served out your sentence. (Of course prisons in this country are a completely different rant) If you are found employing an illegal you should face stiff fines and/or jail time … say $2.5 million per illegal and/or up to 10 years in prison (compounded for each illegal).
The idea is to make hiring an illegal so unattractive, so risky, that an employer is going to do everything possible to make sure that his employees are in this country legally. Now I’m willing to be lenient in a case where the employer is able to show due diligence in their hiring, but was taken by forged documents, but this would have to be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Now, some people will yell and scream that the immigration system is outdated, archaic, and too slow. I would probably agree with all of the above, and I would certainly agree that there needs to be some massive reform to the system, but that is no excuse for willingly and knowingly entering the country illegally or remaining in this country illegally. If I get pulled over for speeding, should I not have to pay the ticket because the county I was pulled over in doesn’t accept electronic payment and requires me to pay in person, in cash, on the appointed court day? No.
We should come down hard on those that have no respect for our country and our laws, and embrace those that show us that they respect us and wish to follow the American dream.
“In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”
This was sent to me as a quote by Theodore Roosevelt, though I haven’t been able to confirm if Roosevelt actually ever said it. Who said it or didn’t say it, however, does not change the truth in the statement. Sadly the realms of political correctness erode this country and strip from it even its identity … it divides us into groups and subgroups and pits us against one another weakening us from within.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
