I read in the Houston Chronicle where a DUI crackdown landed the groom in jail on the night his wedding as he left his own reception. Last time I looked, “Up against the wall and spread ‘em”, wasn’t part of the wedding ceremony.
“…a family friend who has known Puckett for 10 years, said he strongly believes the law should be enforced, but that in this case the police displayed a lack of discretion toward the couple.”
The problem with some police officers is they never road with a seasoned veteran in their training phase, one who could teach them how to show discretion while at the same time enforcing the law. I’m not saying the officers did anything wrong; please don’t misread what I’m saying; from what the report showed the letter of the law was enforced.
I had a senior officer explain an interesting perspective on law enforcement the first month or so I was wearing a blue uniform for the Houston Police Department. I couldn’t tell you his name; but what he said stayed with me the whole twenty years I was on the street.
“If you stop someone for a traffic violation and they hand you a valid driver’s license which happens to alert you to the fact that it’s their birthday; wish them a happy birthday and let them go on their way with a simple warning.” That was the first part of the rule; one which sounded fairly innocuous.
“If you stop someone for a traffic violation and they give you an excuse, one which you have never heard before and regardless of whether or not you believe it to be truthful; let them go on their way with a simple warning too.” How’s that for a neat change of pace?
I know I’ve shared this before; here it is again for those who may have missed it. I had a call; actually I was dispatched several times in one night to the same apartment project regarding a loud party disturbing the neighbors. The first time I showed up I warned the parties involved to turn down the music as it was in violation. The second and third times I had to be more than a little inventive; I failed to mention that this was a wedding party and instead of renting a hall these folks had a boom box and several vacant parking places to use as a dance floor.
Instead of writing tickets or hauling anyone off to jail I reached into my wallet and pulled out a $ 5 dollar bill, walked over to the bride and pinned it on her wedding dress. I asked the mother, sitting there with great concern as the “law” had shown up, if it would be permissible to have a dance with her daughter to celebrate the wedding.
After the dance was over I explained that due to the hour of night the music would have to be turned down, opening my wallet to show I had no more money to buy some time for the party. Enforcing the law requires more than a ticket book and a jail; there are time when you have to throw the book away.
Sunday, March 15, 2009
Thursday, March 12, 2009
They Got It Right and They Got it Wrong
One of my favorite movies has to be Fiddler on the Roof, Tevye explaining his thought process at every turn, “On the one hand…and on the other…then again…, all the while the camera somehow removes him from the situation visually as if to stop time. In this morning’s Houston Chronicle Mike Tolson has an interesting insight as to how the criminal justice system handles very minute details, Appeals court grants new trial for condemned Houston man .
On the one hand, according to the article, the suspect admitted everything necessary for a conviction and yet; on the other hand, the second part of the process, the punishment phase may or may not have had a significant legal blunder, one which gave the defense and the convicted murderer a chance to “beat the rap”. “If I were a rich man, a divvy, divvy, divvy do; all day long I’d…”
“(District Judge Jim) Wallace and another judge, Lon Harper, split pre-trial duties before the start of Haynes’ 1999 capital murder trial in the death of police Sgt. Kent Kincaid, with Harper presiding over the voir dire process in which potential jurors are questioned individually by prosecutors and defense attorneys.”
The first part of setting up grounds for a retrial, does State law provides for such a split; can one judge hear the pre-trial voir dire process, knowing that a different judge will be in attendance for the rest of the judicial proceedings? I am not given the answer, at least not from previous experience and not entirely through the information in today’s story; however, logic tells me the answer. The State Court of Appeals, mentioned as part of the justice system having heard the appeal, did not toss out the original findings of the District Court. A division of duties between judges, one only hearing voir dire, presumably to insure that important process is handled within the framework of our laws, is within the accepted day to day operations of the justice system.
“But the 5th Circuit panel said there was no way for Wallace or state appeals courts to determine from the printed trial record whether the defense objections had merit. And because Wallace had not witnessed the questioning, his ruling cannot be given the deference it normally would, the panel said.”
“It is clearly established that the cold record cannot accurately reveal the demeanor of live trial participants,” the opinion stated. “We cannot correspondingly apply . . . deference to the state court, because the state courts engaged in pure appellate fact-finding for an issue that turns entirely on demeanor.”
Here’s where the 5th Circuit panel got it right and wrong, both at the same time. In their reasoning they pointed to the “cold record” and correctly state that such a “cold record cannot accurately reveal the demeanor of live trial participants”.
What they neglect to include in their reasoning was how Judge Lon Harper had observed and could reveal the demeanor of live trial participants; the records were not “cold” and therefore should have had no sway in the 5th Circuit order for a retrial. Judge Harper observed and insured equal, impartial and accepted voir dire proceedings as part of his lawful duties; at the first sign of any deviance from accepted lawful proceedings he would have, by law, been required to halt the trial and start the entire process over.
The 5th Circuit has re-written a long established and accepted portion of human conduct within the frame work of the criminal justice system which, at one time provided a reasonable amount of weight for human observation by officers of the court, to include judges, who are well aware of each aspect of their duties. Had the 5th Circuit stated in their review that either judge had not been alert or carried out their individual duties, then and only then would this case have had merit. (Grammar check keeps insisting I put a question mark after the word “merit”; oh well…)
For anyone looking at the old adage, “Better a guilty person be let go than an innocent man be imprisoned”, then look elsewhere. This particular convicted felon never at anytime denied his involvement; he and he alone shot and killed a police officer. The impaneled jury which heard the evidence and determined the penalty phase came up with a verdict based on what they determined to be valid observations. The only issue the defense claimed was worthy of a retrial was a technical issue, an incorrect technical issue at that. Sorry, 5th Circuit, you got it wrong in the long run.
On the one hand, according to the article, the suspect admitted everything necessary for a conviction and yet; on the other hand, the second part of the process, the punishment phase may or may not have had a significant legal blunder, one which gave the defense and the convicted murderer a chance to “beat the rap”. “If I were a rich man, a divvy, divvy, divvy do; all day long I’d…”
“(District Judge Jim) Wallace and another judge, Lon Harper, split pre-trial duties before the start of Haynes’ 1999 capital murder trial in the death of police Sgt. Kent Kincaid, with Harper presiding over the voir dire process in which potential jurors are questioned individually by prosecutors and defense attorneys.”
The first part of setting up grounds for a retrial, does State law provides for such a split; can one judge hear the pre-trial voir dire process, knowing that a different judge will be in attendance for the rest of the judicial proceedings? I am not given the answer, at least not from previous experience and not entirely through the information in today’s story; however, logic tells me the answer. The State Court of Appeals, mentioned as part of the justice system having heard the appeal, did not toss out the original findings of the District Court. A division of duties between judges, one only hearing voir dire, presumably to insure that important process is handled within the framework of our laws, is within the accepted day to day operations of the justice system.
“But the 5th Circuit panel said there was no way for Wallace or state appeals courts to determine from the printed trial record whether the defense objections had merit. And because Wallace had not witnessed the questioning, his ruling cannot be given the deference it normally would, the panel said.”
“It is clearly established that the cold record cannot accurately reveal the demeanor of live trial participants,” the opinion stated. “We cannot correspondingly apply . . . deference to the state court, because the state courts engaged in pure appellate fact-finding for an issue that turns entirely on demeanor.”
Here’s where the 5th Circuit panel got it right and wrong, both at the same time. In their reasoning they pointed to the “cold record” and correctly state that such a “cold record cannot accurately reveal the demeanor of live trial participants”.
What they neglect to include in their reasoning was how Judge Lon Harper had observed and could reveal the demeanor of live trial participants; the records were not “cold” and therefore should have had no sway in the 5th Circuit order for a retrial. Judge Harper observed and insured equal, impartial and accepted voir dire proceedings as part of his lawful duties; at the first sign of any deviance from accepted lawful proceedings he would have, by law, been required to halt the trial and start the entire process over.
The 5th Circuit has re-written a long established and accepted portion of human conduct within the frame work of the criminal justice system which, at one time provided a reasonable amount of weight for human observation by officers of the court, to include judges, who are well aware of each aspect of their duties. Had the 5th Circuit stated in their review that either judge had not been alert or carried out their individual duties, then and only then would this case have had merit. (Grammar check keeps insisting I put a question mark after the word “merit”; oh well…)
For anyone looking at the old adage, “Better a guilty person be let go than an innocent man be imprisoned”, then look elsewhere. This particular convicted felon never at anytime denied his involvement; he and he alone shot and killed a police officer. The impaneled jury which heard the evidence and determined the penalty phase came up with a verdict based on what they determined to be valid observations. The only issue the defense claimed was worthy of a retrial was a technical issue, an incorrect technical issue at that. Sorry, 5th Circuit, you got it wrong in the long run.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Diurnal and Plagiarism
What are the odds of those two words, Diurnal and Plagiarism, showing up in the same sentence much less as the title of an article? Going through the comic strips this evening I ran across one of my regular reads, Funky Winkerbean. The teacher pointed out how one of the students had used a word in a paper he’d turned in; but apparently had no idea what the word meant.
There’s a strong possibility the student plagiarized someone else’s work; never mind that the student happens to be a comic strip character. Plagiarism is the act of including someone else’s creative writing within the body of your own work without properly acknowledging the original source; in short, it’s the same as stealing.
Teachers have tools at their disposal which are able to detect “borrowed work”. One simple way, as shown in the comic strip, would be to recognize the student’s inability to explain what had been written by virtue of the level of vocabulary or sentence structure. The internet has provided additional tools which are able to instantly compare previously acknowledged works and spot duplications or modest alterations of some other author’s original work. The solution being self evident, document and annotate any and all borrowed work and avoid the appearance of impropriety.
“A little bird whispered in my ear”, forgive the old worn out excuse line; but in a delicate and on going situation it sometimes is wise to pretend ignorance of facts, anyway, “A little bird whispered in my ear”, about a reversal of sorts in regards to plagiarism. Rather than a student being “caught red handed”, in this instance it was the other way around.
There was a serious paper turned in by a doctoral student a year or so back which somehow was copied by folks in a position to take advantage of the student’s article. The interesting part occurred by pure chance when the doctoral student attended a lecture only to find her paper being presented by those giving the lecture, almost verbatim; without any acknowledgement or annotation as to the true author of the work. I’m sure there had to be a proper explanation; but as most students will agree, “The dog ate mine”, won’t float.
In case you’re wondering, Diurnal: Active in the daytime; in zoology it has to do with animals which are active during the day, as opposed to nocturnal creatures. In botany it describes flowers that open during the day and close at night. Another meaning of Diurnal: The book of worship in the Roman Catholic Church, a book containing the material for daily prayers and worship.
How unfortunate; the folks holding students to an honor code lack the integrity and character they presumably are attempting to instill. All I can say for the thieves who stole a creative piece of writing from a student; hope you say your daily prayers and obtain some measure of forgiveness, after you complete the process of repentence.
There’s a strong possibility the student plagiarized someone else’s work; never mind that the student happens to be a comic strip character. Plagiarism is the act of including someone else’s creative writing within the body of your own work without properly acknowledging the original source; in short, it’s the same as stealing.
Teachers have tools at their disposal which are able to detect “borrowed work”. One simple way, as shown in the comic strip, would be to recognize the student’s inability to explain what had been written by virtue of the level of vocabulary or sentence structure. The internet has provided additional tools which are able to instantly compare previously acknowledged works and spot duplications or modest alterations of some other author’s original work. The solution being self evident, document and annotate any and all borrowed work and avoid the appearance of impropriety.
“A little bird whispered in my ear”, forgive the old worn out excuse line; but in a delicate and on going situation it sometimes is wise to pretend ignorance of facts, anyway, “A little bird whispered in my ear”, about a reversal of sorts in regards to plagiarism. Rather than a student being “caught red handed”, in this instance it was the other way around.
There was a serious paper turned in by a doctoral student a year or so back which somehow was copied by folks in a position to take advantage of the student’s article. The interesting part occurred by pure chance when the doctoral student attended a lecture only to find her paper being presented by those giving the lecture, almost verbatim; without any acknowledgement or annotation as to the true author of the work. I’m sure there had to be a proper explanation; but as most students will agree, “The dog ate mine”, won’t float.
In case you’re wondering, Diurnal: Active in the daytime; in zoology it has to do with animals which are active during the day, as opposed to nocturnal creatures. In botany it describes flowers that open during the day and close at night. Another meaning of Diurnal: The book of worship in the Roman Catholic Church, a book containing the material for daily prayers and worship.
How unfortunate; the folks holding students to an honor code lack the integrity and character they presumably are attempting to instill. All I can say for the thieves who stole a creative piece of writing from a student; hope you say your daily prayers and obtain some measure of forgiveness, after you complete the process of repentence.
NASA Photograph of Gulf Coast?
Sorry to disappoint you; no, that’s not a photograph taken from the orbiting space station of the Gulf Coast or any other coast for that matter. I just walked out to the foot of my driveway after a short cloud burst collected a sampling of tree pollen.
With any luck the weather system which is supposed to move through the Houston area later today and into tomorrow will not only bring the temperatures down a bit; but will bring us some much needed rain. It could be worse; those imbeciles in Washington might pass the pork spending bill and send it off to Obama to sign; sorry, too late.
With any luck the weather system which is supposed to move through the Houston area later today and into tomorrow will not only bring the temperatures down a bit; but will bring us some much needed rain. It could be worse; those imbeciles in Washington might pass the pork spending bill and send it off to Obama to sign; sorry, too late.
American Tune
I’m not sure what was going on in Paul Simon’s mind at the time he put this song to music. I’ve been told the tune goes back to Germany, even Bach; but that doesn’t quite explain how it turned into an “American Tune”. I do find it interesting for the information and feelings associated with the tune to work in today’s landscape, even more so than for what ever purpose might have existed, real or imagined, when Paul felt the urge to express these thoughts.
I do know this, while leaving a comment to David’s article, Trenchant Observation , this morning, the verses came to mind and wouldn’t let me alone.
For we lived so well so long
Still, when I think of the
Road were traveling on
I wonder what’s gone wrong
I cant help it, I wonder what’s gone wrong
American Tune
Words & music by Paul Simon
Many’s the time I’ve been mistaken
And many times confused
Yes, and often felt forsaken
And certainly misused
Oh, but I’m alright, I’m alright
I’m just weary to my bones
Still, you don’t expect to be
Bright and bon vivant
So far a-way from home, so far away from home
I don’t know a soul who’s not been battered
I don’t have a friend who feels at ease
I don’t know a dream that’s not been shattered
Or driven to its knees
Oh, but its alright, its alright
For we lived so well so long
Still, when I think of the
Road were traveling on
I wonder what’s gone wrong
I cant help it, I wonder what’s gone wrong
And I dreamed I was dying
I dreamed that my soul rose unexpectedly
And looking back down at me
Smiled reassuringly
And I dreamed I was flying
And high up above my eyes could clearly see
The statue of liberty
Sailing away to sea
And I dreamed I was flying
We come on the ship they call the mayflower
We come on the ship that sailed the moon
We come in the a-ges most uncertain hours
And sing an American tune
Oh, and its alright, its alright, its alright
You can’t be forever blessed
Still, tomorrows going to be another working day
And I’m trying to get some rest
That’s all I’m trying to get some rest
I do know this, while leaving a comment to David’s article, Trenchant Observation , this morning, the verses came to mind and wouldn’t let me alone.
For we lived so well so long
Still, when I think of the
Road were traveling on
I wonder what’s gone wrong
I cant help it, I wonder what’s gone wrong
American Tune
Words & music by Paul Simon
Many’s the time I’ve been mistaken
And many times confused
Yes, and often felt forsaken
And certainly misused
Oh, but I’m alright, I’m alright
I’m just weary to my bones
Still, you don’t expect to be
Bright and bon vivant
So far a-way from home, so far away from home
I don’t know a soul who’s not been battered
I don’t have a friend who feels at ease
I don’t know a dream that’s not been shattered
Or driven to its knees
Oh, but its alright, its alright
For we lived so well so long
Still, when I think of the
Road were traveling on
I wonder what’s gone wrong
I cant help it, I wonder what’s gone wrong
And I dreamed I was dying
I dreamed that my soul rose unexpectedly
And looking back down at me
Smiled reassuringly
And I dreamed I was flying
And high up above my eyes could clearly see
The statue of liberty
Sailing away to sea
And I dreamed I was flying
We come on the ship they call the mayflower
We come on the ship that sailed the moon
We come in the a-ges most uncertain hours
And sing an American tune
Oh, and its alright, its alright, its alright
You can’t be forever blessed
Still, tomorrows going to be another working day
And I’m trying to get some rest
That’s all I’m trying to get some rest
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
HBO’s Big Love Temple Scene
I understand the lack of respect for anything religious in nature coming from those who produce and provide so called entertainment on most cable channels, to include HBO. If Hollywood had its way; well, let’s not go there, haven’t got enough hours in the day.
I am aware of a show, Big Love, which, under the thin veil of entertainment, portrays a polygamous family. That show being on the air as entertainment is marginally acceptable; however, and that which is not excusable is the lack of respect for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints by including within the show ( to be aired Sunday March 15,2009) scenes depicting sacred temple ordinances. (photo credit: iStockphoto and borrowed from Meridian Magazines website)
“Certainly one of the hallmarks of a civilized society is that we grant others the opportunity to reverence their beliefs. If a group or individual holds something as sacred, an advanced and compassionate society gives them that privilege and does not seek to desecrate it… HBO has violated that critical idea and the LDS Church with their unseemly depiction. If you choose to send a letter to HBO, make sure it is dignified and reasonable, and note the counsel of the Church given here”
I am told the information used to recreate these sacred ordinance scenes along with the set designs to simulate the ordinance rooms within a working LDS temple, this information was obtained from a former member of the LDS Church, who left the LDS Church with an ax to grind and who does not hold these ordinances sacred. Even with that in mind, what lapse of respect on the part of HBO would lend a reasonable entertainment company to believe that airing such material would be acceptable in any light?
HBO has lowered, yet again, the minimum standards for the entertainment industry and those involved in the production and distribution of the show, Big Love, owe an apology to each and every member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and the entire community for trampling that which is sacred, regardless of which religious institution has been abused.
I am aware of a show, Big Love, which, under the thin veil of entertainment, portrays a polygamous family. That show being on the air as entertainment is marginally acceptable; however, and that which is not excusable is the lack of respect for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints by including within the show ( to be aired Sunday March 15,2009) scenes depicting sacred temple ordinances. (photo credit: iStockphoto and borrowed from Meridian Magazines website)
“Certainly one of the hallmarks of a civilized society is that we grant others the opportunity to reverence their beliefs. If a group or individual holds something as sacred, an advanced and compassionate society gives them that privilege and does not seek to desecrate it… HBO has violated that critical idea and the LDS Church with their unseemly depiction. If you choose to send a letter to HBO, make sure it is dignified and reasonable, and note the counsel of the Church given here”
I am told the information used to recreate these sacred ordinance scenes along with the set designs to simulate the ordinance rooms within a working LDS temple, this information was obtained from a former member of the LDS Church, who left the LDS Church with an ax to grind and who does not hold these ordinances sacred. Even with that in mind, what lapse of respect on the part of HBO would lend a reasonable entertainment company to believe that airing such material would be acceptable in any light?
HBO has lowered, yet again, the minimum standards for the entertainment industry and those involved in the production and distribution of the show, Big Love, owe an apology to each and every member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and the entire community for trampling that which is sacred, regardless of which religious institution has been abused.
Connecticut No Longer Recognizes 1st Amendment
Well, perhaps the title should have been directed to a couple of folks rather than the entire state of Connecticut, more precisely, Senator Andrew McDonald and Representative Michael Lawlor no longer recognize the 1st Amendment. I want to acknowledge and give a tip of the cap to Cassy Fiano, one of the many fine bloggers at Stop the ACLU, for her article posted yesterday, Connecticut looking to regulate the Catholic Church? .
I was going to write this blog last night when I ran across it; but wanted to be awake rather than half asleep. I did manage to send off some email letters to the offending government representatives, which I will include a little further down.
“The Lawlor-and-McDonald-controlled Judiciary Committee has introduced Raised Bill 1098, a bill aimed specifically at the Catholic Church, which would remove the authority of the bishop and pastor over individual parishes and put a board of laymen in their place.”
I want that to sink in for a moment or so, these government representatives want to alter the ways in which a church goes about self governance and organization. Does that throw up a red flag, anyone; is anyone at all paying attention out there? Please read the entire linked article over at Stop the ACLU, it should make your blood boil.
Here’s a challenge for you; write these “wonderful” government representatives a letter and get it out to them. Then let someone in the Catholic Church know you care as well. I sent a complimentary copy of the below letter to Thomas Peters, thomas@americanpapist.com , who is part of the Catholic Church up there in Connecticut and who is working to stop this piece of legislation.
Senator Andrew McDonald; ( McDonald@senatedems.ct.gov )
Perhaps Bill 1098 would have been something worthy of approval in some other country, say Russia; however, this is the USA and we have a constitution and a bill of rights which were put in place to protect the citizenry from tyrants such as you and Representative Michael Lawlor. ( MLawlor99@juno.com )
There is even more to Bill 1098 than simply imposing the will of the state on any religious organization they chose, the Catholic Church being in their target today. This same imposed state meddling could as easily be used to target corporations, small businesses or even families if you think about it.
If the state doesn’t like the way a particular board of trustees has been organized for a corporate giant then theoretically, under this same brazen usurpation of power, the state could alter that board to one more in line with what ever agenda is being pushed forward, regardless of the desires of stockholders, profitability or internal operations.
Take that same usurpation of power and apply it to the family unit and the state takes the place of parents in making decisions such as going to school, church attendance and social rules of engagement to include sexual relations which may or may not meet with the standards of the family.
This legislation must be quashed and then buried so far as to make sure the stink of it never reaches out for a second chance of life. Perhaps a public hanging of the bills sponsors would serve as a reminder, “Don’t tread on me”!
T F Stern
Houston, Texas
Don't bother coming down here to explain why you want to destroy God given rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, the smell has already preceded you. Stay up in Connecticut and pray I don’t come up there.
I was going to write this blog last night when I ran across it; but wanted to be awake rather than half asleep. I did manage to send off some email letters to the offending government representatives, which I will include a little further down.
“The Lawlor-and-McDonald-controlled Judiciary Committee has introduced Raised Bill 1098, a bill aimed specifically at the Catholic Church, which would remove the authority of the bishop and pastor over individual parishes and put a board of laymen in their place.”
I want that to sink in for a moment or so, these government representatives want to alter the ways in which a church goes about self governance and organization. Does that throw up a red flag, anyone; is anyone at all paying attention out there? Please read the entire linked article over at Stop the ACLU, it should make your blood boil.
Here’s a challenge for you; write these “wonderful” government representatives a letter and get it out to them. Then let someone in the Catholic Church know you care as well. I sent a complimentary copy of the below letter to Thomas Peters, thomas@americanpapist.com , who is part of the Catholic Church up there in Connecticut and who is working to stop this piece of legislation.
Senator Andrew McDonald; ( McDonald@senatedems.ct.gov )
Perhaps Bill 1098 would have been something worthy of approval in some other country, say Russia; however, this is the USA and we have a constitution and a bill of rights which were put in place to protect the citizenry from tyrants such as you and Representative Michael Lawlor. ( MLawlor99@juno.com )
There is even more to Bill 1098 than simply imposing the will of the state on any religious organization they chose, the Catholic Church being in their target today. This same imposed state meddling could as easily be used to target corporations, small businesses or even families if you think about it.
If the state doesn’t like the way a particular board of trustees has been organized for a corporate giant then theoretically, under this same brazen usurpation of power, the state could alter that board to one more in line with what ever agenda is being pushed forward, regardless of the desires of stockholders, profitability or internal operations.
Take that same usurpation of power and apply it to the family unit and the state takes the place of parents in making decisions such as going to school, church attendance and social rules of engagement to include sexual relations which may or may not meet with the standards of the family.
This legislation must be quashed and then buried so far as to make sure the stink of it never reaches out for a second chance of life. Perhaps a public hanging of the bills sponsors would serve as a reminder, “Don’t tread on me”!
T F Stern
Houston, Texas
Don't bother coming down here to explain why you want to destroy God given rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, the smell has already preceded you. Stay up in Connecticut and pray I don’t come up there.
The G Spot of all G Spots
No, this not going to be “R” rated, unless the “R” stands for religious. FoxNews wants us all to know we all have a “God Spot” according to a report published in the U.S. Journal of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by Jordan Grafman and his colleagues.
“A team of U.S. researchers has obtained strong evidence that religiosity is managed by the same parts of the brain that are used every day to interpret other people’s moods and intentions and to analyze experiences.”
“Moreover, the spots exist in the brains of ordinary people, not just those whose extraordinary religious experiences have been triggered by brain injury or neurological conditions like epilepsy.”
Did you catch that interesting twist which puts religious experiences and brain injury together? This would explain how the “progressives”, call them the liberal left, the godless or whatever; this is how they view the poor unfortunate souls who have to live with the burden of religious disease. You think I’m going off on one of my sarcastic rants; well, not so this time.
“Britain's controversial evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins contends that religion is essentially a cultural virus, spread from brain to brain.”
A little further down this news article I found other tid bits which would fit with the over all assumption that folks with religion might be suffering from delusions rather than actual experiences with deity.
“According to University of NSW evolutionary biologist Rob Brooks, the study shows that religion taps into existing parts of the brain that evolved to handle complex social interactions.”
“"It exploits existing parts of our brain," Associate Professor Brooks suggested.”
The choice of the word “exploits” in the sentence, “It exploits existing parts of our brain,”, exploits? Which meaning of exploit; to take selfish or unfair advantage or a person or situation, usually for personal gain or to simply use or develop something in order to gain a benefit?
Words have colors or hues attached to them, either by design or subconsciously fixed through years of casual association. Personally, the word exploit connotes something less than honorable, devious or even pernicious; then again I’m one of those brain damaged souls who believe in God and this is only my defensive reaction to what I perceive as an attack on the crutch used to maintain my sorry excuse of existence. I expect to fall down on the floor in uncontrollable jerking fits any moment; quick call a scientist to absolve me from the sins I’ve committed.
I came up with my own “conspiracy theory” after reading the articles. Use of the word “evolution” was laced throughout; a regular diet of phrases such as, “the brain’s evolution” or the “brain evolved” sort of makes you come to the conclusion that the information might have been slanted, at least to some degree by folks who support evolutionary theory and just might have a rigid attitude against anything associated with Intelligent Design , God or Religion. Remember that line, “…religion is essentially a cultural virus, spread from brain to brain.”; biologist Richard Dawkins isn’t by himself and has a whole bunch of similar thinking folks in his corner.
This scientific fact finding study on the brain which had to do with religion was conducted by a portion of society which does not believe in God and thinks religion is essentially a cultural virus; wouldn’t that seem rather pre-destined to a particular outcome? Forgive the use of the word pre-destined as such terms tend to annoy clear thinking scientific folks. “Okay, we got that paper out of the way; let’s move on to something worthy of our efforts. How about spending gobs and gobs of the taxpayer’s money on a new study, “the sexual habits of flat worms”? It will be much more satisfying and take at least 5 years to complete. We should all have enough to retire by then.”
How's this for a thought; scientific findings or results will match the theory regardless of the lack of scientific methods used to obtain them; isn’t that how “modern scientific consensus” works? This abuse of real science, having been switched with its evil twin, the one called “scientific consensus” gets a rubber stamp of approval by the progressives, or more accurately, the godless who would have everyone drink their Kool-aid.
Evolutionism is not science; it more closely falls into the category of a religion complete with Priests, Bishops and High Priests. So why were Priests from the religion of Evolutionism doing the brain study when it more properly should have been some other religious order, say Lutherans or Episcopalian Priests dressed in fancy white lab coats? It would seem more probable that the Lutherans or Episcopalians would recognize the God Spot; are we having fun yet?
These are the same reasons why the religion of Global Warming is able to survive in spite of the shabby so called scientific studies and intentional distortion of data used to further their agenda, one which either inhibits industrial growth in the free market system or which destroys it entirely. The High Priest of Global Warming, Algore, has decreed and handed down the tablets; I think Carbon Footprint was listed as the second violation of the 10, right after Greenhouse Gas.
“A team of U.S. researchers has obtained strong evidence that religiosity is managed by the same parts of the brain that are used every day to interpret other people’s moods and intentions and to analyze experiences.”
“Moreover, the spots exist in the brains of ordinary people, not just those whose extraordinary religious experiences have been triggered by brain injury or neurological conditions like epilepsy.”
Did you catch that interesting twist which puts religious experiences and brain injury together? This would explain how the “progressives”, call them the liberal left, the godless or whatever; this is how they view the poor unfortunate souls who have to live with the burden of religious disease. You think I’m going off on one of my sarcastic rants; well, not so this time.
“Britain's controversial evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins contends that religion is essentially a cultural virus, spread from brain to brain.”
A little further down this news article I found other tid bits which would fit with the over all assumption that folks with religion might be suffering from delusions rather than actual experiences with deity.
“According to University of NSW evolutionary biologist Rob Brooks, the study shows that religion taps into existing parts of the brain that evolved to handle complex social interactions.”
“"It exploits existing parts of our brain," Associate Professor Brooks suggested.”
The choice of the word “exploits” in the sentence, “It exploits existing parts of our brain,”, exploits? Which meaning of exploit; to take selfish or unfair advantage or a person or situation, usually for personal gain or to simply use or develop something in order to gain a benefit?
Words have colors or hues attached to them, either by design or subconsciously fixed through years of casual association. Personally, the word exploit connotes something less than honorable, devious or even pernicious; then again I’m one of those brain damaged souls who believe in God and this is only my defensive reaction to what I perceive as an attack on the crutch used to maintain my sorry excuse of existence. I expect to fall down on the floor in uncontrollable jerking fits any moment; quick call a scientist to absolve me from the sins I’ve committed.
I came up with my own “conspiracy theory” after reading the articles. Use of the word “evolution” was laced throughout; a regular diet of phrases such as, “the brain’s evolution” or the “brain evolved” sort of makes you come to the conclusion that the information might have been slanted, at least to some degree by folks who support evolutionary theory and just might have a rigid attitude against anything associated with Intelligent Design , God or Religion. Remember that line, “…religion is essentially a cultural virus, spread from brain to brain.”; biologist Richard Dawkins isn’t by himself and has a whole bunch of similar thinking folks in his corner.
This scientific fact finding study on the brain which had to do with religion was conducted by a portion of society which does not believe in God and thinks religion is essentially a cultural virus; wouldn’t that seem rather pre-destined to a particular outcome? Forgive the use of the word pre-destined as such terms tend to annoy clear thinking scientific folks. “Okay, we got that paper out of the way; let’s move on to something worthy of our efforts. How about spending gobs and gobs of the taxpayer’s money on a new study, “the sexual habits of flat worms”? It will be much more satisfying and take at least 5 years to complete. We should all have enough to retire by then.”
How's this for a thought; scientific findings or results will match the theory regardless of the lack of scientific methods used to obtain them; isn’t that how “modern scientific consensus” works? This abuse of real science, having been switched with its evil twin, the one called “scientific consensus” gets a rubber stamp of approval by the progressives, or more accurately, the godless who would have everyone drink their Kool-aid.
Evolutionism is not science; it more closely falls into the category of a religion complete with Priests, Bishops and High Priests. So why were Priests from the religion of Evolutionism doing the brain study when it more properly should have been some other religious order, say Lutherans or Episcopalian Priests dressed in fancy white lab coats? It would seem more probable that the Lutherans or Episcopalians would recognize the God Spot; are we having fun yet?
These are the same reasons why the religion of Global Warming is able to survive in spite of the shabby so called scientific studies and intentional distortion of data used to further their agenda, one which either inhibits industrial growth in the free market system or which destroys it entirely. The High Priest of Global Warming, Algore, has decreed and handed down the tablets; I think Carbon Footprint was listed as the second violation of the 10, right after Greenhouse Gas.
Monday, March 09, 2009
Courage and Resolve
These two closely related words, Courage and Resolve, came up over the weekend and then again this afternoon. I’ll work backwards, something I used to do when working traffic, backing up with the flow of traffic as large trucks hid smaller vehicles from view in the middle of rush hour traffic, cars which might jut out to get from behind a large truck and run me over while directing traffic if I didn’t pay attention.
This afternoon I checked in on Angel’s blog where she’d posted about Israel’s tennis victory over in Sweden. The real story had nothing to do with tennis; but with the courage to attend where so much resentment had been thrown their way, not only from the Muslims who stood outside where the tennis match was being held; but as shown through the cowardice of the host city and the way things were handled. Go read the article and see for yourself.
Continuing to move backwards, paying attention to details along the way, was something I heard in a talk given at church on Sunday by a friend of mine. The talk was centered around prayer; but, I heard one sentence and that made all the difference, that which struck a nerve. He used the word “resolution” and then tossed in, “Many of you will make a resolution today, some of you might even keep that resolution as far away as tomorrow”, close enough since I’m not a stenographer.
I heard the hint of frustration; his words trailed off as they escaped his mouth, his knowledge that a good portion of those hearing his words would not act upon them, and even if they did, their actions would only be a token acceptance rather than become long term habits. Resolve is more than a word in our vocabulary; it should be part of our character. I knew right away what he was referring to was applicable to other aspects of life here in America, important character traits which at one time were prevalent and for one reason or another seemed less important.
Lots of folks make New Year’s Resolutions, pie in the sky promises to themselves which last all of a week or a month; “I’m going to keep a journal”, “I’m going to eat a proper diet”, “I’m going to read the scriptures daily” and the list goes on for as many improvements as can be implemented. The trouble with “resolutions”, at least for most people would be the lack of understanding; they have no resolve, no discipline or integrity of character and so what they really meant to say, instead of having a New Year’s Resolution was they had a Wish, a kin to winning the lottery and about the same odds.
If you go back and study our founding documents, the words resolve and courage are woven directly into the fabric of our nation. With resolve our nation was formed and with great courage to back up that resolve was our independence obtained and kept. For those not paying attention we fought for independence twice; the first time we won and Cornwallis surrendered and then again in the War of 1812 we proved we could keep them at bay.
You should know by now that the battle for freedom and liberty is a never ending process, one which must be taken seriously for there are many who would deny us the temporary victories of the past at a moments notice. I wasn’t around on December 7th, 1941 to hear President Roosevelt’s declaration; but it’s available through the miracle of the internet if you wanted to both hear and read it.
“No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people, in their righteous might, will win through to absolute victory.”
President Roosevelt could have just as easily said, “This day we resolve…” instead of, “No matter how long it may take us…”, a statement of our determination as a country of like minded individuals with a righteous cause, that of liberty and freedom from fear, freedom from cowardly attacks on our soil. Years after the speech was given, even now, these words of common indignation toward our enemy are thought of in high regard, as they should be.
I did listen with a somber spirit on September 20, 2001 when President Bush spoke to the nation and the rest of the world in response to an attack on our soil by terrorists, those who have declared without reservation their desire to destroy our nation and way of life.
“Our grief has turned to anger and anger to resolution. Whether we bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done.”
{…}
“But our resolve must not pass. Each of us will remember what happened that day and to whom it happened. We will remember the moment the news came, where we were and what we were doing.”
Go back and read the whole of it, “{…}” hardly does it justice. Try to remember how your head nodded affirmatively as we silently agreed to the resolve mentioned, to hold on to the required resolve until justice had been taken to our enemies. I find it interesting, if not beyond the pale, for the traitors living among us and enjoying our freedoms to speak carelessly and with insulting derision toward former President Bush and the resolutions which should remain a common goal, that of bringing the terrorists to justice.
Isn’t it sad how many of us have lost that resolve in a relatively short period of time; not because there wasn’t sufficient reason, simply because so many lack the necessary character to qualify as Americans due to a lack of courage and self discipline. I keep a reminder of the 911 attack on the sidebar of my blog; it wasn’t a bad dream and waking up each day doesn’t make it go away, the image doesn’t fade, nor should it ever. Those who would destroy America through terrorist acts are still out there and what are we doing to bring them to justice?
“Wouldn’t it be nice if…, fill in the blank”; that’s not resolve, that’s wishing. The terrorists we wanted to bring to justice eight years ago are laughing at us today and will one day shake us to our very foundations if we don’t show some backbone, some courage and resolve to do that which we know should be done.
Being politically correct, not making the rest of the world angry for standing up for what is right will not stop our enemies from advancing against us. Those who cave into bullies invite continued bullying; only from then on not only is there a taste of blood in your mouth but the taste of cowardice to wash it down.
We now have a president who has decided to close Gitmo, turned a blind eye to justice and let one of the terrorists responsible for blowing up the USS Cole go, wants to hold serious peace talks with agents of the terrorist nations harboring the very people who have vowed to annihilate us and to top that off has invited the dregs of Gaza to have a safe haven here in America.
We resolve this day not to resolve anything any more, and we will stand by this resolution!
This afternoon I checked in on Angel’s blog where she’d posted about Israel’s tennis victory over in Sweden. The real story had nothing to do with tennis; but with the courage to attend where so much resentment had been thrown their way, not only from the Muslims who stood outside where the tennis match was being held; but as shown through the cowardice of the host city and the way things were handled. Go read the article and see for yourself.
Continuing to move backwards, paying attention to details along the way, was something I heard in a talk given at church on Sunday by a friend of mine. The talk was centered around prayer; but, I heard one sentence and that made all the difference, that which struck a nerve. He used the word “resolution” and then tossed in, “Many of you will make a resolution today, some of you might even keep that resolution as far away as tomorrow”, close enough since I’m not a stenographer.
I heard the hint of frustration; his words trailed off as they escaped his mouth, his knowledge that a good portion of those hearing his words would not act upon them, and even if they did, their actions would only be a token acceptance rather than become long term habits. Resolve is more than a word in our vocabulary; it should be part of our character. I knew right away what he was referring to was applicable to other aspects of life here in America, important character traits which at one time were prevalent and for one reason or another seemed less important.
Lots of folks make New Year’s Resolutions, pie in the sky promises to themselves which last all of a week or a month; “I’m going to keep a journal”, “I’m going to eat a proper diet”, “I’m going to read the scriptures daily” and the list goes on for as many improvements as can be implemented. The trouble with “resolutions”, at least for most people would be the lack of understanding; they have no resolve, no discipline or integrity of character and so what they really meant to say, instead of having a New Year’s Resolution was they had a Wish, a kin to winning the lottery and about the same odds.
If you go back and study our founding documents, the words resolve and courage are woven directly into the fabric of our nation. With resolve our nation was formed and with great courage to back up that resolve was our independence obtained and kept. For those not paying attention we fought for independence twice; the first time we won and Cornwallis surrendered and then again in the War of 1812 we proved we could keep them at bay.
You should know by now that the battle for freedom and liberty is a never ending process, one which must be taken seriously for there are many who would deny us the temporary victories of the past at a moments notice. I wasn’t around on December 7th, 1941 to hear President Roosevelt’s declaration; but it’s available through the miracle of the internet if you wanted to both hear and read it.
“No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people, in their righteous might, will win through to absolute victory.”
President Roosevelt could have just as easily said, “This day we resolve…” instead of, “No matter how long it may take us…”, a statement of our determination as a country of like minded individuals with a righteous cause, that of liberty and freedom from fear, freedom from cowardly attacks on our soil. Years after the speech was given, even now, these words of common indignation toward our enemy are thought of in high regard, as they should be.
I did listen with a somber spirit on September 20, 2001 when President Bush spoke to the nation and the rest of the world in response to an attack on our soil by terrorists, those who have declared without reservation their desire to destroy our nation and way of life.
“Our grief has turned to anger and anger to resolution. Whether we bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done.”
{…}
“But our resolve must not pass. Each of us will remember what happened that day and to whom it happened. We will remember the moment the news came, where we were and what we were doing.”
Go back and read the whole of it, “{…}” hardly does it justice. Try to remember how your head nodded affirmatively as we silently agreed to the resolve mentioned, to hold on to the required resolve until justice had been taken to our enemies. I find it interesting, if not beyond the pale, for the traitors living among us and enjoying our freedoms to speak carelessly and with insulting derision toward former President Bush and the resolutions which should remain a common goal, that of bringing the terrorists to justice.
Isn’t it sad how many of us have lost that resolve in a relatively short period of time; not because there wasn’t sufficient reason, simply because so many lack the necessary character to qualify as Americans due to a lack of courage and self discipline. I keep a reminder of the 911 attack on the sidebar of my blog; it wasn’t a bad dream and waking up each day doesn’t make it go away, the image doesn’t fade, nor should it ever. Those who would destroy America through terrorist acts are still out there and what are we doing to bring them to justice?
“Wouldn’t it be nice if…, fill in the blank”; that’s not resolve, that’s wishing. The terrorists we wanted to bring to justice eight years ago are laughing at us today and will one day shake us to our very foundations if we don’t show some backbone, some courage and resolve to do that which we know should be done.
Being politically correct, not making the rest of the world angry for standing up for what is right will not stop our enemies from advancing against us. Those who cave into bullies invite continued bullying; only from then on not only is there a taste of blood in your mouth but the taste of cowardice to wash it down.
We now have a president who has decided to close Gitmo, turned a blind eye to justice and let one of the terrorists responsible for blowing up the USS Cole go, wants to hold serious peace talks with agents of the terrorist nations harboring the very people who have vowed to annihilate us and to top that off has invited the dregs of Gaza to have a safe haven here in America.
We resolve this day not to resolve anything any more, and we will stand by this resolution!
I’ll Be Running 4 Years From Now
If you just fell off the turnip truck you might have missed a news article which explained that President Obama signed off on an executive order to overturn the Bush executive order banning the use of taxpayer dollars use in Embryonic Stem Cell Research.
The New York Times had a short explanatory article with the following paragraph; but you can be sure most any media outlet has a similar story.
“The ban, known as the Dickey-Wicker amendment, first became law in 1996, and has been renewed by Congress every year since. It specifically bans the use of tax dollars to create human embryos — a practice that is routine in private fertility clinics — or for research in which embryos are destroyed, discarded or knowingly subjected to risk of injury.”
Obama has stated that his administration “make clear that the government intends to support” the use of taxpayer dollars in Embryonic Stem Cell Research; the difference between the Bush administration and the Obama administration being the use of taxpayer dollars in what many consider a very hot topic and which is just as volatile as the abortion issue.
While driving down the road in between jobs and listening to the news I got to hear the interview; you know the one that had to be coming, the one showing the Bush folks as heartless for having kept researchers from discovering the miracle cure for damaged nerves that kept her paralyzed.
“Obama’s signature today means I’ll be up and back to running four years from now!” I’m not making this up, that’s what I heard in the interview. Never mind the private sector has been doing embryonic stem cell research all this time; the Bush executive order kept taxpayer dollars from being spent, not the research from being done.
I’d bet the same woman who said, “Obama’s signature today means I’ll be up and back to running four years from now!”, lives down the street from the woman who thinks she’ll never have to worry about buying gasoline since the “O” got elected and down the street from that woman lives yet another who thinks the “One” is going to furnish that free house with all new appliances and a new bathroom. All this can be done with a signature from Obama; just think what he can do for sexually transmitted disease, illiteracy or a host of other human conditions.
For the record, the use of embryonic stem cells to secure a scientific break through, even if that break through cures cancer, repairs spinal cord injuries or makes time travel possible; a created human being, even if the creative process was done outside the womb, has the same rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as any other human being.
When we forget or ignore the rights of one individual it is the same as ignoring those same rights for all. When we perform scientific experiments on humans, regardless of how old they are, we are guilty of the same crimes performed in NAZI Germany on folks who had no say in the matter.
What’s next in the name of scientific medical research; are we going to start dunking people living at the old folk’s home into freezing tubs of water, timing them to see how long they can survive the cold? How about we expose them to extreme heat to see how long before their skins falls off the bone; after all, these folks have served their usefulness and have now become a burden on the health care system.
I don’t see embryonic stem cell research as a step towards a more humane world of science, a world where we no longer have one or two medical issues that once plagued our society. No, we as taxpayers are being told we have no choice except to join in and be a party to the murder and torture of defenseless human beings. I can see flakes of ash falling from the sky; thought it was my imagination at first or the ashes were simply pieces of cardboard from the local trash incinerator. God help us for ignoring what we know to be wrong.
The New York Times had a short explanatory article with the following paragraph; but you can be sure most any media outlet has a similar story.
“The ban, known as the Dickey-Wicker amendment, first became law in 1996, and has been renewed by Congress every year since. It specifically bans the use of tax dollars to create human embryos — a practice that is routine in private fertility clinics — or for research in which embryos are destroyed, discarded or knowingly subjected to risk of injury.”
Obama has stated that his administration “make clear that the government intends to support” the use of taxpayer dollars in Embryonic Stem Cell Research; the difference between the Bush administration and the Obama administration being the use of taxpayer dollars in what many consider a very hot topic and which is just as volatile as the abortion issue.
While driving down the road in between jobs and listening to the news I got to hear the interview; you know the one that had to be coming, the one showing the Bush folks as heartless for having kept researchers from discovering the miracle cure for damaged nerves that kept her paralyzed.
“Obama’s signature today means I’ll be up and back to running four years from now!” I’m not making this up, that’s what I heard in the interview. Never mind the private sector has been doing embryonic stem cell research all this time; the Bush executive order kept taxpayer dollars from being spent, not the research from being done.
I’d bet the same woman who said, “Obama’s signature today means I’ll be up and back to running four years from now!”, lives down the street from the woman who thinks she’ll never have to worry about buying gasoline since the “O” got elected and down the street from that woman lives yet another who thinks the “One” is going to furnish that free house with all new appliances and a new bathroom. All this can be done with a signature from Obama; just think what he can do for sexually transmitted disease, illiteracy or a host of other human conditions.
For the record, the use of embryonic stem cells to secure a scientific break through, even if that break through cures cancer, repairs spinal cord injuries or makes time travel possible; a created human being, even if the creative process was done outside the womb, has the same rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as any other human being.
When we forget or ignore the rights of one individual it is the same as ignoring those same rights for all. When we perform scientific experiments on humans, regardless of how old they are, we are guilty of the same crimes performed in NAZI Germany on folks who had no say in the matter.
What’s next in the name of scientific medical research; are we going to start dunking people living at the old folk’s home into freezing tubs of water, timing them to see how long they can survive the cold? How about we expose them to extreme heat to see how long before their skins falls off the bone; after all, these folks have served their usefulness and have now become a burden on the health care system.
I don’t see embryonic stem cell research as a step towards a more humane world of science, a world where we no longer have one or two medical issues that once plagued our society. No, we as taxpayers are being told we have no choice except to join in and be a party to the murder and torture of defenseless human beings. I can see flakes of ash falling from the sky; thought it was my imagination at first or the ashes were simply pieces of cardboard from the local trash incinerator. God help us for ignoring what we know to be wrong.
Saturday, March 07, 2009
School Textbooks Distort Religion
Lauren Green, not to be confused with Lorne Green , the actor from the old Bonanza television show, Lauren Green with the FoxNews network had an article, “Authors Warn That Many Textbooks Distort Religion” . From that article:
“Authors Gary Tobin and Dennis Ybarra of the Institute for Jewish and Community Research found some 500 imperfections and distortions concerning religion in 28 of the most widely used social studies and history textbooks in the United States.”
Errors are going to happen, isn’t that what the bumper sticker says; close enough. The problem with errors and distortions is how they prejudice or bias the teaching process as well as the learning process when dealing with the different religions of the world.
“Islam has a privileged position,” he said. “It’s not critiqued or criticized or qualified, whereas Judaism and Christianity are.”
“One example is in the glossary of “World History: Continuity and Change.” It calls the Ten Commandments “moral laws Moses claimed to have received from the Hebrew God,” while the entry for the Koran contains no such qualifier in saying it is the “Holy Book of Islam containing revelations received by Muhammad from God.””
Whether or not the bias was intended or perceived determines the future in so many ways as the printed text becomes part of the distribution process, is handed out to “eager young minds”, then is turned over to the public schools and the teacher’s union operatives who at one time were called teachers. The trend, at least in the United States, over the past several decades has been to drive a huge wedge to separate church and state, to be in compliance with a Supreme Court ruling, one intended to turn America toward communism . We are to become a godless society in matters public, what you do in private; well, that’s your business.
“But First Amendment scholar Dr. Charles Haynes , who has written extensively on the subject of public schools and religion, says he thinks sometimes the criticisms go a little too far.”
“There’s no conspiracy in the textbook industry to favor one religion over another. ... I think the group that bangs the pot the loudest gets the most attention,” he said.”
Naturally I’d have to side with anyone who has “Dr.” in front of their name over some religious whacko with an ax to grind. I’ll use only one more quote from the original article and finish up, an example which pretty much covers the topic of distortion.
“A “true or false” question on the origins of Christianity asserted that “Christianity was started by a young Palestinian named Jesus.” The teacher’s edition says this is “true.””
I mean, anyone with half a brain knows, Jesus, just like Moses, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were all Mormons. You can bet the farm that won’t get printed in the next history text book.
“Authors Gary Tobin and Dennis Ybarra of the Institute for Jewish and Community Research found some 500 imperfections and distortions concerning religion in 28 of the most widely used social studies and history textbooks in the United States.”
Errors are going to happen, isn’t that what the bumper sticker says; close enough. The problem with errors and distortions is how they prejudice or bias the teaching process as well as the learning process when dealing with the different religions of the world.
“Islam has a privileged position,” he said. “It’s not critiqued or criticized or qualified, whereas Judaism and Christianity are.”
“One example is in the glossary of “World History: Continuity and Change.” It calls the Ten Commandments “moral laws Moses claimed to have received from the Hebrew God,” while the entry for the Koran contains no such qualifier in saying it is the “Holy Book of Islam containing revelations received by Muhammad from God.””
Whether or not the bias was intended or perceived determines the future in so many ways as the printed text becomes part of the distribution process, is handed out to “eager young minds”, then is turned over to the public schools and the teacher’s union operatives who at one time were called teachers. The trend, at least in the United States, over the past several decades has been to drive a huge wedge to separate church and state, to be in compliance with a Supreme Court ruling, one intended to turn America toward communism . We are to become a godless society in matters public, what you do in private; well, that’s your business.
“But First Amendment scholar Dr. Charles Haynes , who has written extensively on the subject of public schools and religion, says he thinks sometimes the criticisms go a little too far.”
“There’s no conspiracy in the textbook industry to favor one religion over another. ... I think the group that bangs the pot the loudest gets the most attention,” he said.”
Naturally I’d have to side with anyone who has “Dr.” in front of their name over some religious whacko with an ax to grind. I’ll use only one more quote from the original article and finish up, an example which pretty much covers the topic of distortion.
“A “true or false” question on the origins of Christianity asserted that “Christianity was started by a young Palestinian named Jesus.” The teacher’s edition says this is “true.””
I mean, anyone with half a brain knows, Jesus, just like Moses, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were all Mormons. You can bet the farm that won’t get printed in the next history text book.
Out My Back Door
“Doo-ot, doo-ot, do, looking out my back door”, a line from a Credence Clearwater song; don’t care if it’s spelled properly as long as you get the point. Looking out my door is not all doom and gloom in spite of what Obama and congress tell me.
Spring has sprung here in Houston. The Colanchos, which word is spelled correctly, are in full radiance there on the back patio. These are off-spring, pardon the pun, of the same plants my folks gave us when they moved off to Florida many years ago. Originally they were potted plants; but they seem to have thrived in spite of the neglect and lack of gardening skills offered them. These plants found a crack in the concrete and I didn’t have the heart to pull them up as if to equate them with weeds which suffer such a fate.
Another sure sign of spring around here are billowing yellow clouds of tree pollen rolling down the street. Strangers in their cars slow down as they look around for a building on fire, believing the air to be filled with yellow smoke. A film of the powder covers everything so it’s almost a waste of time to wash the car; half an hour later it’s back. If it ever rains, we’re six to eight inches behind for the year and it’s only the first of March; if it ever rains the pollen floats as it’s collected in puddles at the edge of the street so as to look like pools of sulfur.
Mockingbirds, my favorite of all, dive in front of vehicles as they challenge the percentages of survival. I’ve come to admire their sheer grit, wondering if perhaps the Mockingbird should have been the symbol of our nation over the Bald Eagle. No, come to think of it, the Mockingbird has more spirit and would be ashamed of how we cower in the face of adversity. You thought I’d never get around to a political twist.
I listened to the Rush Limbaugh radio show the other day and heard a neat line of thought, one which beats the crap out of, “Oh no the world is ending, my 401k has lost half its value, companies are laying off workers and I might be next”, and the list could go on and on.
No, the right attitude expressed by the host, “I refuse to participate in the recession.” It won’t matter what happens as long as I keep my shoulder to the wheel, continue doing what got me here to begin with and do the best I know how. There will always be challenges; it’s not the challenge that breaks you, it’s how you deal with it. I refuse to give in and let someone else bail me out of something I can accomplish myself.
Now, aren’t those some beautiful Colanchos? “Doo-ot, doo-ot, do, looking out my back door”.
Spring has sprung here in Houston. The Colanchos, which word is spelled correctly, are in full radiance there on the back patio. These are off-spring, pardon the pun, of the same plants my folks gave us when they moved off to Florida many years ago. Originally they were potted plants; but they seem to have thrived in spite of the neglect and lack of gardening skills offered them. These plants found a crack in the concrete and I didn’t have the heart to pull them up as if to equate them with weeds which suffer such a fate.
Another sure sign of spring around here are billowing yellow clouds of tree pollen rolling down the street. Strangers in their cars slow down as they look around for a building on fire, believing the air to be filled with yellow smoke. A film of the powder covers everything so it’s almost a waste of time to wash the car; half an hour later it’s back. If it ever rains, we’re six to eight inches behind for the year and it’s only the first of March; if it ever rains the pollen floats as it’s collected in puddles at the edge of the street so as to look like pools of sulfur.
Mockingbirds, my favorite of all, dive in front of vehicles as they challenge the percentages of survival. I’ve come to admire their sheer grit, wondering if perhaps the Mockingbird should have been the symbol of our nation over the Bald Eagle. No, come to think of it, the Mockingbird has more spirit and would be ashamed of how we cower in the face of adversity. You thought I’d never get around to a political twist.
I listened to the Rush Limbaugh radio show the other day and heard a neat line of thought, one which beats the crap out of, “Oh no the world is ending, my 401k has lost half its value, companies are laying off workers and I might be next”, and the list could go on and on.
No, the right attitude expressed by the host, “I refuse to participate in the recession.” It won’t matter what happens as long as I keep my shoulder to the wheel, continue doing what got me here to begin with and do the best I know how. There will always be challenges; it’s not the challenge that breaks you, it’s how you deal with it. I refuse to give in and let someone else bail me out of something I can accomplish myself.
Now, aren’t those some beautiful Colanchos? “Doo-ot, doo-ot, do, looking out my back door”.
Friday, March 06, 2009
Headline Was Misleading
A headline on the KPRC website got my attention, “Judge Arrested On DWI Suspicion” . My first thoughts, and without having read anything except the title, “That judge must think he’s above the law…”, without adding, and yet having a related thought, “…just like most every other elected official”.
The problem with glancing only at the headline was how badly the headline matched up with the facts of the article. I guess if KPRC were out to smear someone’s good name, saying he’d been arrested for DWI would go a long way; but the honest thing to do would have been to say, “Breathalyzer Proved Judge Was Not DWI” or something about how the system in place works to protect everyone equally; but that won’t get anyone to spend time or money, now will it?
“Judge Alan B. Sadler was arrested after a minor accident involving another vehicle in the 2100 block of North Loop 336 West on Wednesday night.”
“Police said the judge was given a Breathalyzer test and he had .0257, which is below the legal limit of .08.”
“No charges were filed and the judge was released.”
“.0257”, you could get a reading like that from brushing your teeth and then gargling with almost any brand name mouthwash for goodness sakes. Think about it, “.0257”, would be the equivalent to maybe two sips of wine or maybe a quarter of a can of beer.
What kind of a non-story would that have made? I’d go so far as to say there are probably normal folks who have interesting body metabolism functions, whose body naturally produce a blood alcohol level of “.0257”.
I don’t know Judge Sadler, never heard of him before this article came out; however, the man had a minor traffic accident, he didn’t violate the public trust. I think KPRC owes Judge Sadler a public apology and perhaps dinner at a nice restaurant to be enjoyed with his wife or “significant other” as the case may be. Throw in a bottle of the house wine and tickets to the symphony, the Rocket’s or Astros game and hope he is gracious enough to let it go at that.
The problem with glancing only at the headline was how badly the headline matched up with the facts of the article. I guess if KPRC were out to smear someone’s good name, saying he’d been arrested for DWI would go a long way; but the honest thing to do would have been to say, “Breathalyzer Proved Judge Was Not DWI” or something about how the system in place works to protect everyone equally; but that won’t get anyone to spend time or money, now will it?
“Judge Alan B. Sadler was arrested after a minor accident involving another vehicle in the 2100 block of North Loop 336 West on Wednesday night.”
“Police said the judge was given a Breathalyzer test and he had .0257, which is below the legal limit of .08.”
“No charges were filed and the judge was released.”
“.0257”, you could get a reading like that from brushing your teeth and then gargling with almost any brand name mouthwash for goodness sakes. Think about it, “.0257”, would be the equivalent to maybe two sips of wine or maybe a quarter of a can of beer.
What kind of a non-story would that have made? I’d go so far as to say there are probably normal folks who have interesting body metabolism functions, whose body naturally produce a blood alcohol level of “.0257”.
I don’t know Judge Sadler, never heard of him before this article came out; however, the man had a minor traffic accident, he didn’t violate the public trust. I think KPRC owes Judge Sadler a public apology and perhaps dinner at a nice restaurant to be enjoyed with his wife or “significant other” as the case may be. Throw in a bottle of the house wine and tickets to the symphony, the Rocket’s or Astros game and hope he is gracious enough to let it go at that.
Due Process and Confiscated Firearms
First off I need to give a tip of the hat to Say Uncle for putting a link up which led to yet another blog site with an interesting name, Ride Fast and Shoot Straight , Eventually the path led to Inside Bay Area dot Com’s blog where the original story had been posted; I’d feel bad not giving credit for each step along the way, especially since a key word involved is the word “process”.
The long and short of it had to do with police officers confiscating an entire collection of firearms under the guise of protecting a community. I read the little bit that was offered in the articles and came away with a few bullet points, none of which add up to the end result; the 9th Circus Court of Appeals leaving a citizen without his gun collection which had either been destroyed and/or sold off at auction.
There were at least two people living under one roof, a father and a son; both owned guns either in joint ownership or individually.
The son was Bi-Polar, had not been taking the prescribed medication and had acted in such a way as to be a danger to his father and others in the community through threats along with the ability to carry out those threats by virtue of having weapons readily available; however, as was included in the article, the son was arrested, outside the house by police and had no weapon on him at the time.
The police conducted a “protective sweep” of the house, after the arrest had been made, and confiscated every weapon in the house. Please explain the definition of a protective sweep; make sure the language meets recognized legal standards. If the break down of events is accurate, where’s the court order to enter the house, to confiscate any weapon, much less every weapon, and upon what lawful basis would such a court order come?
According to the report, officers proceeded to search the house using “search incident to arrest” as their justification. I may have been retired for quite some time now; but the laws covering “search incident to arrest” are fairly direct and limited.
Search incident to arrest applied only to the immediate area of control by a suspect being arrested, that which was on his/her person or within reach and could be used as a weapon against the arresting officers. If a glove box was locked and within reach of a suspect, then anything inside the glove box was not considered within the scope “search incident to arrest”, nor would anything in the trunk of the car; it had to be within reach, as in under the seat, between the seat or over the sun visor.
If an arrest was made at the front porch of a house nothing inside that house fell within the immediate control of the arrested suspect and so nothing inside that house could be searched without a signed search warrant which would require all aspects of probable cause.
Even if the suspect was completely irrational and a danger to society, nothing inside the house was within his ability to use and once he was under control and handcuffed he no longer posed any threat to the officers or the community. The father, while his age was listed as 82, was in control of his faculties and no mention was made as to his being a danger, either to himself, the police officers or the community. Without such a finding neither the police nor the courts would have a legal leg to stand on for removing property from the house “incidental to an arrest” of his son.
The son was taken to jail, convicted of crimes, not enumerated specifically in the article; but which included at least one charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He then served approximately 7 months before being released.
Without further information, facts not included in the article, it would be nearly impossible to explain how a conviction would be gained for the offense “possession of a firearm by a convicted felon” since he had no weapon on him at the time of arrest. The only weapons of interest were those either referred to on recorded telephone conversations or through self admission; in any case, pretty thin evidence and certainly nothing to justify confiscation of property outside his immediate control.
Some weapons were destroyed by the police department; again, what court order gave anyone the authority to destroy any weapon, presumably as part of a specific related crime? If the weapons destroyed were evidence used in court to gain a conviction then and only then would the court have authority to dispose of such a weapon. Police departments do not have the authority to destroy or auction off weapons without a court’s written authority when such weapons are the property of an identified individual; property rights are all inclusive.
This is not the same as destroying weapons which have ended up in the police property room over a long period of time, weapons for which ownership can not be verified and which would never be claimed by a rightful owner. In cases where ownership is disputed and ongoing there is no lawful justification to either destroy or auction property, to include weapons. The rest of the weapons were sold at auction; where’s the original court order to confiscate property and auction that property?
A portion of the auction revenue was given to the son as recompense for property taken. So, read that last paragraph and explain how that works; can’t be done, can it? Even with a wide application of the 5th Amendment, 10% of the property’s actual value would hardly be considered “just compensation” for items seized by the government, even had these items been seized within the limited and rigid parameters of our laws, that which sustain us as a nation ruled by law.
The father requested the return of weapons and then filed a formal complaint to have them returned and was denied by local law enforcement and then the courts. The moment the request to return the property was made is that same moment when destruction of the property and/or auctioning off of that property became illegal. There is no room for violation of property rights, even when that property falls under the classification of being a weapon.
The courts sided with the police department for not returning the property even though the son was not permitted to live under the same roof after having completed the court’s sentence; the son would not have had access to any of the weapons unless he entered the house without permission. Apparently the courts see any house with firearms as a threat to the community because anyone can break in and obtain a weapon, is this the reasoning the 9th Circus Court used; their reasoning is not explained sufficiently and therefore is unacceptable.
There was never any reference to the possibility of join ownership or implied ownership of each item should the son be declared incompetent, or unable to have ownership of firearms by virtue of his being a convicted felon. Even if the son owned every single item confiscated, property rights would naturally flow to a member of the family and not automatically to the discretion of either the police department, the city or even the courts.
“…the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against him. "The district court correctly determined that Barsch's Fourth Amendment rights were not violated when police officers entered his house in conducting a protective sweep based on reports of multiple guns on this premises in the possession of Barsch's bipolar son, who reportedly was not taking his medication, making death threats, and saying that he had stabbed someone the night before," said a court memorandum filed Monday. "The district court also correctly determined that Barsch's Fourteenth Amendment due process rights were not violated by the sale/destruction of the weapons found in his house."
Go read the 4th Amendment, add the 5th Amendment while you’re at it since they both include the idea of Due Process, something the 9th Circus Court may never have done. The search of Barsch’s house most definitely was not within the limits placed on government, the police department being the defined representative of government at the time. There was no probable cause to believe the arrested suspect could obtain control of anything within reach, certainly nothing inside the house. There was no written search warrant and no judge following the strict rules of probable cause would have a legal reason to search for anything other than a dead body, any other lawful items being outside the lawful interpretation of any search warrant.
If an officer, while searching for an injured party without the aid of a search warrant, under the attitude of such a search going past the need for obtaining a warrant, finds a bag full of opium in plain view, opium being listed as an illegal substance, then that may be taken as evidence of a crime; however, a weapon within a house is not in and of itself evidence of a crime since weapons are legal to own and more than one person lived under the roof of that particular house.
A police officer must obtain a warrant if he believes he’s searching for a body; not the same as an officer’s search for an injured person whose life hangs in the balance and for which immediate action might determine life or death and for which waiting for a court signed document might jeopardize the outcome. Laws are written to protect the rights of each citizen, to include 82 year old men who just happen to be the fathers of Bi-Polar children living under the same roof. 82 year old men have the same right to own weapons as do any other citizen unless a court has ruled them incompetent.
The 14th Amendment was written to secure individual rights to former slaves and is one place where the phrase “due process of law” is found. Due process of law goes all the way back to the Magna Carta as a means of defining individual rights and protecting individuals from indiscriminate abuses by tyrannical leaders and governments. It has been a part of civilized society, in whole or in part ever since King John of England signed off, admitting that even kings had no right to abuse citizen’s lives and property.
Apparently the 9th Circus Court has never read any of the history which lead up to the Magna Carta, and certainly has no idea how to interpret the 14th Amendment given their rather wide paint brush of supposed authority which they have granted to the police department and the city of Hayward. I feel sorry for anyone living under the abuses imposed by the 9th Circus Court, under the pretence of justice and the American way of life.
The opinions expressed here are mine and I’m just a plain run of the mill ignorant citizen with no clue as to the intricacies of the laws of the land, rights of citizens, the constitution or anything of real importance. The only information I get comes from MSNBC, CNN and Time Magazine. I never listen to extremists like Rush or Hannity and the last thing I’d ever do is read a book, much less one that didn’t have lots of pretty pictures to entertain me.
The long and short of it had to do with police officers confiscating an entire collection of firearms under the guise of protecting a community. I read the little bit that was offered in the articles and came away with a few bullet points, none of which add up to the end result; the 9th Circus Court of Appeals leaving a citizen without his gun collection which had either been destroyed and/or sold off at auction.
There were at least two people living under one roof, a father and a son; both owned guns either in joint ownership or individually.
The son was Bi-Polar, had not been taking the prescribed medication and had acted in such a way as to be a danger to his father and others in the community through threats along with the ability to carry out those threats by virtue of having weapons readily available; however, as was included in the article, the son was arrested, outside the house by police and had no weapon on him at the time.
The police conducted a “protective sweep” of the house, after the arrest had been made, and confiscated every weapon in the house. Please explain the definition of a protective sweep; make sure the language meets recognized legal standards. If the break down of events is accurate, where’s the court order to enter the house, to confiscate any weapon, much less every weapon, and upon what lawful basis would such a court order come?
According to the report, officers proceeded to search the house using “search incident to arrest” as their justification. I may have been retired for quite some time now; but the laws covering “search incident to arrest” are fairly direct and limited.
Search incident to arrest applied only to the immediate area of control by a suspect being arrested, that which was on his/her person or within reach and could be used as a weapon against the arresting officers. If a glove box was locked and within reach of a suspect, then anything inside the glove box was not considered within the scope “search incident to arrest”, nor would anything in the trunk of the car; it had to be within reach, as in under the seat, between the seat or over the sun visor.
If an arrest was made at the front porch of a house nothing inside that house fell within the immediate control of the arrested suspect and so nothing inside that house could be searched without a signed search warrant which would require all aspects of probable cause.
Even if the suspect was completely irrational and a danger to society, nothing inside the house was within his ability to use and once he was under control and handcuffed he no longer posed any threat to the officers or the community. The father, while his age was listed as 82, was in control of his faculties and no mention was made as to his being a danger, either to himself, the police officers or the community. Without such a finding neither the police nor the courts would have a legal leg to stand on for removing property from the house “incidental to an arrest” of his son.
The son was taken to jail, convicted of crimes, not enumerated specifically in the article; but which included at least one charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He then served approximately 7 months before being released.
Without further information, facts not included in the article, it would be nearly impossible to explain how a conviction would be gained for the offense “possession of a firearm by a convicted felon” since he had no weapon on him at the time of arrest. The only weapons of interest were those either referred to on recorded telephone conversations or through self admission; in any case, pretty thin evidence and certainly nothing to justify confiscation of property outside his immediate control.
Some weapons were destroyed by the police department; again, what court order gave anyone the authority to destroy any weapon, presumably as part of a specific related crime? If the weapons destroyed were evidence used in court to gain a conviction then and only then would the court have authority to dispose of such a weapon. Police departments do not have the authority to destroy or auction off weapons without a court’s written authority when such weapons are the property of an identified individual; property rights are all inclusive.
This is not the same as destroying weapons which have ended up in the police property room over a long period of time, weapons for which ownership can not be verified and which would never be claimed by a rightful owner. In cases where ownership is disputed and ongoing there is no lawful justification to either destroy or auction property, to include weapons. The rest of the weapons were sold at auction; where’s the original court order to confiscate property and auction that property?
A portion of the auction revenue was given to the son as recompense for property taken. So, read that last paragraph and explain how that works; can’t be done, can it? Even with a wide application of the 5th Amendment, 10% of the property’s actual value would hardly be considered “just compensation” for items seized by the government, even had these items been seized within the limited and rigid parameters of our laws, that which sustain us as a nation ruled by law.
The father requested the return of weapons and then filed a formal complaint to have them returned and was denied by local law enforcement and then the courts. The moment the request to return the property was made is that same moment when destruction of the property and/or auctioning off of that property became illegal. There is no room for violation of property rights, even when that property falls under the classification of being a weapon.
The courts sided with the police department for not returning the property even though the son was not permitted to live under the same roof after having completed the court’s sentence; the son would not have had access to any of the weapons unless he entered the house without permission. Apparently the courts see any house with firearms as a threat to the community because anyone can break in and obtain a weapon, is this the reasoning the 9th Circus Court used; their reasoning is not explained sufficiently and therefore is unacceptable.
There was never any reference to the possibility of join ownership or implied ownership of each item should the son be declared incompetent, or unable to have ownership of firearms by virtue of his being a convicted felon. Even if the son owned every single item confiscated, property rights would naturally flow to a member of the family and not automatically to the discretion of either the police department, the city or even the courts.
“…the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against him. "The district court correctly determined that Barsch's Fourth Amendment rights were not violated when police officers entered his house in conducting a protective sweep based on reports of multiple guns on this premises in the possession of Barsch's bipolar son, who reportedly was not taking his medication, making death threats, and saying that he had stabbed someone the night before," said a court memorandum filed Monday. "The district court also correctly determined that Barsch's Fourteenth Amendment due process rights were not violated by the sale/destruction of the weapons found in his house."
Go read the 4th Amendment, add the 5th Amendment while you’re at it since they both include the idea of Due Process, something the 9th Circus Court may never have done. The search of Barsch’s house most definitely was not within the limits placed on government, the police department being the defined representative of government at the time. There was no probable cause to believe the arrested suspect could obtain control of anything within reach, certainly nothing inside the house. There was no written search warrant and no judge following the strict rules of probable cause would have a legal reason to search for anything other than a dead body, any other lawful items being outside the lawful interpretation of any search warrant.
If an officer, while searching for an injured party without the aid of a search warrant, under the attitude of such a search going past the need for obtaining a warrant, finds a bag full of opium in plain view, opium being listed as an illegal substance, then that may be taken as evidence of a crime; however, a weapon within a house is not in and of itself evidence of a crime since weapons are legal to own and more than one person lived under the roof of that particular house.
A police officer must obtain a warrant if he believes he’s searching for a body; not the same as an officer’s search for an injured person whose life hangs in the balance and for which immediate action might determine life or death and for which waiting for a court signed document might jeopardize the outcome. Laws are written to protect the rights of each citizen, to include 82 year old men who just happen to be the fathers of Bi-Polar children living under the same roof. 82 year old men have the same right to own weapons as do any other citizen unless a court has ruled them incompetent.
The 14th Amendment was written to secure individual rights to former slaves and is one place where the phrase “due process of law” is found. Due process of law goes all the way back to the Magna Carta as a means of defining individual rights and protecting individuals from indiscriminate abuses by tyrannical leaders and governments. It has been a part of civilized society, in whole or in part ever since King John of England signed off, admitting that even kings had no right to abuse citizen’s lives and property.
Apparently the 9th Circus Court has never read any of the history which lead up to the Magna Carta, and certainly has no idea how to interpret the 14th Amendment given their rather wide paint brush of supposed authority which they have granted to the police department and the city of Hayward. I feel sorry for anyone living under the abuses imposed by the 9th Circus Court, under the pretence of justice and the American way of life.
The opinions expressed here are mine and I’m just a plain run of the mill ignorant citizen with no clue as to the intricacies of the laws of the land, rights of citizens, the constitution or anything of real importance. The only information I get comes from MSNBC, CNN and Time Magazine. I never listen to extremists like Rush or Hannity and the last thing I’d ever do is read a book, much less one that didn’t have lots of pretty pictures to entertain me.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
90 Day Interest Free Loan Buzz
There was a blip on the radio while on my way to a customer this morning, something about the government meddling with the way 90 day interest free loans would be “changed”. Now I’ll admit up front I only caught a small part of what was announced; however, what I heard gave me reason to be concerned.
Many folks, myself included, purchase medium to large ticket items like refrigerators or furniture type items on a 90 day interest free loan or some other specified length of time where if the total amount of the purchase price is paid up in full within the time frame of the agreement then no interest is added to the original price of the item. If this concept is alien to you then you probably don’t have the discipline necessary to purchase medium to large ticket items and you should continue to rent your appliances and/or furniture on a monthly basis.
The news item lasted only half a minute or so; but I’m sure I heard them say a new rule, something the government had put into play, a new rule would make it impossible for the seller to tack interest onto a 90 day interest free loan even when the amount had not been paid off in the agreed time frame. Excuse me for bringing up a stupid issue; but isn’t that the same as saying all loans are now interest free?
I’ve referenced "the rule of law", a basic principle of government before, apparently the folks in Washington have no problem ignoring the “rule of law” , a foundation upon which we depend for almost any aspect of life here in our country. Borrowing from the article I linked with just now, “In the most basic sense, the rule of law is a system that attempts to protect the rights of citizens from arbitrary and abusive use of government power.”
Someone like Sen. Ted “Chapaquitic” Kennedy or is that Sir Edward Kennedy now, is out there telling me to sit down and shut up. Better yet, some pompous Hollywood celebrity like Alec Baldwin or Sean Penn is running to a microphone explaining how I need to shut up, “Our man won, it’s our turn to run the country!”
“Rule of Law, we don’t need no stinkin’ rule of law!” I wonder how many times that movie line has been played with to make a point, lots of times is my guess.
I tried to find a reference to this “new rule”, some news story in print to explain the particulars as might pertain to 90 day interest free loans; nothing, nada and zip. There were lots of company listings for loans on my Google search; but no news of a change in the basic way financial agreements had been altered by our government in such a way as to destroy any incentive to draw in buyers via 90 day no interest loans.
Okay, some smart person who knows where to look; leave a word or two in the comment section to either dispel the rumor I may have started or point the way to a fact based informative story. I found pages and pages of articles to explain Michelle Obama’s hair style or fashion statements; why nothing on a real news item? The clock is ticking…
Maybe this is part of the home mortgage mess , that new legislation where bankruptcy judges will be given power, power they were never intended to have nor should they have, power to mandate lending institutions to reduce interest rates and/or the amount of principle owed in order to facilitate home ownership to the undeserving among us.
As a locksmith, I’m waiting for something new to come down the pike, government mandates to remove locking devices, free of charge no doubt, such as door knobs and deadbolts from homes in low or middle income neighborhoods to keep the homeless sheltered by making use of previously foreclosed houses, those structures which should be used for "the greater good". The mandates will be part of yet another Obama administration initiative, let’s call it “One for all and all for one”, ( hey, that’s no worse than some of the names being tossed around on other initiatives), just another feel good policy which sprang from his well fertilized mind in a vision while taking a dump on the constitution during his morning constitutional.
As far fetched as this might sound, nothing and I mean nothing coming out of Washington would surprise me now. Heaven help us, the lunatic asylum is being run by the inmates.
Many folks, myself included, purchase medium to large ticket items like refrigerators or furniture type items on a 90 day interest free loan or some other specified length of time where if the total amount of the purchase price is paid up in full within the time frame of the agreement then no interest is added to the original price of the item. If this concept is alien to you then you probably don’t have the discipline necessary to purchase medium to large ticket items and you should continue to rent your appliances and/or furniture on a monthly basis.
The news item lasted only half a minute or so; but I’m sure I heard them say a new rule, something the government had put into play, a new rule would make it impossible for the seller to tack interest onto a 90 day interest free loan even when the amount had not been paid off in the agreed time frame. Excuse me for bringing up a stupid issue; but isn’t that the same as saying all loans are now interest free?
I’ve referenced "the rule of law", a basic principle of government before, apparently the folks in Washington have no problem ignoring the “rule of law” , a foundation upon which we depend for almost any aspect of life here in our country. Borrowing from the article I linked with just now, “In the most basic sense, the rule of law is a system that attempts to protect the rights of citizens from arbitrary and abusive use of government power.”
Someone like Sen. Ted “Chapaquitic” Kennedy or is that Sir Edward Kennedy now, is out there telling me to sit down and shut up. Better yet, some pompous Hollywood celebrity like Alec Baldwin or Sean Penn is running to a microphone explaining how I need to shut up, “Our man won, it’s our turn to run the country!”
“Rule of Law, we don’t need no stinkin’ rule of law!” I wonder how many times that movie line has been played with to make a point, lots of times is my guess.
I tried to find a reference to this “new rule”, some news story in print to explain the particulars as might pertain to 90 day interest free loans; nothing, nada and zip. There were lots of company listings for loans on my Google search; but no news of a change in the basic way financial agreements had been altered by our government in such a way as to destroy any incentive to draw in buyers via 90 day no interest loans.
Okay, some smart person who knows where to look; leave a word or two in the comment section to either dispel the rumor I may have started or point the way to a fact based informative story. I found pages and pages of articles to explain Michelle Obama’s hair style or fashion statements; why nothing on a real news item? The clock is ticking…
Maybe this is part of the home mortgage mess , that new legislation where bankruptcy judges will be given power, power they were never intended to have nor should they have, power to mandate lending institutions to reduce interest rates and/or the amount of principle owed in order to facilitate home ownership to the undeserving among us.
As a locksmith, I’m waiting for something new to come down the pike, government mandates to remove locking devices, free of charge no doubt, such as door knobs and deadbolts from homes in low or middle income neighborhoods to keep the homeless sheltered by making use of previously foreclosed houses, those structures which should be used for "the greater good". The mandates will be part of yet another Obama administration initiative, let’s call it “One for all and all for one”, ( hey, that’s no worse than some of the names being tossed around on other initiatives), just another feel good policy which sprang from his well fertilized mind in a vision while taking a dump on the constitution during his morning constitutional.
As far fetched as this might sound, nothing and I mean nothing coming out of Washington would surprise me now. Heaven help us, the lunatic asylum is being run by the inmates.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Communism - Have We Been Sufficiently Warned?
I heard Ezra Taft Benson’s warning, a recorded excerpt from his talk given at Brigham Young University back in 1966, “Our Immediate Responsibility” . If you don’t like the fact that Ezra Taft Benson happened to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, “those Mormons” as many folks deride my faith in unflattering tones, perhaps listening to his comments, remembering him instead as former Secretary of Agriculture under the Eisenhower administration will lend his words credence.
Please take the time to go over the material, read the entire talk and tell me our nation isn’t in serious trouble; we are at the brink and with the leadership we’ve had over the past several years, to include both sides of the isle and every president with the exception of Ronald Reagan, we are running head long into the abyss of communism. Here are some of the tidbits you might wish to read:
“No greater immediate responsibility rests upon the members of the church, upon all citizens of this republic and of neighboring republics than to protect the freedom vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States.”
“In the days of the Prophet Noah, men had no greater immediate responsibility than to repent and board the Ark. Now in our day, the day of the Prophet David O. McKay, he has said that we have no greater immediate responsibility than to protect the freedom vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States.” (You don’t have to accept the fact that David O. McKay was a Prophet to understand the importance of this message, get over it.)
“President McKay has said that the Supreme Court is leading this nation down the road to atheism. (Newquist, op. cit., p. 187) Not only is the court leading this nation down the road to atheism, but in one tragic decision after another they are leading us down the road to communism. One such decision caused Dorthy Healey, Communist spokesman for the West Coast, to rejoice in these words, quote, “This is the greatest victory the Communist party ever had,” unquote. The communists have held victory rallies to honor the Supreme Court and its decisions. The Book of Mormon tells us what corrupt judges can do to freedom.”
“I warn you, unless we wake up soon and do something about the Conspiracy the Communist-inspired civil rights riots of the past will pale into insignificance compared to the bloodshed and destruction that lie ahead in the near future.”
“God provided that in this land of liberty, our political allegiance shall run not to individuals, that is, to government officials… the only allegiant we owe as citizens or denizens of the United States, runs to our inspired Constitution which God Himself set up.”
Should I continue; mind you I’m skipping lots of good stuff that was in the talk; well, since you twisted my arm…
“Jefferson warned that we should not talk about confidence in men but that we should inhibit their power through the Constitution. In the meantime, we pray for our leaders as we have always been counseled to do.”
“I believe that only through a truly educated citizenry can the ideals that inspired the Founding Fathers of our nation be preserved and perpetuated.”
Do you remember the interviews given to folks as we entered the last presidential elections? Kind of makes that last quote run shivers up and down your spine, now don’t it” “Are you voting for Obama because of his great choice of Sarah Palin as his Vice Presidential running Mate or because he’s promised to take a stand against abortion?” The answers kept coming back, “Yes, I think Obama will help the country on both counts”.
“I have personally witnessed the heart-rending results of the loss of freedom. I have seen it with my own eyes. I have been close to the godless evil of the socialist-communist conspiracy on both sides of the iron curtain, particularly during my years as European Mission President at the close of the war, and today and also during my eight years in the Cabinet.”
“I have talked face-to-face with the godless Communist leaders. It may surprise you to learn that I was host to Mr. Khrushchev for a half day, when he visited the United States. Not that I’m proud of it – I opposed his coming then and I still feel it was a mistake to welcome this atheistic murderer as a state visitor. But according to President Eisenhower, Khrushchev had expressed a desire to learn something of American agriculture, and after seeing Russian agriculture I can understand why.”
“You Americans are so gullible. No you won’t accept Communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and you find you already have Communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you fall like over-ripe fruit into our hands.” (emphasis added)
Folks, that time has arrived; are you asleep or simply ignoring the handwriting on the wall? WAKE UP!
Please take the time to go over the material, read the entire talk and tell me our nation isn’t in serious trouble; we are at the brink and with the leadership we’ve had over the past several years, to include both sides of the isle and every president with the exception of Ronald Reagan, we are running head long into the abyss of communism. Here are some of the tidbits you might wish to read:
“No greater immediate responsibility rests upon the members of the church, upon all citizens of this republic and of neighboring republics than to protect the freedom vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States.”
“In the days of the Prophet Noah, men had no greater immediate responsibility than to repent and board the Ark. Now in our day, the day of the Prophet David O. McKay, he has said that we have no greater immediate responsibility than to protect the freedom vouchsafed by the Constitution of the United States.” (You don’t have to accept the fact that David O. McKay was a Prophet to understand the importance of this message, get over it.)
“President McKay has said that the Supreme Court is leading this nation down the road to atheism. (Newquist, op. cit., p. 187) Not only is the court leading this nation down the road to atheism, but in one tragic decision after another they are leading us down the road to communism. One such decision caused Dorthy Healey, Communist spokesman for the West Coast, to rejoice in these words, quote, “This is the greatest victory the Communist party ever had,” unquote. The communists have held victory rallies to honor the Supreme Court and its decisions. The Book of Mormon tells us what corrupt judges can do to freedom.”
“I warn you, unless we wake up soon and do something about the Conspiracy the Communist-inspired civil rights riots of the past will pale into insignificance compared to the bloodshed and destruction that lie ahead in the near future.”
“God provided that in this land of liberty, our political allegiance shall run not to individuals, that is, to government officials… the only allegiant we owe as citizens or denizens of the United States, runs to our inspired Constitution which God Himself set up.”
Should I continue; mind you I’m skipping lots of good stuff that was in the talk; well, since you twisted my arm…
“Jefferson warned that we should not talk about confidence in men but that we should inhibit their power through the Constitution. In the meantime, we pray for our leaders as we have always been counseled to do.”
“I believe that only through a truly educated citizenry can the ideals that inspired the Founding Fathers of our nation be preserved and perpetuated.”
Do you remember the interviews given to folks as we entered the last presidential elections? Kind of makes that last quote run shivers up and down your spine, now don’t it” “Are you voting for Obama because of his great choice of Sarah Palin as his Vice Presidential running Mate or because he’s promised to take a stand against abortion?” The answers kept coming back, “Yes, I think Obama will help the country on both counts”.
“I have personally witnessed the heart-rending results of the loss of freedom. I have seen it with my own eyes. I have been close to the godless evil of the socialist-communist conspiracy on both sides of the iron curtain, particularly during my years as European Mission President at the close of the war, and today and also during my eight years in the Cabinet.”
“I have talked face-to-face with the godless Communist leaders. It may surprise you to learn that I was host to Mr. Khrushchev for a half day, when he visited the United States. Not that I’m proud of it – I opposed his coming then and I still feel it was a mistake to welcome this atheistic murderer as a state visitor. But according to President Eisenhower, Khrushchev had expressed a desire to learn something of American agriculture, and after seeing Russian agriculture I can understand why.”
“You Americans are so gullible. No you won’t accept Communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and you find you already have Communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you fall like over-ripe fruit into our hands.” (emphasis added)
Folks, that time has arrived; are you asleep or simply ignoring the handwriting on the wall? WAKE UP!
Constitution Be Damned - We Want This Now!
Some terrible events have been happening over the past several weeks; but reading the headlines today, what kind of mongrels are running this pack of wolves in Washington?
About the only thing I could glean from their actions would be the overall assumption by those in power that they can do anything they please, Constitution be damned; we want this now!
Reading from a headline article posted to the KPRC website made me angry; I’m well past concerned at this point, reading about how congress wants to give judges power to alter civil contracts in order to relieve debt. Constitution be damned, we want this to happen!
“Democratic negotiators in the House said they have an agreement on housing legislation that gives bankruptcy judges the power to force lenders to rewrite mortgages for debt-strapped homeowners.” (emphasis added)
{…}
“Under the terms of the agreement, judges would have to consider whether a homeowner had been offered a reasonable deal by the bank to rework his or her home loan before deciding whether to take judicial action to lower the interest rate or principal.”
Isn’t it bad enough we have companies advertising over the air ways looking for folks with huge amounts of debts, folks who owe so many people money as to make them eligible for election to public office. Yes, the unwashed, the undisciplined and certainly the unrepentant.
“Are your credit card debts dragging you under? Are creditors knocking on your door day and night? Are you afraid to open the mail knowing you can’t pay even the interest? Well give us a call at 1-800-NEVR-PAY and we can legally eliminate all your debt and all you have to do is click those ruby red slippers together three times while saying the magic words, “I ain’t got no money”, and like magic your debt will disappear. Call us; that number once again, 1-800-NEVR-PAY, call right now and years of unbridle spending habits will be forgotten. The first 25 callers will be eligible to win an all expenses paid vacation in Tahiti. Our number once again, 1-800-NEVR-PAY.”
A quick disclaimer; I just made up the phone number. If you’re one of the undisciplined spenders who needs to make your excessive debt vanish, then you might be dumb enough to call 1-800-NEVR-PAY, expecting Glenda the Good Witch of the North to answer the phone. THIS IS A MADE UP NUMBER, it probably matches up with some real phone number and boy are they going to be angry with me.
All kidding aside, Congress actually believes it can authorize judges to alter civil contracts. Think what that means. If I owe you twenty dollars I can get a judge to explain to you how times are tough, and with any luck I’ll only owe you, say, twelve, make that eight dollars; yea, eight dollars because the judge was distracted when my girlfriend rubbed his leg.
You think the system might be wide open for corruption when judges have the ability to alter contract agreement? But we trust our judges, just like we trust our elected officials. Remember, most judges and most elected officials came from the same gene pool; here’s a hint, “Lawyers”.
You’ve heard the old saying, “How can you tell when a lawyer is telling a lie? His lips are moving.” Now, expand that same thought process to include Congress and you’ll have a much better chance of understanding why we need to be afraid anytime they get together to “help” fix things.
What about the folks who loaned that money with a reasonable expectation of getting paid back; not just paid back, but with interest? You thought it was hard getting a loan before; folks, there won’t be anyone with the sense God gave a door knob willing to extend credit to anyone; not if a judge can void the agreement. You might as well take the word “Lend” out of the dictionary; either that or add the newest meaning to it:
Lend – the act of stupidity on the part of folks with money whereby they hand over large sums of money to irresponsible parties with the full knowledge that they could have flushed that same money down the toilet and had as good a chance of getting it back.
The country and the rule of law as we know it just got thrown out with the bathwater. Constitution be damned, it’s being done now!
About the only thing I could glean from their actions would be the overall assumption by those in power that they can do anything they please, Constitution be damned; we want this now!
Reading from a headline article posted to the KPRC website made me angry; I’m well past concerned at this point, reading about how congress wants to give judges power to alter civil contracts in order to relieve debt. Constitution be damned, we want this to happen!
“Democratic negotiators in the House said they have an agreement on housing legislation that gives bankruptcy judges the power to force lenders to rewrite mortgages for debt-strapped homeowners.” (emphasis added)
{…}
“Under the terms of the agreement, judges would have to consider whether a homeowner had been offered a reasonable deal by the bank to rework his or her home loan before deciding whether to take judicial action to lower the interest rate or principal.”
Isn’t it bad enough we have companies advertising over the air ways looking for folks with huge amounts of debts, folks who owe so many people money as to make them eligible for election to public office. Yes, the unwashed, the undisciplined and certainly the unrepentant.
“Are your credit card debts dragging you under? Are creditors knocking on your door day and night? Are you afraid to open the mail knowing you can’t pay even the interest? Well give us a call at 1-800-NEVR-PAY and we can legally eliminate all your debt and all you have to do is click those ruby red slippers together three times while saying the magic words, “I ain’t got no money”, and like magic your debt will disappear. Call us; that number once again, 1-800-NEVR-PAY, call right now and years of unbridle spending habits will be forgotten. The first 25 callers will be eligible to win an all expenses paid vacation in Tahiti. Our number once again, 1-800-NEVR-PAY.”
A quick disclaimer; I just made up the phone number. If you’re one of the undisciplined spenders who needs to make your excessive debt vanish, then you might be dumb enough to call 1-800-NEVR-PAY, expecting Glenda the Good Witch of the North to answer the phone. THIS IS A MADE UP NUMBER, it probably matches up with some real phone number and boy are they going to be angry with me.
All kidding aside, Congress actually believes it can authorize judges to alter civil contracts. Think what that means. If I owe you twenty dollars I can get a judge to explain to you how times are tough, and with any luck I’ll only owe you, say, twelve, make that eight dollars; yea, eight dollars because the judge was distracted when my girlfriend rubbed his leg.
You think the system might be wide open for corruption when judges have the ability to alter contract agreement? But we trust our judges, just like we trust our elected officials. Remember, most judges and most elected officials came from the same gene pool; here’s a hint, “Lawyers”.
You’ve heard the old saying, “How can you tell when a lawyer is telling a lie? His lips are moving.” Now, expand that same thought process to include Congress and you’ll have a much better chance of understanding why we need to be afraid anytime they get together to “help” fix things.
What about the folks who loaned that money with a reasonable expectation of getting paid back; not just paid back, but with interest? You thought it was hard getting a loan before; folks, there won’t be anyone with the sense God gave a door knob willing to extend credit to anyone; not if a judge can void the agreement. You might as well take the word “Lend” out of the dictionary; either that or add the newest meaning to it:
Lend – the act of stupidity on the part of folks with money whereby they hand over large sums of money to irresponsible parties with the full knowledge that they could have flushed that same money down the toilet and had as good a chance of getting it back.
The country and the rule of law as we know it just got thrown out with the bathwater. Constitution be damned, it’s being done now!
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
National Anthem Done Right!
The Cactus Cuties from Lubbock, Texas doing us proud. I’ve been told the young lady on the left is 8 years old, the two in the middle 7 and the two on the right are 6 years old.
Hardly Anything Beats a Full House
I started blogging several years ago; gosh and oh by golly, I was blogging before it was called blogging truth be known. I had my early “training” as a police officer writing letters up the chain of command; an exacting science of words necessary to justify some of the bone headed incidents I was a party to or had been accused of being a party to. I could, if given enough rope, annoy and antagonize my immediate supervisors while properly and logically documenting my actions, such actions falling under the letter and spirit contained within the rules and regulations of that august organization, the Houston Police Department, long enough to achieve enough years to retire; all this would fall under the category, Religious Manifestations and Miracles.
My “skills of expression” naturally fanned out to include political opinions, a banned topic within the ranks of the police department; but something which I continued to have as a God given right. As a citizen, my opinions could be expressed on my own time as long as I kept a rigid distinction between my actions as a citizen and my being a representative of the Houston Police Department and employee working for the City of Houston.
Back then, BB (Before Blogging), most of what I wrote were letters to the editor of the local newspaper, letters so long as to be termed “essays” and never short enough to print. I just figured they didn’t like what I’d written and kept on writing. I’d sent off to the Reader’s Digest without success; even so, I needed to keep writing regardless of who got to read my “stuff”, a form of venting which kept me happy.
One day I actually had one of my op-ed pieces published in the Houston Chronicle, a piece of sarcasm directed towards the City of Houston’s use of cameras to enforce red light violations and subsequent “cash cow”. The problem which struck me as unacceptable was the editor’s alteration of my opinion’s wording, without first asking for my permission, in such a way as to change the entire piece; it now appeared as if I were in favor of the huge money grab all because one word was removed, “Scam”.
The editor and I exchanged pleasantries and I couldn’t tell you how many times the words, “We are truly sorry for this misunderstanding” came out either in our telephone conversations or in the letters of apology which later were sent. The editorial staff “claimed” they honestly thought I’d accidentally typed “Scam” when referring to the City’s new ability to obtain money. To this day the banner on my blog, T. F. Stern’s Rantings, has a reference which reads:
“My Op-ed pieces are generally too long, and most definitely too far to the right for our Liberal friends in the press to print. The one time they printed my rantings, they edited it so badly as to destroy its meaning...and so I now have decided to BLOG.”
I found out something about blogging, a hidden prize I hadn’t known existed, comments. I’d write about something, figure out how to mechanically get it onto the blog, a whole new world of “tools” to become familiar with by the way; lo and behold, folks would leave a comment. Total strangers from all over the world had read my article and either agreed or disagreed, enough to take a moment or so out of their day to write a note.
Now I have to admit, calling me a “%$&!” or some other profanity doesn’t exactly fall into the compliment category; but at least I’d gotten someone’s attention. I’d been a police officer for twenty years, you think calling me “%$&!” is going to work; folks, “you ain’t heard nothin’”, compared with what I’ve heard coming from the back seat of a patrol car. I only wish I’d kept tape recordings so you could get an idea; but “ you can’t please everyone so you’ve got to please yourself”, at least that’s what Ricky Nelson had to say in his song.
I’ll share one and only one “police war story” at “this juncture” (you should see an exaggerated Saturday Night Live imitation of President Bush) to make a point.
I’d arrested a young man for DWI and while filling out the required forms asked him his name since he had no driver’s license or any other form of identification. His reply, “F*** You!”; shouldn’t take much imagination to fill in those blanks. Instead of getting in a huff I left that part of the form blank, at least until I took him to get finger printed and could ascertain his true identity; filling in his answer under the category, AKA or alias.
A couple of months passed and the case came up for trial; I sat in the court room as a potential witness wearing my blue uniform. The defendant wanted to enter a plea, his lawyer having reached some kind of agreement with the prosecutor. That all changed when the judge happened to look down at the form in front of him, the one which had the defendant’s alias.
The judge wasn’t amused, called me up to the bench and asked me how that information came to be included on the arrest blotter. I was more than happy to enlighten the judge and a new round of negotiations took place between the defense lawyer and the prosecutor, one which would take into consideration the defendant’s friendly disposition; that glib comment from the back seat of my patrol car came back to bite him on the butt, now didn’t it.
Call it an ego trip, for surely that term applies to the comment section; the more comments at the bottom of an article, the better I felt about having spent so much time writing when I could have been doing other things, making a living, reading a good book, making a living, watching re-runs of Mary Tyler Moore and of course, making a living. Is this where you hear a little voice go off in the back of your head, “Get a life!”?
My wife, Lucy, of Lucy’s Frugal Living , has the kind of personality which draws friendly folks out of hiding. These are wonderful people from all walks of life who, like myself, quickly claim Lucy as their buddy for life. Even when Lucy has something to say which runs counter to everyone else in a “thread” of comments, to include the author of the article; even then Lucy has a way of diplomacy which would make her an excellent candidate for most any Department of State position around the world. I should have prefaced that remark; Civilized folks find Lucy’s way of handling adversity appealing; the Palestinians would still be doing their best to push Israel into the sea.
You see, I just antagonized an entire population, a dangerous malignant society run by ignorant rag headed thugs and I’ve only gotten to the first page. Lucy will read this and quietly shake her head, as if to say, breathing out a heavy sigh, “You’re not going to leave in that line about the Palestinians, are you?”.
Every now and again I hit pay dirt and the comment section grows with faithful admirers; okay, often times I have to duck as a rotten tomato whizzes past my forehead. The errant tomato tossed in anger only goes to show what kind of a genius I am for painting the wall in the dining room a deep red, that wall directly behind my “writer’s chair”.
Blogging makes me the master of my op-ed pieces. The New York Times may need to down size in order to stay in business; I’ve only one way to go, up! My regular readership might average twenty a day, and that’s on a good day.
I used to wonder if anyone, anyone at all stopped by to read my articles; not to be confused with the Anyone Atoll located in the South Pacific. I added one of those Stat Counter things and found I was right; hardly anyone stops by, breathe out and keep typing. I started to feel like Charlie Brown, unappreciated and in serious need of help. It’s a good thing I have Lucy, who only charges a nickel for “free” advice. (“That’s a joke, boy, a joke”, in my cartoon rooster voice)
I thought about putting the “Lucy” cartoon logo here on this page, the one we stole from Charles Schultz’ cartoon, Peanuts, the one we put at the top of her blog in place of an actual photograph; but that would involve copyright infringements, permission from the trust fund and all kinds of legal entanglements. Picture in your mind the cartoon character in her medium blue dress on the other side of the hand made booth waiting to explain how the cow ate the cabbage to Charlie Brown, having paid his nickel in order to obtain “free” advice.
There are different categories for blog articles, at least in my file system. Some bloggers go through the trouble of listing the various file boxes when they post, it’s called “technorati” , a search engine tool intended to help draw readers in. I have file boxes, general in nature in which I store my articles; Observations, Government, Politics, History, Locksmith, Police and Religion. I have one last file for Posted Blogs where I edit original articles by adding the Comment Section remarks when and if these come about.
If, for example, I write from the pulpit about Religion or most anything associated with faith; that article will bring out what I call, “the Zero Comment” response. Interestingly enough, the Stat Counter will show quite a few “hits” indicating it was read by a wide range of folks; however, the comment section will be barren, much as the aging Elizabeth prior to the birth of John the Baptist. I could say I visited with Matthew, Mark, Luke and John over the weekend and be fairly confident knowing a Zero would float ominously in the comment count box.
On the other hand, if I said I talked to a fellow named Peter who said we should render unto Uncle Sam that which was issued by Uncle Sam in order to pay for a never ending stream of entitlement programs; that would fall under Government or Politics. Nothing like pouring gasoline on an already well stoked fire; the comment section would pop like pork fat on a barbeque grill on the White House lawn. Altering the name of something in order to attract attention and comments is an art in and of itself.
I learned how to link other folks’ blogs within the text of my articles with the links being hidden rather than have to leave a space and type in
“http://www.link”
The use of hidden links makes any paragraph look more professional; call it eye appeal. I even learned how to use the trackback function in Haloscan , a little like leaving a comment and yet much more complex in the nuts and bolts. I was aided in my progress by Mike, listed on my blog roll as Mover Mike ; a truly patient individual able to teach even an imbecile as was proven when I proved I could actually link and trackback.
Here’s the “template” used to hide links; I keep it at the bottom of my page for easy reference any time I write a blog. I need only Control C/Control V and place the linking template tool where I want it, substitute “short description” with key words in my sentence and then substitute the actual URL in the space provided between quotation marks of “url”. If I can do it, anyone should be able to; just make sure not to alter any of the instructions on the template.
short description
(Note: It’s impossible to attempt showing the hidden link tool instructions on blogger as it instantly sees anything close as either a link or a screwed up attempt to link, thereby pointing out the error which won’t let you proceed)
I’ve found a certain amount of satisfaction when others link to one of my articles; it stands to reason other bloggers enjoy being included by way of a link or trackback. The use of trackbacks extends an invitation to other readers, those reading the comment section of someone else’s blog as they need only click on the provided link which leads them to read my blog. (Make a note to myself, trackback more often)
Blogger “burn out” can happen for any number of reason, either from the feeling of wasted effort when nobody leaves a comment, from having exhausted a limited range of thoughts (be careful here, be very careful), or getting in the way of other important functions such as making a living, reading a good book, making a living, watching re-runs of Mary Tyler Moore and of course, making a living.
Recently a fellow blogger was asking “why bother anymore”, wondering if the time and effort required for a blog was a waste. My comment equated blogging with attending church meetings; you never know who will be touched by what you have to offer, even if it’s only one person the effort isn’t wasted. While that is a true statement, having lots of comments is a lot more fun; hardly anything beats a full house.
My “skills of expression” naturally fanned out to include political opinions, a banned topic within the ranks of the police department; but something which I continued to have as a God given right. As a citizen, my opinions could be expressed on my own time as long as I kept a rigid distinction between my actions as a citizen and my being a representative of the Houston Police Department and employee working for the City of Houston.
Back then, BB (Before Blogging), most of what I wrote were letters to the editor of the local newspaper, letters so long as to be termed “essays” and never short enough to print. I just figured they didn’t like what I’d written and kept on writing. I’d sent off to the Reader’s Digest without success; even so, I needed to keep writing regardless of who got to read my “stuff”, a form of venting which kept me happy.
One day I actually had one of my op-ed pieces published in the Houston Chronicle, a piece of sarcasm directed towards the City of Houston’s use of cameras to enforce red light violations and subsequent “cash cow”. The problem which struck me as unacceptable was the editor’s alteration of my opinion’s wording, without first asking for my permission, in such a way as to change the entire piece; it now appeared as if I were in favor of the huge money grab all because one word was removed, “Scam”.
The editor and I exchanged pleasantries and I couldn’t tell you how many times the words, “We are truly sorry for this misunderstanding” came out either in our telephone conversations or in the letters of apology which later were sent. The editorial staff “claimed” they honestly thought I’d accidentally typed “Scam” when referring to the City’s new ability to obtain money. To this day the banner on my blog, T. F. Stern’s Rantings, has a reference which reads:
“My Op-ed pieces are generally too long, and most definitely too far to the right for our Liberal friends in the press to print. The one time they printed my rantings, they edited it so badly as to destroy its meaning...and so I now have decided to BLOG.”
I found out something about blogging, a hidden prize I hadn’t known existed, comments. I’d write about something, figure out how to mechanically get it onto the blog, a whole new world of “tools” to become familiar with by the way; lo and behold, folks would leave a comment. Total strangers from all over the world had read my article and either agreed or disagreed, enough to take a moment or so out of their day to write a note.
Now I have to admit, calling me a “%$&!” or some other profanity doesn’t exactly fall into the compliment category; but at least I’d gotten someone’s attention. I’d been a police officer for twenty years, you think calling me “%$&!” is going to work; folks, “you ain’t heard nothin’”, compared with what I’ve heard coming from the back seat of a patrol car. I only wish I’d kept tape recordings so you could get an idea; but “ you can’t please everyone so you’ve got to please yourself”, at least that’s what Ricky Nelson had to say in his song.
I’ll share one and only one “police war story” at “this juncture” (you should see an exaggerated Saturday Night Live imitation of President Bush) to make a point.
I’d arrested a young man for DWI and while filling out the required forms asked him his name since he had no driver’s license or any other form of identification. His reply, “F*** You!”; shouldn’t take much imagination to fill in those blanks. Instead of getting in a huff I left that part of the form blank, at least until I took him to get finger printed and could ascertain his true identity; filling in his answer under the category, AKA or alias.
A couple of months passed and the case came up for trial; I sat in the court room as a potential witness wearing my blue uniform. The defendant wanted to enter a plea, his lawyer having reached some kind of agreement with the prosecutor. That all changed when the judge happened to look down at the form in front of him, the one which had the defendant’s alias.
The judge wasn’t amused, called me up to the bench and asked me how that information came to be included on the arrest blotter. I was more than happy to enlighten the judge and a new round of negotiations took place between the defense lawyer and the prosecutor, one which would take into consideration the defendant’s friendly disposition; that glib comment from the back seat of my patrol car came back to bite him on the butt, now didn’t it.
Call it an ego trip, for surely that term applies to the comment section; the more comments at the bottom of an article, the better I felt about having spent so much time writing when I could have been doing other things, making a living, reading a good book, making a living, watching re-runs of Mary Tyler Moore and of course, making a living. Is this where you hear a little voice go off in the back of your head, “Get a life!”?
My wife, Lucy, of Lucy’s Frugal Living , has the kind of personality which draws friendly folks out of hiding. These are wonderful people from all walks of life who, like myself, quickly claim Lucy as their buddy for life. Even when Lucy has something to say which runs counter to everyone else in a “thread” of comments, to include the author of the article; even then Lucy has a way of diplomacy which would make her an excellent candidate for most any Department of State position around the world. I should have prefaced that remark; Civilized folks find Lucy’s way of handling adversity appealing; the Palestinians would still be doing their best to push Israel into the sea.
You see, I just antagonized an entire population, a dangerous malignant society run by ignorant rag headed thugs and I’ve only gotten to the first page. Lucy will read this and quietly shake her head, as if to say, breathing out a heavy sigh, “You’re not going to leave in that line about the Palestinians, are you?”.
Every now and again I hit pay dirt and the comment section grows with faithful admirers; okay, often times I have to duck as a rotten tomato whizzes past my forehead. The errant tomato tossed in anger only goes to show what kind of a genius I am for painting the wall in the dining room a deep red, that wall directly behind my “writer’s chair”.
Blogging makes me the master of my op-ed pieces. The New York Times may need to down size in order to stay in business; I’ve only one way to go, up! My regular readership might average twenty a day, and that’s on a good day.
I used to wonder if anyone, anyone at all stopped by to read my articles; not to be confused with the Anyone Atoll located in the South Pacific. I added one of those Stat Counter things and found I was right; hardly anyone stops by, breathe out and keep typing. I started to feel like Charlie Brown, unappreciated and in serious need of help. It’s a good thing I have Lucy, who only charges a nickel for “free” advice. (“That’s a joke, boy, a joke”, in my cartoon rooster voice)
I thought about putting the “Lucy” cartoon logo here on this page, the one we stole from Charles Schultz’ cartoon, Peanuts, the one we put at the top of her blog in place of an actual photograph; but that would involve copyright infringements, permission from the trust fund and all kinds of legal entanglements. Picture in your mind the cartoon character in her medium blue dress on the other side of the hand made booth waiting to explain how the cow ate the cabbage to Charlie Brown, having paid his nickel in order to obtain “free” advice.
There are different categories for blog articles, at least in my file system. Some bloggers go through the trouble of listing the various file boxes when they post, it’s called “technorati” , a search engine tool intended to help draw readers in. I have file boxes, general in nature in which I store my articles; Observations, Government, Politics, History, Locksmith, Police and Religion. I have one last file for Posted Blogs where I edit original articles by adding the Comment Section remarks when and if these come about.
If, for example, I write from the pulpit about Religion or most anything associated with faith; that article will bring out what I call, “the Zero Comment” response. Interestingly enough, the Stat Counter will show quite a few “hits” indicating it was read by a wide range of folks; however, the comment section will be barren, much as the aging Elizabeth prior to the birth of John the Baptist. I could say I visited with Matthew, Mark, Luke and John over the weekend and be fairly confident knowing a Zero would float ominously in the comment count box.
On the other hand, if I said I talked to a fellow named Peter who said we should render unto Uncle Sam that which was issued by Uncle Sam in order to pay for a never ending stream of entitlement programs; that would fall under Government or Politics. Nothing like pouring gasoline on an already well stoked fire; the comment section would pop like pork fat on a barbeque grill on the White House lawn. Altering the name of something in order to attract attention and comments is an art in and of itself.
I learned how to link other folks’ blogs within the text of my articles with the links being hidden rather than have to leave a space and type in
“http://www.link”
The use of hidden links makes any paragraph look more professional; call it eye appeal. I even learned how to use the trackback function in Haloscan , a little like leaving a comment and yet much more complex in the nuts and bolts. I was aided in my progress by Mike, listed on my blog roll as Mover Mike ; a truly patient individual able to teach even an imbecile as was proven when I proved I could actually link and trackback.
Here’s the “template” used to hide links; I keep it at the bottom of my page for easy reference any time I write a blog. I need only Control C/Control V and place the linking template tool where I want it, substitute “short description” with key words in my sentence and then substitute the actual URL in the space provided between quotation marks of “url”. If I can do it, anyone should be able to; just make sure not to alter any of the instructions on the template.
short description
(Note: It’s impossible to attempt showing the hidden link tool instructions on blogger as it instantly sees anything close as either a link or a screwed up attempt to link, thereby pointing out the error which won’t let you proceed)
I’ve found a certain amount of satisfaction when others link to one of my articles; it stands to reason other bloggers enjoy being included by way of a link or trackback. The use of trackbacks extends an invitation to other readers, those reading the comment section of someone else’s blog as they need only click on the provided link which leads them to read my blog. (Make a note to myself, trackback more often)
Blogger “burn out” can happen for any number of reason, either from the feeling of wasted effort when nobody leaves a comment, from having exhausted a limited range of thoughts (be careful here, be very careful), or getting in the way of other important functions such as making a living, reading a good book, making a living, watching re-runs of Mary Tyler Moore and of course, making a living.
Recently a fellow blogger was asking “why bother anymore”, wondering if the time and effort required for a blog was a waste. My comment equated blogging with attending church meetings; you never know who will be touched by what you have to offer, even if it’s only one person the effort isn’t wasted. While that is a true statement, having lots of comments is a lot more fun; hardly anything beats a full house.
Monday, March 02, 2009
Show Me The Money!
“Show Me The Money!”, a great line movie goers automatically associate with Cuba Gooding’s character. The American taxpayer should be screaming at the top of their lungs as Washington claims to be solving not only our own sluggish economy; but the problems of the world to boot. “Show Me The Money!”
The Obama administration has promised to help rebuild the Gaza strip by spending about $900 million dollars ; that’s either taxpayer money or that funny money they keep printing up when there isn’t enough taxpayer money to go around. Other than taking a closer look as to which terrorist organization might be getting their hands on all that money, what the hell are the folks in Washington doing spending money we don’t have to begin with?
“"To route $900 million to this area, and let's say Hamas was only able to steal 10 percent of that, we would still become Hamas' second-largest funder after Iran," U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., told FOXNews.com. Kirk called the overall package an apparent "waste of money," given the U.S. recession. Hamas, which the United States considers a terrorist organization, rules the Gaza Strip.”
We are told US taxpayer money will also be spent to support Planned Parenthood as a world wide effort to end human suffering. Without getting into the abortion debate as to whose suffering would be ended, the mother of the unwanted pregnancy and a life of perpetual poverty which would have been promised were the life of the unborn child not been aborted and paid for all in the name of helping; where’d all that extra taxpayer money come from, has Obama’s administration found that fabled money tree somewhere just outside the Oval Office?
I could go on and on about spending taxpayer money; but one more time, in unison and feeling, I want the rest of you to shout on the count of three, “One, two, ………just waiting for the guitar part to come around again…..almost there….any moment now…three; Show Me The Money!”
The Obama administration has promised to help rebuild the Gaza strip by spending about $900 million dollars ; that’s either taxpayer money or that funny money they keep printing up when there isn’t enough taxpayer money to go around. Other than taking a closer look as to which terrorist organization might be getting their hands on all that money, what the hell are the folks in Washington doing spending money we don’t have to begin with?
“"To route $900 million to this area, and let's say Hamas was only able to steal 10 percent of that, we would still become Hamas' second-largest funder after Iran," U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., told FOXNews.com. Kirk called the overall package an apparent "waste of money," given the U.S. recession. Hamas, which the United States considers a terrorist organization, rules the Gaza Strip.”
We are told US taxpayer money will also be spent to support Planned Parenthood as a world wide effort to end human suffering. Without getting into the abortion debate as to whose suffering would be ended, the mother of the unwanted pregnancy and a life of perpetual poverty which would have been promised were the life of the unborn child not been aborted and paid for all in the name of helping; where’d all that extra taxpayer money come from, has Obama’s administration found that fabled money tree somewhere just outside the Oval Office?
I could go on and on about spending taxpayer money; but one more time, in unison and feeling, I want the rest of you to shout on the count of three, “One, two, ………just waiting for the guitar part to come around again…..almost there….any moment now…three; Show Me The Money!”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)